HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-23-2020 PC Agenda PacketCity of San Luis Obispo, Agenda, Planning Co mmission
Agenda
PLANNING COMMISSION
Wednesday, September 23, 2020
6:00 PM REGULAR MEETING TELECONFERENCE
Broadcasted via Webinar
Based on the threat of COVID-19 as reflected in the Proclamations of Emergency issued by both the
Governor of the State of California, the San Luis Obispo County Emergency Services Director and the City
Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as well as the Governor’s Executive Order N-29-20 issued on March
17, 2020, relating to the convening of public meetings in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the City of
San Luis Obispo will be holding all public meetings via teleconference. There will be no physical
location for the Public to view the meeting. Below are instructions on how to view the meeting remotely
and how to leave public comment.
Additionally, members of the Planning Commission (PC) are allowed to attend the meeting via
teleconference and participate in the meeting to the same extent as if they were present.
Using the most rapid means of communication available at this time, members of the public are
encouraged to participate in PC meetings in the following ways:
1. Remote Viewing - Members of the public who wish to watch the meeting can view:
• Televised live on Charter Cable Channel 20
• View a livestream of the meeting on the City’s YouTube channel: http://youtube.slo.city
• View the Webinar (recommended for the best viewing quality):
➢ Registration URL: https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/1286863321239407116
➢ Webinar ID: 703-072-995
➢ Telephone Attendee: (562) 247-8321; Audio Access Code: 690-953-291
2. Public Comment - The PC will still be accepting public comment for items within their purview.
Public comment can be submitted in the following ways:
• Mail or Email Public Comment
➢ Received by 3:00 PM on the day of meeting - Can be submitted via email to
advisorybodies@slocity.org or U.S. Mail to City Clerk at: 990 Palm St. San Luis Obispo, CA
93401
➢ Emails sent after 3:00 PM – Can be submitted via email to advisorybodies@slocity.org and
will be archived/distributed to members of the Advisory Body the day after the meeting.
Emails will not be read aloud during the meeting
• Verbal Public Comment
➢ Received by 3:00 PM on the day of the meeting - Call (805) 781-7164; state and spell your
name, the agenda item number and leave your comment. The verbal comments must be limited
to 3 minutes. All voicemails will be forwarded to Advisory Body Members and saved as
Agenda Correspondence. Voicemails will not be played during the meeting.
➢ During the meeting – Members of the public who wish to provide public comment can join
the webinar (instructions above). Once you have joined the webinar, please put your name
and Item # in the questions box. Your mic will be unmuted once Public Comment is called for
the Item and you will have 3 minutes to speak.
Planning Commission Agenda for September 23, 2020 Page 2
CALL TO ORDER: Chair Hemalata Dandekar
ROLL CALL : Commissioners Michael Hopkins, Steve Kahn, Nicholas Quincey,
Michelle Shoresman, Mike Wulkan, Vice-Chair Robert Jorgensen, and
Chair Hemalata Dandekar
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
1. Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of September 9, 2020.
PUBLIC COMMENT
At this time, people may address the Commission about items not on the agenda. Comments are
limited to three minutes per person. Items raised at this time are generally referred to staff and, if
action by the Commission is necessary, may be scheduled for a future meeting.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Note: Any court challenge to the action taken on public hearing items on this agenda may be
limited to considering only those issues raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence
delivered to the City of San Luis Obispo at, or prior to, the public h earing. If you wish to speak,
please give your name and address for the record. Please limit your comments to three minutes;
consultant and project presentations limited to six minutes.
2. Review of Vesting Tentative Tract Map (VTTM) to subdivide Lot 7 of previously approved
Tract 3096 into 11 parcels ranging in size from 0.30 to 2.77 acres, and Specific Plan
Amendments (SPA) to the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan (SLRSP) to increase the number of
residential units from 580 to 654 for increased affordable housing, update of design guidelines
for mixed-use development on the Neighborhood Commercial site, relocation of Community
Garden location in previously approved Tract 3096, and minor updates to reduce the
anticipated amount of floor area of commercial space from 150,000 square feet to 139,000
square feet and a reduction in office space from 100,000 to 97,000 square feet. An addendum
has been prepared with a determination that the proposal is consistent with the certified Final
EIR and Supplemental Final EIR for the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan. Project address: 1035
Madonna Road; Case #: SPEC-0172-2020 & SBDV-0173-2020; Zone: San Luis Ranch
designations NG-10, NG-23, NG-30, AG and Neighborhood Commercial (NC); MI San
Luis Ranch, LLC, applicant. (John Rickenbach – 60 minutes)
Recommendation: Adopt the draft Resolution recommending the City Council introduce an
Ordinance to amend the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan and approve the Vesting Tentative Tract
Map based on findings and subject to conditions of approval.
Planning Commission Agenda for September 23, 2020 Page 3
3. Conceptual review of a mixed-use project consisting of 280 residential units and 15,000 square
feet of commercial space, the project also includes an amendment to the Airport Area Specific
Plan to rezone the property from Business Park (BP-SP) to Commercial Services (C-S-SP), and
an associated and a General Plan Map Amendment. The project will include preparation of an
Environmental Impact Report. Project address: 600 Tank Farm Road; Case #: ARCH-
0216-2020; Zone: BP-SP; Covelop Holdings, LLC, applicant. (Kyle Bell – 45 minutes)
Recommendation: Provide direction to the applicant and staff on items to be addressed in plans
submitted for formal entitlement review.
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION
4. Staff Updates & Agenda Forecast
ADJOURNMENT
The next Regular Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, October 14,
2020, at 6:00 p.m., via teleconference.
APPEALS
Any decision of the Planning Commission is final unless appealed to City Council within 10 days of
the action (Recommendations to City Council cannot be appealed since they are not a final action).
Any person aggrieved by a decision of the Commission may file an appeal with the City Clerk. Appeal
forms are available at the Community Development Department office, City Clerk’s office, or on the
City’s website (www.slocity.org). The appropriate appeal fee must accompany the appeal
documentation.
LISTENING ASSISTIVE DEVICES are available for the hearing impaired--please see the Clerk
The City of San Luis Obispo wishes to make all of its public meetings accessible to the public.
Upon request, this agenda will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with
disabilities. Any person with a disability who requires a modification or accommodation in order
to participate in a meeting should direct such request to the City Clerk’s Office at (805) 781-7100
at least 48 hours before the meeting, if possible. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805)
781-7410.
Planning Commission regular meetings are televised live on Charter Channel 20. Agenda related
writings or documents provided to the Planning Commission are available for public inspection
on the City’s website: http://www.slocity.org/government/advisory-bodies. Meeting video
recordings can be found on the City’s website: http://www.slocity.org/government/department-
directory/city-clerk/on-demand-meeting-videos
BLANK PAGE
This page is intended to be blank so that you can print double-sided.
City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda, City Hall, 99 0 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo
Minutes - Draft
Planning Commission
Minutes
Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
Wednesday, September 9, 2020
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo Planning Commission was called to order on Wednesday,
September 9, 2020 at 6:00 p.m., via teleconference, by Chair Dandekar.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Michael Hopkins, Nicholas Quincey, Michelle Shoresman, Mike
Wulkan, Vice-Chair Robert Jorgensen, and Chair Hemalata Dandekar
Absent: Commissioner Steve Kahn
Staff: Principal Planner Tyler Corey, Assistant City Attorney Markie Jorgensen, and
Deputy City Clerk Kevin Christian
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
None
1.CONSENT AGENDA – CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SHORESMAN, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER
QUINCEY, CARRIED 6-0-1 (COMMISSIONER KAHN ABSENT) to approve the Planning
Commission Minutes of August 26, 2020.
PUBLIC HEARING
2.Development review of a three-story condominium project consisting of 40 residential units
throughout 14 separate buildings within Tract 3044 (South Morros), as part of the Orcutt Area
Specific Plan. The project includes exceptions from the following specific development
standards: fence height exception for a portion of a fence and retaining wall within the street yard
of 13 feet in height, where normally limited to 3 feet, an exception to the side yard setback of 16
feet where normally a 23 foot setback is required, as well as minor exceptions to the open space
requirements for common interest subdivisions. The project also includes an affordable hou sing
alternative incentive request for relief of site development standards to allow a maximum height
of 38 feet, where normally limited to 35 feet. The project is in consistent with previously adopted
Mitigated Negative Declaration ER-137-11, City Council Resolution No 10462 (2013 Series);
Project Address: 3700 Ranch House Road; Case #: ARCH-0825-2019, AFFH-0406-2020 &
SBDV-0826-2019; Zone: R-3-SP; WC Taylor Ranch, LLC, owner/applicant.
Item 1
Packet Page 1
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
September 9, 2020
Page 2 of 5
Associate Planner Kyle Bell presented the staff report and responded to Commission inquiries.
Applicant representative, Carol Florence of Oasis Associates, and project architect Michael Stone
provided an overview of the project and responded to Commission inquiries.
Chair Dandekar opened the public hearing.
Public Comment:
None
Chair Dandekar closed the public hearing.
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WULKAN, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER
HOPKINS, CARRIED 6-0-1 (Commissioner Kahn absent) to adopt a Resolution entitled,
“A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A THREE-STORY CONDOMINIUM
PROJECT CONSISTING OF 40 RESIDENTIAL UNITS THROUGHOUT 14 SEPARATE
BUILDINGS WITHIN TRACT 3044 (SOUTH MORROS), AS PART OF THE ORCUTT
AREA SPECIFIC PLAN. THE PROJECT INCLUDES EXCEPTIONS FROM THE
FOLLOWING SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: FENCE HEIGHT
EXCEPTION FOR A PORTION OF A FENCE AND RETAINING WALL WITHIN THE
STREET YARD OF 13 FEET IN HEIGHT, WHERE NORMALLY LIMITED TO 3 FEET,
AN EXCEPTION TO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK OF 16 FEET WHERE NORMALLY
A 23 FOOT SETBACK IS REQUIRED. THE PROJECT ALSO INCLUDES AN
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ALTERNATIVE INCENTIVE REQUEST FOR RELIEF OF
SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TO ALLOW A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 38 FEET,
WHERE NORMALLY LIMITED TO 35 FEET. THE PROJECT IS IN CONSISTENT
WITH PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ER-137-11,
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO 10462 (2013 SERIES); AS REPRESENTED IN THE
STAFF REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED SEPTEMBER 9, 2020 (3700 RANCH
HOUSE ROAD, ARCH-0825-2019 & AFFH-0406-2020)” with a new condition and an
additional consideration:
• New Condition No. 5: The main drive shall include permeable or alternative pavers at the
project entrance/exits along with other locations to support pedestrian circulation, to the
satisfaction of Community Development Director and the Public Works Director.
• Consider that the applicant and staff work to include a more child friendly design for the
planned park area.
ACTION: MOTION BY VICE CHAIR JORGENSEN, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER
HOPKINS, CARRIED 6-0-1 (Commissioner Kahn absent) to adopt a Resolution entitled,
“A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING A VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP WITHIN PREVIOUSLY
APPROVED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 3044 TO CREATE CONDOMINIUM
OWNERSHIP SPACE WITHIN THE 40 UNITS APPROVED BY DEVELOPMENT PLAN
APPROVAL ARCH-0825-2019 WITHIN THE R-3 ZONE OF THE ORCUTT AREA
SPECIFIC PLAN, WITH REQUESTED EXCEPTIONS TO THE MINIMUM
Item 1
Packet Page 2
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
September 9, 2020
Page 3 of 5
DIMENSIONS OF PRIVATE OPEN SPACE, AND THE TOTAL PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
REQUIREMENT FOR EACH UNIT, AND A DETERMINATION THAT THE PROJECT
IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CERTIFIED FINAL EIR FOR THE ORCUTT AREA
SPECIFIC PLAN AND EXEMPT FROM FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA); AS
REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED
SEPTEMBER 9, 2020 (3700 RANCH HOUSE ROAD, SBDV-0826-2019)”
3. Development Review of: the demolition of a multi-unit dwelling (four dwelling units); Minor
Subdivision of one parcel into two lots, with an exception from the minimum lot area standard for
one parcel, allowing creation of a 4.645 square-foot parcel where 5,000 square feet is the minimum
lot area, and minor exceptions from minimum lot width standards, allowing creation of parce ls
that are 44.7 and 46.4 feet wide where 50 feet is the minimum lot width; and construction of two
duplex buildings, each containing two four-bedroom dwellings (four total dwelling units), with
associated site improvements. The applicant has requested Discretionary Exceptions to the side
and rear setback standards allowing side and rear setbacks ranging between six and nine feet in
depth along portions of the upper floor of the new buildings, where the setback standard ranges
between seven and ten feet in depth. A Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental review
(CEQA) is proposed; Project Address: 1230 Monte Vista; Case #: ARCH-0115-2020, SBDV-
0182-2020 & EID-0199-2020; Zone: R-4; MVP, LLC, owner/applicant.
Assistant Planner Walter Oetzell presented the staff report and responded to Commission inquiries.
Applicant representatives, Chuck Francoeur of MVP, LLC and Joel Snyder of Ten Over Studio,
reviewed the geographic design constraints and consultation comments given by City staff
concerning those restraints.
Chair Dandekar opened the public hearing.
Public Comment:
None
Chair Dandekar closed the public hearing.
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER QUINCEY, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER
SHORESMAN, CARRIED 6-0-1 (Commissioner Kahn absent) to adopt a Resolution entitled,
“A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SLO-20-
006 CREATING TWO PARCELS, WITH EXCEPTIONS FROM MINIMUM LOT AREA
AND MINIMUM LOT WIDTH STANDARDS, GRANTING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
APPROVAL FOR A MULTI-UNIT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT COMPRISED OF
FOUR DWELLINGS IN TWO NEW DUPLEX BUILDINGS, WITH EXCEPTIONS FROM
INTERIOR SIDE AND REAR SETBACK STANDARDS, AND ADOPTING A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR THE
PROJECT, IN THE HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-4) ZONE (SBDV-0821-2020;
ARCH- 0155-2020; EID-0199-2020)” with modifications to:
• Condition 5 and condition 31 as detailed in the staff presentation.
Item 1
Packet Page 3
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
September 9, 2020
Page 4 of 5
Chair Dandekar called a recess at 8:15 p.m. The Commission reconvened at 8:30 p.m. with all members
present.
4. Review of a new inclusionary housing development consisting of five, two-story structures
containing a total of 38 low-income affordable units, community room, and leasing office, on a
site designated for affordable housing. The project includes an 89% density bonus and a
proposed reduction in setback requirements, a setback of four feet where five feet is the minimum
required within the Planned Development (PD) overlay zone, requested as alternative incentives
for affordable housing. This project is consistent with the Mitigated Negative Declaration
approved with the PD rezone and Map No. 2428 (CEQA); Project Address: 3065 Lucca Lane,
Toscano Development Inclusionary Housing Site; Case #: ARCH-0095-2020 & AFFH-
0096-2020; Zone: R-2-SP-PD; Scott Smith, San Luis Obispo Non-Profit Housing
Corporation, owner/applicant.
Assistant Planner Kyle Van Leeuwen presented the staff report and responded to Commission
inquiries.
Applicant representatives, Scott Smith Executive Director Housing Authority San Luis Obispo,
and architect Joel Snyder of Ten Over Studio, reviewed the design considerations of the
inclusionary housing project.
Chair Dandekar opened the public hearing.
Public Comment:
Gail Ryff
Stephen Queen
Chair Dandekar closed the public hearing.
ACTION: MOTION BY VICE CHAIR JORGENSEN, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER
HOPKINS, CARRIED 6-0-1 (Commissioner Kahn absent) to adopt a Resolution entitled,
“A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN INCLUSIONARY HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT CONSISTING OF FIVE, TWO-STORY STRUCTURES
CONTAINING A TOTAL OF 38 LOW-INCOME AFFORDABLE UNITS, A
COMMUNITY ROOM AND LEASING OFFICE, AND ALTERNATIVE INCENTIVES
FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING INCLUDING AN 89% DENSITY BONUS AND A
RELAXATION OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TO ALLOW A SETBACK OF
FOUR FEET WHERE FIVE FEET IS THE STANDARD, IN ACCORDANCE WITH
THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ER-98-06, AS REPRESENTED IN
THE STAFF REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED SEPTEMBER 9, 2020 (3065
LUCCA LANE ARCH-0095-2020/AFFH-0096-2020)” with modifications to Condition 16 as
follows:
• Construction access shall minimize impact to residents on Lucca lane.
• Provide notification to residents on the construction schedule.
• Provide contact information for construction contractor for the residents during
construction.
Item 1
Packet Page 4
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
September 9, 2020
Page 5 of 5
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION
5. Agenda Forecast – Principal Planner Tyler Corey provided an update of upcoming projects.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 10:10 p.m. The next Regular Planning Commission meeting is
scheduled for Wednesday, September 23, 2020, via teleconference.
APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: XX/XX/2020
Item 1
Packet Page 5
BLANK PAGE
This page is intended to be blank so that you can print double-sided.
Item 1
Packet Page 6
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: Review of Vesting Tentative Tract Map (VTTM) to subdivide Lot 7 of previously
approved Tract 3096 into 11 parcels ranging in size from 0.30 to 2.77 acres, and Specific Plan
Amendments (SPA) to the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan (SLRSP) to increase the number of
residential units from 580 to 654 for increased affordable housing, update of design guidelines for
mixed-use development on the Neighborhood Commercial site, relocation of Community
Garden in previously approved Tract 3096, and minor updates to reduce the anticipated amount of
floor area of commercial space from 150,000 square feet to 139,000 square feet and a reduction
in office space from 100,000 to 97,000 square feet. An Addendum was approved by the City
Council on August 18, 2020 which evaluated revised mitigation requirements with a determination
that the proposal is consistent with the certified Final EIR and Supplemental Final EIR for the San
Luis Ranch Specific Plan.
PROJECT ADDRESS: 1035 Madonna Road BY: John Rickenbach, Contract Planner
Phone Number: 805-610-1109
Email: JFRickenbach@aol.com
FILE NUMBER: SPEC-0172-2020 & FROM: Tyler Corey, Principal Planner
SBDV-0173-2020
ESTIMATED TIME: 60 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Draft Resolution (Attachment 1) recommending the City Council introduce an
Ordinance to amend the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan and approve the Vesting Tentative Tract
Map based on findings and subject to conditions of approval.
SITE DATA
Applicant
Representative
General Plan and
Zoning
Site Area
Environmental
Status
MI San Luis Ranch, LLC
Walter Heiberg
Neighborhood Commercial (NC);
allows mixed commercial, office and
residential uses under the SLRSP
11.44 acres
Addendum finding the proposal is
consistent with the SLRSP Final EIR
and Supplemental Final EIR
SUMMARY
The applicant, MI San Luis Ranch, LLC, has proposed a Specific Plan Amendment (SPA) to the
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan (SLRSP) and a Vesting Tentative Tract Map (VTTM) 3142 to
facilitate development within an 11.44-acre area zoned Neighborhood Commercial (NC) within
the Specific Plan.
Meeting Date: September 23, 2020
Item Number: 2
Item 2
Packet Page 7
SPEC-0172-2020 & SBDV-0173-2020 - 1035 Madonna Road (NC – Commercial/Mixed Use)
Planning Commission Report – September 23, 2020
Page 2
The intent of the Specific Plan Amendment (SPA) is to allow for additional affordable housing
which will range from 64-77 units within the NC-zoned area, and would increase the number of
units allowed within the entire Specific Plan by 74 units overall, from 580 to 654. Under the
approved Specific Plan, the commercial development in the NC zone was required to either
develop or provide in lieu fees for 34 affordable housing units beyond the 580 units approved as
part of the Specific Plan. On March 11, 2020, the Planning Commission approved a 296-unit
multi-family residential development within the NG-30 portion of the Specific Plan (Resolution
PC-1006-20), which included 26 deed-restricted units affordable to very low income households.
As part of their approval, they supported the concept of transferring the affordability requirement
of those 26 units to a consolidated residential development in the NC zone, to combine with a
possible future mixed use development project in the NC zone that could also include the 34 units
required as part of the commercial development, for a minimum of at least 60 affordable housing
units within the NC zone. If that occurred, those 26 units in the NG-30 zone would be sold as
market rate units. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment is intended to facilitate this Planning
Commission-supported concept.
The VTTM would subdivide Lot 7 from VTTM 3096, which covers the entire Speci fic Plan area.
The Final Map for VTTM 3096 was approved in November 2018. The proposed VTTM would
establish 11 parcels ranging from 0.30 to 2.77 acres in order to accommodate development within
the NC-zoned area, with one lot being for the residences, and the other 10 for commercial uses up
to 114,300 SF of commercial development (Attachment 2). An additional 25,000 SF of
commercial could occur in conjunction with the future Agricultural Heritage Center. Future
development on the lots to be created in the NC zone within the VTTM will require a separate
entitlement.
In August 2020, an Addendum to the certified Final EIR for the SLRSP was prepared to evaluate
possible impacts associated with revised mitigation requirements that would result from a revised
development pattern as described above. The proposed action is consistent with the certified Final
EIR and certified Supplemental Final EIR for San Luis Ranch Specific Plan, when considered in
conjunction with that Addendum. (Attachment 4).
The following summarizes the proposed project:
Specific Plan Amendment:
• Increase the number of allowed residential units in the SLRSP from 580 to 654. This would
allow for up to 77 affordable units within the NC area as part of a mixed use development
(it also acknowledges that the previously-approved NG-30 MFR project in the SLRSP
decreased its development potential from 299 to 296 units). Various references and tables
with the SP would be updated. The current SP does not consistently acknowledge the
requirement that the commercial development within the NC zone of the SLRSP must
provide 34 units of affordable housing, meaning the actual current requirement is 580 +
34, or 614 total units. As described above, the affordable units in the NC zone would also
address the affordability requirement for 26 of the previously-approved multi-family units
in the NG-30 zone for a minimum of at least 60 affordable housing units (approved March
11, 2020);
• Update the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood Commercial site to address a potential
horizontal and vertical mixed-use project;
Item 2
Packet Page 8
SPEC-0172-2020 & SBDV-0173-2020 - 1035 Madonna Road (NC – Commercial/Mixed Use)
Planning Commission Report – September 23, 2020
Page 3
• Update the allowed level of commercial development to 139,300 SF (114,300 SF in the
NC area and 25,000 in the Ag Center area), a decrease from 150,000 SF;
• Update the allowed level of office development to 97,000 SF, a decrease from 100,000 SF;
• Amend the Community Garden location from Lot 7 Tract 3096 as shown on page 3-20 of
SLRSP to the Farm on Lot 10 of Tract 3096; the Community Garden would be of equal or
greater size.
Vesting Tentative Tract Map 3142:
• Subdivision of 11.44-acre Lot 7 of Tract 3096 into 11 parcels to accommodate a future
proposal for commercial-retail pads and horizontal mixed-use to include the affordable
housing site with parcels ranging in size from 0.30 acres to 2.77 acres;
• Establish grading, drainage, utilities and storm water requirements for approximately
114,300 SF of retail and up to 77 Affordable housing units; and
• Abandon and dedicate new right-of-way to conform with realignment of bus stop at Dalidio
Drive immediately adjacent to Lot 7 of Tract 3096.
Figure 1 shows the proposed lot boundaries within the VTTM. Although no development is
proposed at this time, the application includes an illustrative site plan (Figure 2) to help visualize
how the project could be implemented based on the boundaries of the proposed VTTM and in the
context of the Specific Plan Amendment. This figure is only a conceptual development plan layout
that demonstrates how the site is generally anticipated to be developed.
Figure 1: VTTM 3142 – Proposed Lot Layout
Item 2
Packet Page 9
SPEC-0172-2020 & SBDV-0173-2020 - 1035 Madonna Road (NC – Commercial/Mixed Use)
Planning Commission Report – September 23, 2020
Page 4
1.0 PROJECT STATISTICS
Table 1 summarizes the key proposed project components, and a comparison to what is currently
allowed under the approved San Luis Ranch Specific Plan:
Table 1. Proposed Project Features and Consistency with Requirements
Site Details Proposed Existing SLRSP Requirement
Land Use Designation NC NC
Commercial SF 114,300 SF (in NC under the
amended SLRSP and VTTM)
25,000 SF (in AG under the SLRSP)
150,000 SF (LUE calls for a range of 50,000 to
200,000 SF)
Office SF 97,000 SF 100,000 SF (LUE calls for a range of 50,000 to
150,000 SF)
Residential Units 654 (77 within the NC zone) 580 (does not include 34 inclusionary units
required as part of NC development)
Environmental
Status
An Addendum was prepared to address potential changes associated with the
application and finds the SPA and VTTM is consistent with the certified Final EIR and
Supplemental Final EIR for San Luis Ranch Specific Plan. See Section 5.0 of this report
for additional discussion.
Figure 2: Illustrative Site Plan
Item 2
Packet Page 10
SPEC-0172-2020 & SBDV-0173-2020 - 1035 Madonna Road (NC – Commercial/Mixed Use)
Planning Commission Report – September 23, 2020
Page 5
2.0 PLANNING COMMISSION’S PURVIEW
The Planning Commission’s role is to review for consistency with the General Plan1, San Luis
Ranch Specific Plan (SLRSP)2, Zoning Regulations3, Subdivision Regulations4, and other
applicable City development standards. Specific Plan Amendments require a recommendation
from the Planning Commission (PC) to the City Council and the Subdivision Regulations require
review by the PC with final action by the City Council on Vesting Tentative Tract Maps.
Any future application for a Development Plan pursuant to the SPA and VTTM would require a
separate entitlement.
3.0 PREVIOUS REVIEW
The Planning Commission previously reviewed and approved the Development Plan for the Multi-
Family (NG-30) site of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan (Attachment 5, PC Resolution No. PC-
1006-2020). In the review of the multi-family site, the Commission supported the concept of
moving the affordable units on the NG-30 site to a location within the NC zone with the potential
of a significant increase in the amount of affordable units. Condition 15.B. in the Resolution states
the following, which would support the project as currently proposed in the NC zone:
“The Base Inclusionary Housing Requirement [for the NG-30 project] may be modified by
the Community Development Director in the event that an application for an Affordable
Housing Project on the NC portion of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan area is approved
providing for at least the same number (26) very low income affordable housing units
currently proposed for the multi-family site, in addition to the 34 very low income
affordable housing units already required on the NC site through previous project
entitlements.”
This SPA and VTTM are consistent with and provides for implementation of the relocation and
increase of affordable units.
4.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS
The below analysis evaluates the SPA in the context of its consistency with the General Plan, and
the policy objectives the Specific Plan was intended to implement when the Land Use and
Circulation Element (LUCE) was adopted in 2014.
4.1 Consistency with the General Plan
The project area is within the San Luis Ranch Special Focus area as identified in Section 8.1.4 of
the Land Use Element (LUE). Section 8.1.4 of the LUE identifies a general framework guiding
1 General Plan: Land Use Element Chapter 2 (Conservation and Development of Residential Neighborhoods),
Chapter 3 (Commercial and Industrial Development), Chapter 8 (Special Focus Areas) and Chapter 9
(Sustainability); Housing Element Chapter 3 (Goals, Policies and Programs)
2 SLRSP: Chapter 3 (Neighborhood Form; 5 (Sustainability), and 7 (Infrastructure and Financing)
3 Zoning Regulations Article 3 (Regulations and Standards Applicable to All Zones) and Article 8 (Housing-Related
Regulations)
4 Subdivision Regulations: Chapter 16.12 (Vesting Tentative Maps)
Item 2
Packet Page 11
SPEC-0172-2020 & SBDV-0173-2020 - 1035 Madonna Road (NC – Commercial/Mixed Use)
Planning Commission Report – September 23, 2020
Page 6
development in that area, including issues related to circulation, site design, view protection,
agricultural protection, and public safety. Specifically, it anticipates that the area could support
commercial, office and residential development, and the proposed SPA and VTTM support
implementation of SLRSP General Plan policy objectives.
The LUE required that a specific plan be prepared for the entire 132-acre San Luis Ranch area. A
specific plan is a tool for the systematic implementation of a general plan. The SLRSP was adopted
in 2017. Because the Specific Plan is inherently consistent with the General Plan, the project’s
consistency with the Specific Plan is the focus of this policy analysis. This discussion is in
included in Section 4.2 of this Agenda Report.
The proposed SPA would allow for additional housing not anticipated in the adopted SLRSP,
increasing the number of possible residential units in the plan area from 580 to 654. The intent of
this is to allow for additional affordable housing to be built within the NC-zoned area, beyond the
34 inclusionary units (or in lieu fees) required by the Zoning Regulations with respect to the
development of commercial land (see SLRSP Section 5.2.2 for further discussion). The SPA
would allow up to 77 affordable units to be constructed in the NC-zoned area, which would further
Housing Element goals to provide needed affordable housing citywide. (As noted above, 26 of
these affordable units would represent the transfer of the affordability requirement for 26 of the
296 previously approved units in the NG-30 zone. While all 296 units would still be built in the
NG-30 zone, the 26 previously deed-restricted units in that area would then become market rate
units.)
The proposed increase in housing has the potential effect of increasing impacts to public services
and traffic beyond those anticipated under the General Plan and associated LUCE EIR, as well as
the Final EIR and Supplemental Final EIR for the SLRSP. To address this, an Addendum to the
Final EIR and Supplemental Final EIR for the SLRSP was prepared to evaluate the possible
impacts associated with the updated pattern of development within the Specific Plan area
(Attachment 4). Based on that analysis, the modified development levels under the SPA would
not result in greater impacts to traffic, public services, or any other issue addressed in the Final
EIR and Supplemental Final EIR compared to what was anticipated under the approved Specific
Plan prior to its possible amendment (please refer to Section 5.0 for further discussion of CEQA-
related issues). For that reason, the level of development anticipated under the amended SLRSP
remains consistent with the General Plan. The land use pattern anticipated under the SPA is
substantially similar to what was previously approved, so it too remains consistent with the General
Plan.
Item 2
Packet Page 12
SPEC-0172-2020 & SBDV-0173-2020 - 1035 Madonna Road (NC – Commercial/Mixed Use)
Planning Commission Report – September 23, 2020
Page 7
4.2 Consistency with the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
Upon its adoption in 2017, the SLRSP became the
primary guiding land use regulatory document for
the area it encompassed. Figure 3 shows the land
use map within the SLRSP, and the proposed
project area coincides with the portion of the NC-
designated land generally northwest of the
intersection of Froom Ranch Way and Dalidio
Drive as shown on that map.
A Specific Plan is a tool for the systematic
implementation of a General Plan. It effectively
establishes a link between implementing policies
of the general plan and the individual
development proposals in a defined area. In the
case of the SLRSP, it addresses the broad range
of planning issues and policies typically covered
in the City’s General Plan or zoning ordinance,
from land use, circulation, site planning
standards, design guidelines, landscape design
requirements, project phasing, and infrastructure
requirements. In some cases, it establishes standards that go beyond those included in the General
Plan, or that are tailored to the needs of the project site. For that reason, the project will be
evaluated against the requirements of the SLRSP to determine consistency with City planning
policies.
Table 2 summarizes key relevant policies from the SLRSP, and City staff’s analysis of the project’s
consistency with those policies. The applicant has also provided a statement of conformity with
the SLRSP and General Plan in the project statement (Attachment 2).
Table 2. Project Consistency with the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
SLRSP Relevant Policy or Guidance Discussion Potential
Consistency
Table 2-1. General Plan San Luis Ranch
Performance Standards
Applicant proposes to increase the Residential
component from 580 to 654 units. However,
this table shows what is in the adopted
General Plan, and the proposed SPA would not
change that. No change to this table is
appropriate.
Table 2-1
should not be
modified as
proposed
Table 2-3. Planned San Luis Ranch Specific
Plan Area Development
This table includes proposed modifications to
accommodate up to 654 residential units, and
a downward revision to a maximum of 139,300
SF of commercial and 97,000 SF of office.
Although the residential buildout exceeds what
is shown in Table 2-1, it is still consistent with
the intent of the General Plan as described in
Section 4.1 above. This change provides the
Yes
Figure 3: San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
Land Use Map
Item 2
Packet Page 13
SPEC-0172-2020 & SBDV-0173-2020 - 1035 Madonna Road (NC – Commercial/Mixed Use)
Planning Commission Report – September 23, 2020
Page 8
Table 2. Project Consistency with the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
SLRSP Relevant Policy or Guidance Discussion Potential
Consistency
basis for other modifications to the Specific
Plan discussed below, and the determination
of potential consistency.
Section 2.5.1 Commercial Retail and Section
2.5.2. Office.
The project is consistent with that intent.
Section 2.5.1 and 2.5.2 call for commercial
retail and office uses that would be
accommodated by the VTTM.
Yes
Section 2.5.6. Integrated Residential Uses.
San Luis Ranch will integrate residential uses
in the Neighborhood Commercial Zone.
Housing development and mixed-use
projects in this Zone expand the range of
housing opportunities offered by San Luis
Ranch, creating an opportunity to make use
of the community’s walkability and
multimodal transit amenities, and could be
promoted as an optimal choice for those
seeking a car-free lifestyle.
This section is a proposed amendment to the
SLRSP. It allows for residential mixed use
within the NC zone as proposed under the
VTTM.
Yes
Section 3.3 Neighborhood Commercial (NC)
Zone
The introduction to this section does not
mention residential uses as a possible land use
that could be included in a mixed use project,
although there are illustrations later in this
section that support this concept, and Table 3-
6 includes residential as an allowed use. It is
recommended that the introduction mention
residential as a potential land use in this zone
when part of a mixed-use development.
Yes; see
analysis for
minor
modification
to SP
3.7.2. Commercial/Mixed Use Design
Guidelines. [The following existing
guidelines are modified as proposed, with
new next underlined, and deleted text
indicated by strikeout. Only modified
portions of the existing guidelines are
shown.]
Site Planning and Design
a. Buildings should be sited close to
and oriented toward external and
interior streets. Building design
should incorporate pedestrian
walkways, outdoor seating, and
landscape areas where possible.
Where buildings front external and
internal streets, building design
should address the streets and not
present the back of the building.
Proposed modifications clarify the relationship
between residential and commercial uses in
project design that may come forward through
a Development Plan. Each aspect of the
proposed changes are analyzed below.
Site Planning and Design. In general, the
intent is to promote higher quality design that
emphasizes the visual attributes of
development, integrates pedestrian and
bicycle circulation, and encourages public
meeting opportunities though design. These
guidelines form a solid framework for mixed
use projects that may come forward in a
Development Plan.
Building Form. Includes minor changes that do
not alter the original intent, but clarify and
help visualize how roofing elements would be
integrated into design.
Yes
Item 2
Packet Page 14
SPEC-0172-2020 & SBDV-0173-2020 - 1035 Madonna Road (NC – Commercial/Mixed Use)
Planning Commission Report – September 23, 2020
Page 9
Table 2. Project Consistency with the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
SLRSP Relevant Policy or Guidance Discussion Potential
Consistency
b. Outdoor spaces should reflect
careful planning and provide plaza
spaces with defined edges, benches,
and lighting that establish a sense of
place. Building design should
engage pedestrian circulation paths
with outdoor seating, landscape
areas, and pedestrian-oriented
areas where possible.
c. Transitional pedestrian-oriented
outdoor spaces should be provided
at horizontal mixed-use interface
between uses. Transitional spaces
should include courtyards, benches,
landscape, and lighting that
establish a sense of place.
d. Clearly defined pedestrian and
bicycle circulation paths should be
provided across site connecting to
parking, building entries, public
ways, and multimodal transit
connection points. Use of path
defining elements such as enhanced
paving and landscape should be
incorporated.
e. Plazas, courtyards, pocket parks,
and outdoor public spaces cafes
should be designed in an inviting
manner that to encourages
pedestrian use through the
incorporation of trellises, fountains,
art, seating, and shade trees.
Building Form
b. Roofs covering the entire building
such as hips and gables, are
preferred over mansard roofs.
Where practical and on short span
roof elements, the primary roof
form should address the entire
building such as hips and gables.
Application of flat roofs with
parapets or mansard roofs should
be limited in use and apply to large
spans only.
Building Elements and Articulation. Includes
minor changes that do not alter the original
intent, but emphasize pedestrian access and
functionality.
Mixed-Use Integration. This is a new section
to better articulate how residential and
commercial uses will relate, both vertically and
horizontally. It also describes how pedestrian
connections can be better achieved.
Commercial Plazas. This includes minor
changes to an existing section to better clarify
the original intent.
Signs. This includes minor changes to an
existing section to better clarify the original
intent, and to ensure better consistency both
within the SLRSP and the City’s sign
regulations.
Building Materials. This includes minor
changes to an existing section to better clarify
the original intent.
Exterior Colors. This includes minor changes to
an existing section to better clarify the original
intent.
Utilitarian Aspects of Buildings. A provision
related to pedestrian access to trash closures
was eliminated because it unnecessarily
restricted potential designs that could be
visually less intrusive.
Item 2
Packet Page 15
SPEC-0172-2020 & SBDV-0173-2020 - 1035 Madonna Road (NC – Commercial/Mixed Use)
Planning Commission Report – September 23, 2020
Page 10
Table 2. Project Consistency with the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
SLRSP Relevant Policy or Guidance Discussion Potential
Consistency
d. Vertical elements such as towers
should be used to accent horizontal
massing and provide visual interest
and a point of reference, especially
on corner buildings engaged with
public areas.
Building Elements and Articulation
e. Building facades facing paseos
should be articulated with detail
and display windows provide for
pedestrian scale elements and
materials where it is not the primary
entry.
Mixed-Use Integration
a. Horizontal and vertical mixed-use
incorporating both residential and
office uses provide for a complete
community and are encouraged.
b. Where residential horizontal mixed-
use faces commercial areas and
parking, pedestrian transitional
elements and buffers should be
included such as low fencing or
walls, screening planting, and
seating alcoves.
c. Delineation between public
commercial areas and residential
areas should be defined through the
use of material change, signage and
transitional elements. Transitional
elements should include courtyards,
benches, landscape, and lighting
that establish a sense of place.
d. Lower floors of both horizontal and
vertical mixed-use buildings should
communicate use through key
elements such as scale, plate height,
and architectural details.
Commercial Plazas
a. Specialized, defined, public outdoor
spaces should be incorporated into
the overall building and project
design. These outdoor spaces
should clearly define usable spaces
and take advantage of any “leftover
space.” have clear, recognizable
Item 2
Packet Page 16
SPEC-0172-2020 & SBDV-0173-2020 - 1035 Madonna Road (NC – Commercial/Mixed Use)
Planning Commission Report – September 23, 2020
Page 11
Table 2. Project Consistency with the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
SLRSP Relevant Policy or Guidance Discussion Potential
Consistency
shapes that reflect careful planning
and should not be a result of
“leftover” areas between structures.
b. Site amenities, including benches,
drinking fountains, provisions for
bicyclists, water features, and public
art, should be utilized and should
complement the project’s
architectural character and be
oriented toward courtyards and
paseos.
Signs
b. Signs should reflect the type of
business through design, shape, or
graphic form in addition to
typographic information.
c. Signs oriented toward pedestrian
space and pathways should be
appropriately detailed to enhance
the public space.
e. Signs should not detract from cover
up windows or important
architectural features.
i. Sign construction should reflect a
high level of craftsmanship and be
consistent with City signage
requirements unless otherwise
addressed within the Specific Plan.
Building Materials
b. Smooth plaster finishes, 20-30 sand
finish or smoother, are preferred
over rough, textured stucco. Stucco
may be used in combination with
other materials such as siding and
brick. Stucco should be primarily
used for side and back walls that are
not as visible from public view; with
the richer materials used on the
front or to accent architectural
features serve as a supporting
material with richer, more varied
materials used on the front and
public facing facades. Increased
application of stucco is more
appropriate on the rear and non-
public faces of the buildings.
Item 2
Packet Page 17
SPEC-0172-2020 & SBDV-0173-2020 - 1035 Madonna Road (NC – Commercial/Mixed Use)
Planning Commission Report – September 23, 2020
Page 12
Table 2. Project Consistency with the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
SLRSP Relevant Policy or Guidance Discussion Potential
Consistency
c. Materials and colors should be
architecturally consistent and
enhance the overall project
character while employing best
design practices of authentic
application.
Exterior Colors
a. Exterior colors should be consistent
with the architectural style of the
building. Color schemes that involve
a minimum of three (3) colors
should be utilized but tone on tone
color palettes are also appropriate
in limited application.
b. Different colors accentuating
different aspects and details of the
building architecture should be
utilized. Except for accenting
different aspects and details of a
building or as required by a national
brand, bright colors should be
avoided.
Utilitarian Aspects of Buildings
f. A pedestrian entrance to the trash
enclosure should be provided so the
large access gates do not have to be
opened as often.
5.2.2 Affordable Housing. [The applicant
suggests modifications to this section as
follows:]
1. To reflect the fact that there would
be up to 654 units within the SLRSP,
and 64-77 affordable units on the
NC site (instead of 34).
2. The applicant suggests they qualify
for a 32.5% density bonus instead of
the 20% included in the existing
SLRSP.
3. States that there would be 2 deed
restricted affordable units in each of
the NG-10 and NG-23 zones.
4. Removes the requirement for 26
deed restricted affordable units in
These changes essentially would allow for up
to 34 additional affordable units within the
SLRSP than are currently accommodated in the
plan. In achieving this, there would be fewer
deed restricted affordable units in the NG-30
zone, but a significant increase that more than
offsets this within the NC zone.
The density bonus provision corrects a clause
that was inaccurately described in the original
SLRSP, and allows for the magnitude of
affordable housing development contemplated
in the amended SLRSP.
Overall, these changes further the City’s broad
goal of providing additional affordable housing
Yes
Item 2
Packet Page 18
SPEC-0172-2020 & SBDV-0173-2020 - 1035 Madonna Road (NC – Commercial/Mixed Use)
Planning Commission Report – September 23, 2020
Page 13
Table 2. Project Consistency with the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
SLRSP Relevant Policy or Guidance Discussion Potential
Consistency
the NG-30 zone, since these will be
transferred to the NC zone.
to a greater extent than could occur under the
originally-approved SLRSP.
Tables 7-2, 7-4, 7-5, 7-7, 7-8, 7-10 and 7-11.
[These are tables that project water demand,
wastewater generation, solid waste
generation, school demand, and buildout.
These have been updated to reflect updated
development potential.]
The updated information does not affect
development potential, or any aspect of future
project. It is intended primarily for
informational purposes.
Yes
4.3 Consistency with Affordable Housing Requirements
The City’s 2019-21 Financial Plan identifies affordable housing as a Major City Goal. The City’s
Housing Element includes numerous policies and programs that support incentives, such as density
bonuses, to provide housing for low, very low and extremely low-income households. The SLRSP
as conceived accounts for a 20% density bonus for achieving affordable housing goals. The project
now proposes up to a 32.5% density bonus to reflect current State Density bonus law.
Both the SLRSP and the Development Agreement for the project require that development within
the Specific Plan area include sufficient affordable housing to be consistent with Housing Element
policies related to this issue (the SLRSP and Development Agreement are consistent with one
another). In both documents, development in the NG-30 zone is required to provide 26 deed-
restricted units that are affordable to very low-income households. The Housing Plan within the
Development Agreement also requires that the project provide 10 deed-restricted workforce
housing units (i.e., affordable to households earning from 121-160% of the area’s median income)
within the NG-30 zone.
The proposed Specific Plan Amendment would provide additional affordable housing as compared
to the currently approved SLRSP. An additional 64-77 affordable units would be provided in the
NC zone compared to what would otherwise be built, although even without the SPA, a
commercial project would be required to pay in lieu fees toward the construction of 34 affordable
units. It should be noted that under this proposal, the 26 deed-restricted units within the NG-30
zone would no longer be deed restricted but become market rate high density housing. Instead,
the 64-77 affordable units within the NC zone would include 26 deed restricted units (based on the
requirement transferred from the NG-30 zone), as well as the 34 units that are required as part of
the original SLRSP approval. Thus, this proposal could result in 4-17 units beyond the previously
required 60 affordable units.
Overall, the proposed project would result in a realistically achievable affordable housing project
within the NC zone, functioning as a mixed-use project in proximity to commercial development,
consistent with the intent of the City’s Housing Element goals.
Item 2
Packet Page 19
SPEC-0172-2020 & SBDV-0173-2020 - 1035 Madonna Road (NC – Commercial/Mixed Use)
Planning Commission Report – September 23, 2020
Page 14
4.4 Subdivision Regulations
The applicant has proposed a commercial common interest 11-lot subdivision with shared use of
common parking areas and access. The subdivision component of the project (proposed VTTM
3142) requires a PC recommendation and final approval by the City Council. The VTTM provides
for 11 lots total, with 10 commercial and 1 residential lot. The applicant’s illustrative site plan
(Figure 2 above and Attachment 3) depicts the anticipated development of the commercial parcels
and affordable housing development for the proposed horizontal mixed-use project. A future
development plan approval will be required to review proposed building designs and final site
plans for the residential lot and commercial development within the VTTM. Public Works has
provided conditions of approval for final map requirements on public and private easements
needed for access, parking, utilities, and drainage and final details that will be required at the time
of development plan review.
4.5 Subsequent ARC and PC Development Plan Review Requirements
The SPA and VTTM would direct future development within the NC-zoned area. However, a
Development Plan with detailed information about building locations, circulation, parking,
landscaping, lighting, and building design would be required to implement that development.
Consistent with City requirements, the Development Plan application would be required to
undergo Development Review for possible approval by the Planning Commission.
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The project, including the SPA, VTTM and development facilitated by those actions, is consistent
with the certified Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for SLRSP (July 2017) and Final
Supplemental EIR (July 2018). In August 2020, an Addendum to the certified Final EIR for the
SLRSP was prepared to evaluate possible impacts associated with revised mitigation requirements
that would result from a revised development pattern as described above (Attachment 4). The
Addendum was approved by the City Council on August 18, 2020, per Resolution 11157, with
appropriate CEQA Findings. The Addendum considered development with up to 654 units within
the Specific Plan (consistent with what is now proposed) and found that impacts would not exceed
those considered in the original certified Final EIR and Supplemental Final EIR. All mitigation
measures adopted as part of the SLRSP FEIR and FSEIR that are applicable to the proposed project
are carried forward and applied to the proposed project to effectively mitigate the impacts that
were previously identified. Minor modifications to two transportation mitigation measures were
included in the Addendum, which will not affect any actions being considered in the SPA and
VTTM.
6.0 OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
The project has been reviewed by various City departments and divisions including; Planning,
Engineering, Transportation, Natural Resources, Building, Utilities, and Fire. Comments have
been incorporated into the draft resolution as conditions of approval.
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
1. Continue project. An action to continue the items should include a detailed list of additional
information or analysis required.
Item 2
Packet Page 20
SPEC-0172-2020 & SBDV-0173-2020 - 1035 Madonna Road (NC – Commercial/Mixed Use)
Planning Commission Report – September 23, 2020
Page 15
2. Deny the project. An action recommending denial of the application should include
findings that cite the basis for denial and should reference inconsistency with the General
Plan, SLRSP, Zoning Regulations, Subdivision Regulations or other policy documents.
8.0 ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft Resolution – Specific Plan Amendment Approval
2. Applicant project statement
3. Project Application Materials (including SPA and VTTM)
4. CEQA Addendum and City Council Resolution of August 18, 2020
5. PC Resolution No. PC-1006-2020
Item 2
Packet Page 21
RESOLUTION NO. PC-XXXX-20
A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT
FOR THE SAN LUIS RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN, IN ORDER TO ALLOW
UP TO 139,300 SF OF COMMERCIAL, 97,000 SF OF OFFICE, AND 654
RESIDENTIAL UNITS WITHIN THE PLAN AREA; APPROVAL OF
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 3142 WITHIN PREVIOUSLY
APPROVED VESTING TENATIVE TRACT MAP 3096 TO CREATE 11
LOTS IN THE NC ZONE OF THE SAN LUIS RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN,
FOR THE COMMERCIAL, OFFICE, AND RESIDENTIAL UNITS
WITHIN THESE LOTS, AS ALLOWED UNDER THE SPECIFIC PLAN
AMENDMENT; AND A DETERMINATION THAT THE PROJECT IS
CONSISTENT WITH THE CERTIFIED FINAL EIR AND FINAL
SUPPLMENTAL EIR FOR SAN LUIS RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN WHEN
CONSIDERED IN CONJUNCTION WITH AN ADDENDUM APPROVED
BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON AUGUST 18, 2020; AS REPRESENTED IN
THE AGENDA REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED SEPTEMBER 23,
2020 (1035 MADONNA ROAD, SPEC-0172-2020)
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public
hearing on September 23, 2020, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under SPEC-0172-2020, MI
San Luis Ranch, LLC, applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo has duly considered
all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and evaluation and
recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of
San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. The Planning Commission hereby recommends final approval of
the Specific Plan Amendment and Vesting Tentative Tract Map, based on the following findings:
1. The proposed amendment to the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan (SLRSP) is consistent with
the intent of the General Plan because it will not result in additional impacts beyond those
anticipated in the 2014 Land Use and Circulation Elements (LUCE) Final EIR, and because
additional affordable housing allowed under the SPA would implement Housing Element
goals.
Attachment 1Item 2
Packet Page 22
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-20
1035 Madonna Road, SPEC-0172-2020
Page 2
2. The Specific Plan Amendment (SPA) is intended to ensure internal consistency, to clarify
existing design guidelines, and to allow for more implementable mixed-use development
consistent with the intent of both the General Plan and originally adopted Specific Plan.
3. The SPA does not substantively change the policy framework or overall land use, or
circulation pattern envisioned in the originally adopted Specific Plan.
4. The SPA would facilitate a Vesting Tentative Tract Map (VTTM) within the NC zone of
the SLRSP, consistent with the SPA as amended.
5. The SPA would allow for more logical and implementable location for a future Community
Garden, which would now be located within the Agriculture (AG) zone of the SLRSP, in
conjunction with the Agricultural Heritage Center.
6. The proposed VTTM is consistent with the General Plan and SLRSP as amended because
the proposed subdivision implements goals for affordable housing, and commercial and
office development in the plan area.
7. The site is physically suited for the type and density of development allowed in the NC
zone of the SLRSP, subject to approval of a future Development Plan for this area, subject
to development review and possible conditions of approval related to that Development
Plan; resulting development will be subject to consistency with the development standards
of the SLRSP, Community Design Guidelines, and Zoning Regulations.
8. The VTTM will not conflict with easements for access through (or use of property within)
the proposed subdivision since all parcels will have adequate access from Dalidio Drive as
proposed for extension through the SLRSP, and the underlying project where
condominium units will be created is consistent with the circulation pattern and planned
accessways as envisioned within the SLRSP of which this project is a component.
9. The SPA and VTTM are not likely to cause serious health problems, substantial
environmental damage, or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their
habitat because the subdivision would be sufficiently setback from creeks or other
potentially significant habitat areas for fish and wildlife, is surrounded by urban
development, and is planned for further urban development consistent with the approved
SLRSP and Final EIR, Final Supplemental EIR and Addendum for that project.
SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The project is consistent with the certified Final
EIR and Supplemental Final EIR for the SLRSP under the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) in conjunction with an Addendum prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15164, which
was approved through City Council Resolution 11157 on August 18, 2020. On July 18, 2017, the
City Council certified the FEIR for the SLRSP and approved the SLRSP through Council
Resolution 10822 (2017 Series). A Final Supplemental EIR to address modifications to the
phasing plan within the SLRSP was certified by the City Council on July 17, 2018, through Council
Attachment 1Item 2
Packet Page 23
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-20
1035 Madonna Road, SPEC-0172-2020
Page 3
Resolution 10927 (2018 Series). All mitigation measures adopted as part of the SLRSP FEIR ,
FSEIR and Addendum that are applicable to the proposed project are carried forward and applied
to the proposed project to effectively mitigate the impacts that were previously identified.
SECTION 3. Action. The project conditions of approval do not include mandatory code
requirements. Code compliance will be verified during the plan check process, which may include
additional requirements applicable to the project. The Planning Commission hereby recommends
final approval to the City Council of the SPA and VTTM with the incorporation of the following
conditions:
Planning Division
1. The project shall comply with all mitigation measures and conditions applicable to the
project site, as established under City Council Resolutions No. 10822 (2017 Series), No.
10927 (2018 Series), and No. 11157 (2020 Series).
Engineering Division – Public Works/Community Development Department
2. Park improvement fees shall be paid at the time of map recordation unless otherwise
approved for deferral by the Community Development Director for some or all of the
proposed lots. If deferred to development, a separate Notice of Requirements may be
required.
3. The subdivision shall be recorded with a final map. The map preparation and
monumentation shall be in accordance with the City’s Subdivision Regulations,
Engineering Standards, and the Subdivision Map Act. The map shall use U.S. Customary
Units in accordance with the current City Engineering Standards. A separate application,
checklist, and final map review fee shall be paid at the time of final map processing.
4. The map for Tract 3096 shall be recorded prior to or concurrent with this Vesting Tentative
Map. All pertinent conditions and mitigation measures for Tract 3096 are applicable to
this map. The map and related improvement plans shall be in agreement with the parent
Tract 3096 approvals or the Tract 3096 improvement plans and construction shall be
amended to agree with the proposed development on this Lot 7.
5. The final map shall show, honor, and note all existing easements and offers of dedication
proposed with Tract 3096. The noted areas of additional right-of-way dedication and right-
of-way abandonment noted on VTM sheet C2 are not supported and have not been included
in this VTM processing. The parent unrecorded map shall reflect these proposed changes.
If a timely recording of the parent map does not include the required dedications and/or
abandonments for Tract 3142, a separate Summary abandonment process will be required
in accordance with State and local laws and regulations.
Attachment 1Item 2
Packet Page 24
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-20
1035 Madonna Road, SPEC-0172-2020
Page 4
6. The final map shall show and note all public and private easements including but not
limited to those needed for access, parking, utilities, drainage, and yards. Said easement
may be provided in part or in total as blanket easements.
7. An easement agreement, CCR’s, or other document shall be approved to the satisfaction of
the City to cover the use and maintenance of the several easements and related
improvements.
8. The development plans shall show and note compliance with the City Standards, Design
Guidelines, and policies in effect at the time of development plan submittal.
9. The development plans and supporting documents shall show and note compliance with
the City’s Drainage Design Manual, Post Construction Stormwater Regulations, and the
master drainage report for Tract 3096.
10. A drainage facility Operation and Maintenance Manual will be required with development
plan submittals. A recorded agreement referencing the maintenance and reporting
requirements will be required in conjunction with the building permit submittal(s).
11. The development plan shall show the minimum width for the multi-use path/pedestrian and
bicycle easement and proposed improvement. The plans shall show and note compliance
with City and Bike Plan Standards unless a reduced width is specifically approved by the
City. If a minimum width of 8’ is supported, the plans shall show and label the required 2’
shoulder on either side of the path. The map shall amend all easements, plans, and sections
accordingly. The final bike route, corner radii, width, lighting, signing and striping, etc.
shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Transportation Division.
12. The development plans shall include all existing and proposed site sections to include all
pertinent detail within the noted section. Additional sections may be needed for clarity or
to provide better detail on the interface with the existing and proposed Tract 3096
improvements. The sections shall be expanded to include the proposed/approved right-of-
way improvements in both Section A and Section B. Include all drive aisles, landscape
areas, and sound walls or fences accordingly. The grades beyond the section lines shall
generally represent the approved grades in accordance the PIP’s for Tract 3096. Show and
label the tract boundary on the sections.
13. The development plans shall include a more comprehensive landscape plan. The plan shall
include additional information and clarification on the depth of cover over the detention
system for the proposed parking lot planters. Plant and tree selections shall honor the
available planting zone above the detention structure.
14. The final map submittal and development plans shall include an exhibit to show
compliance with the California Building Code for building setbacks, eave overhangs,
exterior wall protection, opening protection or limitations, and required exit paths/yards to
the satisfaction of the Building Official/Fire Marshal.
Attachment 1Item 2
Packet Page 25
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-20
1035 Madonna Road, SPEC-0172-2020
Page 5
15. The development plans shall show the proposed parking lot dimensions, driveway
approach widths, bay and parking space dimension, loading/unloading zones, and truck
circulation in accordance with the Parking and Driveway Standards.
16. The proposed solid waste management plan, strategy, placement, and volumes shall be
acceptable to the Utilities Department and San Luis Garbage Company. The final site plan
improvements and circulation aisles shall show conformance with the approved solid waste
management strategy.
17. Separate utilities are required to each lot in accordance with the subdivision regulations
unless specifically approved for deferral to development. If approved for deferral, a
separate Notice of Requirements may be required in conjunction with the map recordation.
18. The development plans shall evaluate the existing and proposed public and private fire
hydrant spacing and locations that serve the project. The location of the existi ng or
additional public hydrants and the location of the private on-site hydrants shall be approved
to the satisfaction of the Fire Department.
Transportation
19. The development plans shall identify short-term and long-term bicycle parking consistent
with City Zoning Regulations, City Engineering Standards, and the San Luis Ranch
Specific Plan. Short-term bicycle parking shall use “Peak Style” racks unless otherwise
approved by the Public Works Department.
20. The development plans shall identify pedestrian connectivity between the on-side
pedestrian walkways and the sidewalks along the Dalidio Road and Froom Ranch Way
frontages to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director.
21. Prior to recordation of the Final Map for Tract 3142, the Project Applicant shall sub mit
public improvement plans to establish the proposed pedestrian/bicycle pathway connection
between Tract 3142 and the adjacent residential street (Homestead Place). This connection
must be completed prior to issuance of any occupancy permits for development within
Tract 3142.
Utilities Department
22. The construction plans for sewer and water services shall be in accordance with the
engineering design standards in effect at the time the building permit is approved.
23. Any sewer lateral that crosses one proposed parcel for the benefit of another shall provide
evidence that a private utility easement appropriate for those facilities has been recorded
prior to issuance of a Building Permit.
Attachment 1Item 2
Packet Page 26
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-20
1035 Madonna Road, SPEC-0172-2020
Page 6
24. Calculations for the proposed sewer generations based on Section 7 of the City’s 2018
Engineering Design Standards shall be included in the building permit submittal.
25. The proposed gravity sewer system shall use HDPE pipe, or an approved equal, that meets
or exceeds the performance needed to eliminate groundwater infiltration and root intrusion.
26. If commercial uses in the project include food preparation, provisions for grease
interceptors and FOG (fats, oils, and grease) storage within solid waste enclosure(s) shall
be provided with the design. These types of facilities shall also provide an area inside to
wash floor mats, equipment, and trash cans. The wash area shall be drained to the sanitary
sewer.
27. A separate water meter shall be provided for each new parcel per Chapter 13.04.120 of the
City’s Municipal Code. The City’s water meters must be placed per the Engineering
Standards and the water service lateral feeding the meter shall be perpendicular to the
City’s main.
28. The project’s commercial and residential uses shall be metered separately. All residential
units are to be individually metered. Privately owned sub-meters may be provided for
residential apartments upon approval of the Utilities Director. The CCR’s for the
property/homeowner association shall require that the sub-meters be read by the
association (or P/HOA contracted service) and each apartment billed according to water
use.
29. Building permit submittal shall clarify size of existing and proposed water services and
water meters for the project, including both potable and recycled water.
30. Water service meter(s) shall be adequately sized to serve the project’s proposed units.
Residential units shall be separately metered from the non-residential/commercial units,
and service lines shall not cross parcel boundaries per MC 13.04.120
31. Recycled water shall be used for major construction activities, such as grading and dust
control as required under Prohibited Water Uses; Chapter 17.07.070.C of the City’s
Municipal Code. Recycled water is available through the City’s Construction Water Permit
program.
32. Water service laterals shall have backflow prevention per City Standards since recycled
water use is proposed on site.
33. The project is within the recycled water service area and shall include a “purple pipe”
irrigation system, and backflow preventer consistent with the Engineering Design
Standards.
34. Projects generating more than two cubic yards of total waste shall comply with AB 1826,
and local waste management ordinance to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Attachment 1Item 2
Packet Page 27
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-20
1035 Madonna Road, SPEC-0172-2020
Page 7
35. Each trash enclosure shall include space for the three waste str eams: trash, recycling, and
organics.
36. A letter of agreement for shared trash collection services shall be provided identifying how
each parcel will be served.
37. Commercial and residential refuse services shall be separate unless a letter of agreement
between the tenants and a Conditional Exception Application from the City’s Development
Standards for Solid Waste Services are provided to the City with the building permit
submittal.
38. The project will be required to provide a plan for the disposal, storage, and collection of
solid waste material for both the residential and commercial components of the project.
The development of the plan shall be coordinated with San Luis Garbage Company. The
plan must be submitted for approval by the City's Solid Waste Coordinator.
Indemnification
39. The applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers
and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City and/or its agents,
officers or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul, the approval by the City of this
project, and all actions relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review
(“Indemnified Claims”). The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any Indemnified
Claim upon being presented with the Indemnified Claim and the City shall fully cooperate
in the defense against an Indemnified Claim.
Upon motion of Commissioner _________, seconded by Commissioner ___________, and
on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
RECUSED:
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 23rd day of September 2020.
____________________________________
Tyler Corey, Secretary
Planning Commission
Attachment 1Item 2
Packet Page 28
April 9, 2020
City of San Luis Obispo
Community Development Department
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
RE: Overview for San Luis Ranch Lot 7 Retail/Mixed Use site
(Vesting Tentative Tract Map, Development Plan and Specific Plan Amendment)
San Luis Ranch is excited to present to the City of San Luis Obispo for review and approval the re-subdivision of the
11.44-acre Retail/Mixed use site at San Luis Ranch. Our proposal includes the creation of 11 parcels for horizontal
mixed-use development, with approximately 114, 300 square feet of retail space and 60 affordable units with the ability
to add an additional 17 affordable units.
This project fulfills the City goals and San Luis Ranch’s approvals by:
1. Building more affordable units that is required by the SLR Specific Plan.
2. We are teaming up with People’s Self Help Housing (PSHH) to build the 34 affordable units required by the
Commercial portion of San Luis Ranch and proposing to move the 26 affordable units required by the Multi-
family portion of San Luis Ranch to a combined 60 unit site as part of this application. We are also allowing the
number of affordable units to increase by up to 17 units, if funding sources can be secured. (The current
approval allows the project to pay a fee and not build the units per DA Section 7.05 and SLR SP Section 5.2.2).
3. Providing services and amenities not available in smaller or scattered affordable projects.
4. Building all the affordable units next to transit, services in a mixed-use setting.
5. Allowing the multi-family site to provide additional “affordable by design” micro units.
6. Building the balance of the site in retail uses of various sizes and locations to provide for a variety of services for
the community.
7. The project will meet ALUC requirements. (Please see attached analysis dated March 27, 2020.)
8. The traffic generated by this proposal, even with the addition of more affordable units is under the approved
traffic thresholds in the Certified EIR/SEIR.
9. The project does not cause any additional impact not reviewed in the Certified EIR/SEIR.
10. The project is in conformance with the current design guidelines and will allow for review of the buildings by the
ARC prior to building permit approval.
We have a contract with PSHH to build the affordable units, should the project be approved. With this integrated
project, PSHH is able to deliver to the community more essential affordable housing supportive services, such as
educational and wellness programming, individual and family counseling, and career and business guidance.
Sincerely,
Walter Heiberg; MI San Luis Ranch, LLC
Attachment 2Item 2
Packet Page 29
APPLICATION SUMMARY SAN LUIS RANCH
COMMERCIAL/MIXED USE VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP #3142, DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATIONS
Overall Project Description
Vesting Tentative Tract Map 3142 with concurrent Development Plan and Specific Plan Amendment is
the subdivision of an 11.44-acre parcel into 11 parcels ranging in size from 0.30 acres to 2.77 acres to
establish the horizontal mixed-use development for a total of approximately 114,300 SF of retail and up
to 77 affordable housing units. Specific Plan Amendment application is the correction to the overall
density allowed in the SLR Specific Plan to 654 units.
The proposed VTTM#3142, Development Plan and Specific Plan Amendment applications are in
substantial conformance with EIR/SEIR on file, based upon the updated traffic analysis as provided with
application.
Vesting Tentative Tract Map application:
- Subdivision of Lot 7 Tract 3096, an 11.44-acre parcel into 11 parcels for horizontal mixed-use
ranging in size from 0.30 acres to 2.77 acres;
- Establish grading, drainage, utilities and storm water requirements for approximately
114,300 SF of retail and up to 77 Affordable housing building.
- Abandon and dedicate new right-of-way to conform with realignment of bus stop at Dalidio
Drive immediately adjacent to Lot 7 of Tract 3096;
Development Plan application:
- Refine further the Design Guidelines for the Retail site, establishing the horizontal and
vertical relationship between the retail and residential uses;
- Establish Affordable Housing allowed density to be a maximum of 77 units;
- Establish retail development of approximately 114,300 SF of space.
Specific Plan Amendment application:
- SLR SP Master Planned Community currently requires 580 residential units and 34
commercial affordable housing units for a total of 614 units.
- SLR SP Master Planned Community erroneously limited the allowed density to 614 units,
when per Section 17.140.040 and the currently required affordable housing mix allows for
up to 663 units in the SP Area at a 32.5% Density Bonus, rather than the 20% identified.
- Correct the allowed density in the SLR SP to 654 residential units to accommodate up to 77
affordable housing units on-site – including correction of various reference tables and
narrative language to correct overall allowed density.
- Our application is seeking an overall density correction of 654 units, consistent with ALUC
requirements.
- Amend Community Garden location from Lot 7 Tract 3096 as shown on page 3-20 of SLR SP
to the Farm on Lot 10 Tract 3096 – of equal or greater size.
Attachment 2Item 2
Packet Page 30
Allowed Density per Adopted San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
Use Land Use
Category
Market Rate
Density
Affordable
Density
Maximum
Density
RSF NG-10 194 4 198
RSF NG-23 79 4 83
MF NG-30 273 26 299
Retail NC 0 34 34
Total 546 68 614
Mix of Affordability
CURRENT
Affordable Income
Level
NG-10 NG-23 NG-30 NC Total
Moderate (80%-
120%)
4 0 0 4 8
Low (51%-80%) 0 4 0 4 8
Very Low (31%-50%) 0 0 26 26 52
Extremely Low (30%
and below)
0 0 0 0 0
Manager Unit 0 0 0 0 0
Total 4 4 26 34 68
Allowed Density Bonus Calculation per State Law and Section 17.140.040(E) –
CURRENT
Affordable
Income Level
Total
Affordable
Units
Provided
Percentage of
General Plan
Allowed
Density 500
Units
Percent
Density Bonus
17.140.040(E)
Density
Bonus
Calculation
(500 Units X
Percentage
Allowed)
Maximum
Units
Allowed in
SLR SP
Moderate 8 2% 0
Low 8 2% 0
Very
Low/Extremely
Low
52 10% 32.5% 163
68 663
Attachment 2Item 2
Packet Page 31
Proposed Maximum Density per San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Amendment
Use Land Use
Category
Market Rate
Density
Affordable
Density
Maximum
Density
RSF NG-10 194 4 198
RSF NG-23 79 4 83
MF NG-30 296 0 296
Retail NC 0 77 77
Total 569 85 654
Mix of Affordability
PROPOSED MINIMUM
Affordable
Income Level
NG-10 NG-23 NG-30 NC Total
Moderate 4 0 0 0 4
Low 0 4 0 7 11
Very
Low/Extremely
Low
0 0 0 52 52
Manager Unit 0 0 0 1 1
Total 4 4 0 60 68
Allowed Density Bonus Calculation per State Law and Section 17.140.040(E) –
PROPOSED
Affordable
Income Level
Total
Affordable
Units
Provided
Percentage of
General Plan
Allowed
Density 500
Units
Percent
Density Bonus
17.140.040(E)
Density
Bonus
Calculation
(500 Units X
Percentage
Allowed)
Maximum
Units
Allowed in
SLR SP
Moderate 4 1% 0
Low 11 4% 0
Very
Low/Extremely
Low
52 10% 32.5% 163
68 663
*NC Affordable Housing shows a minimum of 60 units. Breakdown provided is for purposes of
calculating Density Bonus based upon the minimum number of affordable income units proposed.
Actual number of NC affordable units will be between 60-77, with 100% of units available to low income
or below.
Attachment 2Item 2
Packet Page 32
City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Conformance Statement
The proposed design and uses associated with Tract 3142 carry out the existing policies of the City’s
adopted General Plan. The development intended with Tract 3142 fulfills the goals and policies of the
General Plan, particularly those pertaining to affordable housing.
“The City shall support the location of mixed-use projects and community and neighborhood commercial
centers near major activity nodes and transportation corridors/transit opportunities where appropriate. -
General Plan Policy 2.3.6
Tract 3142 locates additional affordable housing units immediately adjacent to commercial, service,
employment and transit uses.
“All land uses proposed shall be in keeping with safety parameters described in this General Plan or other
applicable regulations relative to the San Luis Obispo Regional Airport.” - General Plan Policy 8.1.4
The County Airport Land Use Commission unanimously found the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan to be in
conformance with the San Luis Obispo Airport Land Use Plan. Please see attached “Conformance of San
Luis Ranch Commercial/Mixed Use Proposal – Tract 3142/Specific Plan Amendment” for detailed analysis
of conformance with Airport Land Use Plan policies and conditions.
City of San Luis Obispo Housing Element Policies:
Policy 4.3. Extremely low- and very low-income housing, such as that developed by the Housing Authority
of the City of San Luis Obispo or other housing providers, may be located in any zone that allows housing,
and should be dispersed throughout the City rather than concentrated in one neighborhood or zone.
Policy 6.19. Continue to incentivize affordable housing development with density bonuses, parking
reductions and other development incentives, including City financial assistance.
Policy 7.2. Higher density housing should maintain high quality standards for unit design, privacy, security,
on-site amenities, and public and private open space. Such standards should be flexible enough to allow
innovative design solutions in special circumstances.
Affordable Housing for the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Area, including Tract 3142, is consistent with the
Housing Element policies:
• The project is consistent by providing affordable development consistent with the San Luis Ranch
locational criteria in a newly developing neighborhood.
• A range of housing products from studio to three-bedroom units will be provided. The variety of
floor plans and sizes of units in the project will appeal to different ages and income levels.
• Affordable units maintain high quality standards for unit design, privacy, security, on-site
amenities, and public and private open space.
Attachment 2Item 2
Packet Page 33
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Conformance Statement
The proposed design and uses associated with Tract 3142 carry out the existing policies of the adopted
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan. The development intended with Tract 3142 fulfills the goals and policies of
the General Plan, particularly those pertaining to affordable housing, even more robustly than the
adopted Specific Plan.
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Chapter 8 – Implementation Policies
Policy 1.4. Promote high intensity, clustered development that promotes walking, biking, and transit use.
Policy 3.3. Encourage pedestrian scale development that fosters walking to and from commercial uses.
Policy 4.3. Promote affordable, entry level, and workforce housing opportunities whenever possible.
Policy 6.1. Apply a multimodal approach to transportation networks for the site (i.e., considering safety
and mobility of all users, including pedestrians, cyclists, drivers, and transit riders).
Policy 6.3: Ensure a safe and efficient circulation system within the Plan Area.
Tract 3142 locates up to 77 affordable housing units, targeting low and very-low income groups, in a single
structure, immediately adjacent to multi-use (bike/ped) paths, as well as commercial, employment and
transit uses. Residents and visitors in Tract 3142 have access to wide range of services, transportation
options, and recreational opportunities.
Attachment 2Item 2
Packet Page 34
Attachment 3Item 2Packet Page 35
Attachment 3
Item 2Packet Page 36
Attachment 3
Item 2Packet Page 37
Attachment 3
Item 2Packet Page 38
Attachment 3
Item 2Packet Page 39
Attachment 3
Item 2Packet Page 40
SAN LUIS RANCH RETAIL DEVELOPMENTILLUSTRATIVE SITE PLAN# 1046-09-CO19JULY 1, 20201” = 40’-0” (24X36 SHEET)02040 801” = 80’-0” (12X18 SHEET)LOT 10COMMERCIAL0.61 ACRES LOT 9COMMERCIAL 1.27 ACRESLOT 8COMMERCIAL0.41 ACRES LOT 4COMMERCIAL1.67 ACRES LOT 1COMMERCIAL 2.77 ACRESLOT 2COMMERCIAL0.98 ACRES LOT 3COMM.0.49 ACRES LOT 7COMMERCIAL0.3 ACRESLOT 6COMMERCIAL0.32 ACRES LOT 5COMM.0.72 ACRESLOT 11AFFORDABLE HOUSING1.88 ACRES AFFORDABLE HOUSING AFFORDABLE HOUSING PARKING SECURE PARKING GATESECUREPARKING GATEAFFORDABLE HOUSING PARKING DRAINAGE EASMENTSINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTSTO HWY 101 OVERPASS CONNECTIONOPEN SPACESINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTSALUC NO BUILD ZONERESIDENTIAL ENTRY MONUMENT LOCATIONS.BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY TO NEIGHBORHOOD.CLASS 1 PATH.BICYCLE PATHPEDESTRIAN PATH.VIGNETTE VIEW LOCATION.PUBLIC TRANSIT STOP.SOLID FENCE - PROVIDES PRIVACY AND VISUAL SCREENING AT PROPERTY LINES BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL TYPES.MASONRY WALL - PROVIDES PRIVACY AND BOTH NOISE AND VISUAL SCREENING AT PROPERTY LINES BETWEEN COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL ZONESSHORT TERM BICYCLE PARKINGLEGENDBUILDING STATISTICSSITE AREA:11.44 ACRES (498,408 SF)MAX ALLOWED LOT COVERAGE:80% = 9.16 ACRES (399,010 SF)PROPOSED LOT COVERAGE:79.63% = 9.11 ACRES (8.49 ACRES = 369,881 SF IMPERVIOUS + 0.62 ACRES = 26,931 SF PERVIOUS)MIN LANDSCAPE/PLAZA COVERAGE:20% = 2.29 ACRES (99,752 SF)PROPOSED LANDSCAPE COVERAGE:20.37% = 2.33 ACRES (101,596 SF) > 2.29 ACRESCOMMERCIAL(RED):114,300 SFAFFORDABLE HOUSING (YELLOW):60-77 AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS27,000 SF FOOTPRINT - 3 STORY BLDG.7,700 SF OPEN SPACE (100 SF PER UNIT)COMMERCIAL PARKING:REQUIRED: 114,300/500 = 229 SPACESSEVEN SPACES SHALL BE ADA COMPLIANTBICYCLE PARKING REQ’D: 229*20% = 46 REQUIRED(35 SHORT TERM, 11 LONG TERM)PROVIDED:370 SPACES AND 8 ACCESSIBLE SPACES - 2 VAN (301+ SPACES = 8 REQ’D)BICYCLE PARKING (370*20%)*75% = 74 (60 SHORT TERM SPACES PROVIDED -14 LONG TERM SPACES INSIDE BUILDINGS - TENANT PROVIDES)AFFORDABLE HOUSING PARKING:1.0 PER UNIT REQUIRED: 77*1.0 = 77 SPACES +2 MANAGERIAL(DARKER GREY ON SITE PLAN) PROVIDED: 90 SPACES > 79 SPACES4 ACCESSIBLE SPACES- 1 VANREQUIRED BUILDING HEIGHT:MINIMUM 20’, MAXIMUM 50 FT.PROPOSED BUILDING HEIGHT:NO CHANGEREQUIRED SETBACKS:(NO PROPOSED CHANGE)MINIMUM COMMERCIAL LANDSCAPE BUFFER:5’ STREET FRONT0’ SIDE INTERIOR LOT0’ STREET SIDE CORNER LOT15’ PARKING10’ REAR6’ LANDSCAPE BUFFER FROM PUBLIC STREET (FROOM RANCH WAY & DALIDIO)AND 10’ ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIALPROVIDED LANDSCAPE BUFFER:15’ LANDSCAPE BUFFER FROM PUBLIC STREET (FROOM RANCH WAY & DALIDIO) AND ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL50’-0”50’-0”
LANDSCAPE BUFFER
EXISTING P.U.E. SETBACK
10-0”
15’-0”PED/BICYCLEPATHA2A17,700 SF OPEN SPACEPED/BICYCLEPATHPED/BICYCLEPATHCLASS 1 PATHCLASS 1 PATHCLASS 1 PATHCLASS 1 PATHDRAINAGE EASMENT
BIKE PATHAttachment 3Item 2Packet Page 41
SAN LUIS RANCH COMMERCIAL# 1046-09-CO19JULY 1, 2020MIXED USE/AFFORDABLE & PASEO VIGNETTTEAttachment 3Item 2Packet Page 42
SAN LUIS RANCH COMMERCIAL# 1046-09-CO19JULY 1, 2020AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL ENTRY MONUMENT & WAYFINDINGAttachment 3Item 2Packet Page 43
SAN LUIS RANCH COMMERCIAL# 1046-09-CO19JULY 1, 2020MIXED USE AND COMMERCIAL PLAZA VIGNETTEAttachment 3Item 2Packet Page 44
COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL BUFFER6’10’ YARDSETBACKLANDSCAPEBUFFERSIDEWALKPARKINGPARKINGTRAVEL LANESPARKING AND COMMERCIAL VEHICLE ACCESSCOMMERCIAL VEHICLE ACCESSCOMMERCIAL BUILDINGSINGLE FAMILY HOME BUILDING ENVELOPESINGLE FAMILY HOME60’6’7’20’7’34’10’ 15’10’10’SETBACK10’34’10’ 15’LANDSCAPE BUFFER10’ YARD SETBACKSIDEWALK5’ HIGH VERTICAL MASONRY WALL FOR PRIVACY, VISUAL/NOISE SCREENING AT PROPERTY LINESSAN LUIS RANCH June 22, 2020Scale: 1/8” = 1’-0”(on 11x17 sheet)02486’6’10’ MIN10’ MINAttachment 3Item 2Packet Page 45
SFR AND MFR BUFFER6’10’ YARDSETBACKSIDEWALKPARKINGLANDSCAPEBUFFERPARKINGTRAVEL LANESTRAVEL LANESSIDEWALKPARKINGPARKING5’ HIGH VERTICAL FENCE FOR VISUAL SCREENING AND PRIVACY AT PROPERTY LINESPARKINGMULTI-FAMILYBUILDINGSINGLE FAMILY HOME BUILDING ENVELOPESINGLE FAMILY HOME60’6’7’20’7’6’10’60’10’10’SETBACK10’6’10’LANDSCAPE10’ YARD SETBACKSIDEWALK6’SAN LUIS RANCH June 22, 2020Scale: 1/8” = 1’-0”(on 11x17 sheet)02486’Attachment 3Item 2Packet Page 46
SAN LUIS RANCH June 22, 2020A30248Scale: 1” = 20’(on 11x17 sheet)MULTI-USE PATH - RETAIL SITEMULTI-USE PATH - @HARVEST WAY CONNECTION MULTI-USE PATH - @REAR RESIDENTIAL LOT18’ DEEP PARKING STALLS WITH PERVIOUS PAVERS18’ DEEP PARKING STALLS WITH PERVIOUS PAVERS24’ WIDE DRIVE AISLE24’ WIDE DRIVE AISLE7’ WIDE PEDESTRIAN PATH7’ WIDE PEDESTRIAN PATH30’ LANDSCAPE BUFFER WITH 10’ WIDE MEANDERING MULTI-USE PATH WITH 2’ WIDE SHOULDERS ON EACH SIDE25’ LANDSCAPE BUFFER WITH 10’ WIDE MEANDERING MULTI-USE PATH WITH 2’ WIDE SHOULDERS ON EACH SIDE10’ 10’ 18’24’25’ 25’ 18’ 18’ 24’ 24’ PEDESTRIAN SIDEWALKHARVEST WAYRESIDENTIAL LOTRESIDENTIAL LOTRESIDENTIAL LOTBUFFERDRIVE AISLECROSSWALKTRUCK DOCKCOMMERCIAL BUILDINGCOMMERCIAL BUILDINGCOMMERCIAL BUILDING7’ 7’ 4’12’6’ HIGH MASONRY WALL BETWEEN COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIALAttachment 3Item 2Packet Page 47
SAN LUIS RANCH June 22, 2020A40248Scale: 1” = 20’(on 11x17 sheet)MULTI-USE PATH - RETAIL SITEMULTI-USE PATH - @COMM/RESIDENTIAL BUFFERMULTI-USE PATH - @OPEN SPACE CONNECTION20’ LANDSCAPE BUFFER WITH 10’ WIDE MEANDERING MULTI-USE PATH WITH 2’ WIDE SHOULDERS ON EACH SIDE10’ 10’27’ 20’ BUFFER AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGAFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGCOMMERCIAL BUILDINGAFFORDABLE SECURE PARKINGSECURE GATEMULTI-USE PATH6’ HIGH SOLID FENCE BETWEEN OPEN SPACE AND RESIDENTIAL FOR PRIVACY SCREENINGOPEN SPACE MULTI-USE PATH - CONNECTION TO DALIDIO ROAD AND BUS STOPAttachment 3Item 2Packet Page 48
Attachment 3Item 2Packet Page 49
Attachment 3Item 2Packet Page 50
Attachment 3Item 2Packet Page 51
Attachment 3Item 2Packet Page 52
Attachment 3Item 2Packet Page 53
Attachment 3Item 2Packet Page 54
ADDENDUM TO THE CERTIFIED FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE
SAN LUIS RANCH PROJECT
AUGUST 2020
A. INTRODUCTION
This document is an Addendum to the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report
(FSEIR) prepared for the San Luis Ranch Project (State Clearinghouse Number 2015101083).
The FSEIR was certified by the City of San Luis Obispo on July 17, 2018, pursuant to City
Council Resolution No. 10927 (2018 Series). The Addendum is intended to bring the existing
CEQA documentation up to date as appropriate. Because there are no new significant impacts or
mitigation measures as a result of this updated analysis, an Addendum is the appropriate CEQA
document.
B. ADDENDUM REQUIREMENTS
The Addendum has been prepared in accordance with the relevant provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970 (as amended) and the State CEQA Guidelines as
implemented by the City of San Luis Obispo. According to §15164(b) of the State CEQA
Guidelines, an Addendum to an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is the appropriate
environmental document in instances when “only minor technical changes or additions are
necessary or none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a
subsequent EIR have occurred”. Section 15162(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines states that no
subsequent Negative Declaration shall be prepared for a project unless the lead agency
determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of
the following:
(1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major
revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of
new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of
previously identified significant effects;
(2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which
the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR
or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental
effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant
effects; or
(3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and
could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time
the previous EIR or Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the
following:
(A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed
in the previous EIR or Negative Declaration;
Attachment 4Item 2
Packet Page 55
(B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more
severe than shown in the previous EIR or Negative Declaration;
(C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be
feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or
more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline
to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or
(D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably
different from those analyzed in the previous EIR or Negative Declaration
would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the
environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation
measure or alternative.
This Addendum does not require circulation because it does not provide significant new
information that changes the certified FSEIR in a way that deprives the public of a meaningful
opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse environmental effect of the project or a
feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect.
This Addendum includes this introduction and a description of the proposed actions addressed in
the Addendum as they related to the previously-approved project. The technical analysis in
support of this Addendum is included as an appendix to this document for reference
(Appendix A).
The CEQA documentation for this project, including this Addendum and certified FSEIR, is
available for review on the City’s website at www.slocity.org.
C. PREVIOUS CEQA DOCUMENTATION
The City Council unanimously certified a Final EIR and approved the project on July 18, 2017,
pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 10822 (2017 Series). A Notice of Determination (NOD)
was prepared, and there were no legal challenges to the adequacy of the Final EIR during the 30-
day statute of limitations associated with the NOD, pursuant to CEQA (PRC Section 21167 and
CEQA Guidelines Section 15094).
Subsequently, the City Council unanimously certified a Final Supplemental EIR and approved a
modified project on July 17, 2018, pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 10927 (2018 Series).
A Notice of Determination (NOD) was prepared, and there were no legal challenges to the
adequacy of the Final EIR during the 30-day statute of limitations associated with the NOD,
pursuant to CEQA (PRC Section 21167 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15094).
D. REASONS WHY AN ADDENDUM IS APPROPRIATE
Subsequent to the approval of an amendment to the previously approved San Luis Ranch project
in July 2018, the City of San Luis Obispo conducted additional analysis of traffic operations
related to the Project, a copy of which is attached hereto as Appendix A. The supplemental
traffic analysis evaluates a proposal to implement the Project in a manner that is consistent with
the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan, but with modifications to certain land uses, including a
Attachment 4Item 2
Packet Page 56
reduction in the amount of Office square footage from 100,000 sf to 97,000 sf, a reduction in the
amount of retail square footage from 150,000 sf to 139,300 sf, and an increase in residential uses
from 580 dwelling units to up to 654 dwelling units, of which up to 281 would be single family
residences and 373 would be multi-family residences, some of which are identified as affordable
housing. The change in buildout potential will result in fewer vehicle trips associated with
development of the Project at two intersections evaluated in the FSEIR - Intersection #16: South
Higuera Street & Tank Farm Road and Intersection #18: Prado Road and South Higuera Street.
The updated traffic analysis concludes that it would be appropriate to modify the mitigation
measures associated with these intersections from requiring construction of improvements in
conjunction with development of the Project to requiring payment of the Project’s fair share of
the cost of the future improvements by the City or a future developer at a time to be determined
by the City. The proposed changes do not materially change the findings and conclusions of the
FSEIR, making a second Supplemental EIR unnecessary pursuant to Section 15162 of the
CEQA Guidelines.
E. UPDATED PROJECT ELEMENTS
As discussed above, the project evaluated in this Addendum includes modifications from what
was evaluated in the certified Final EIR and FSEIR to reflect an increase in housing potential
from 580 units to 654 units, and a reduction in non-residential area from 250,000 SF to 236,300
SF. The overall land use mix and pattern envisioned under the approved Specific Plan otherwise
remains unchanged. Please refer to the FEIR and FSEIR for setting information related to
analyzing project impacts.
F. UPDATED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
This section addresses impacts associated with the project changes that have been proposed since
the FSEIR was certified in July 2018. Except as noted below, none of the analysis or discussion
included in the certified FSEIR has changed. The analysis addresses all the issue areas discussed
in the Final EIR and FSEIR.
Transportation
The proposed changes would not affect any of the Project’s construction-related impacts or the
overall footprint of development, which remains consistent with development that could occur
under the approved Specific Plan. As discussed below, based on the June 2020 traffic memo,
attached hereto as Appendix A, there would be fewer trips generated by development under the
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan, and thus commensurately lesser impacts than what were identified
in the FEIR/FSEIR. Previously identified impacts and mitigation measures would still apply.
However, based on the June 2020 traffic memo, two mitigation measures may be modified as
proposed without changing the severity of identified impacts.
With regard to the Project’s operational impacts, the updated traffic analysis concludes that the
implementation of mitigation measures required for two intersections analyzed in the FSEIR –
Intersection #16: South Higuera Street & Tank Farm Road and Intersection #18: Prado Road
and South Higuera Street – could be modified without additional impact from requiring
construction of the improvements discussed therein in conjunction with buildout of the Pr oject
Attachment 4Item 2
Packet Page 57
to payment of the Project’s fair share toward future construction of these improvements by the
City or a future developer, as determined by the City, when warranted by then existing
conditions.
These mitigation measures are modified as follows, new language is shown in underline and
deleted language is shown in cross-out:
T-1(g) Intersection #16: S. Higuera Street & Tank Farm Road.
• Pay Fair share costs and dedicate necessary ROW for construction of the
Prado Road Overpass & NB Ramps (Timing & Amount of Fair Share
Payments as established in San Luis Ranch Development Agreement).
• Develop a Travel Demand Management Plan consistent with section 2.4.3
and to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director (Prior to Building
Permits or Occupancy)
• Pay fair share costs in the amount of $42,500 toward future construction by
City or another developer of an extension of the Extend northbound right
turn pocket to 230' and channelize movement (Prior to Building Permits or
Occupancy)
T-2(j) Intersection #18: Prado Road & Higuera Street.
• Install 2nd U.S. 101 northbound left turn lane (Prior to Building
Permits or Occupancy)
• Pay fair share costs in the amount of $75,000 toward future
construction by City or another developer of an extension of the
Extend westbound right turn pocket to 400' (Prior to Building
Permits or Occupancy)
No other changes to any other transportation-related mitigation measures are proposed.
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Noise
The reduction in the Project’s traffic would result in corresponding reductions in the Project’s
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions and operational Noise impacts, which are largely based
on trip generation. However, the level of impacts identified in the FEIR and FSEIR would not
change, nor would any mitigation measures associated with these issue areas.
Water Resources and Recreation
As noted in the FSEIR, the approved Specific Plan Project is projected to result in a total service
population of 2,135 persons, of which the Project would generate 1,293 residents and 842
employees. Based on the population generation factors included in the FSEIR, the proposed
changes would reduce the total service population to 2,042 persons, comprised of 1,418 residents
(a net increase of 125 residents) and 624 employees (a net decrease of 218 employees). The
changes in the service population for the project are not expected to generate any new or
increased environmental impacts related to demands on water resources or recreational facilities,
as described below.
Attachment 4Item 2
Packet Page 58
Based on the water generation rates in Section 4.13 of the EIR, the proposed changes will result
in an increase in water demand from 217.6 AFY to 226.66 AFY; however, this amount is well
within the amount of available water disclosed under the EIR and would not result in any new or
increased significant impacts.
Similarly, the addition of 125 residents, an increase of less than 10%, would place some
additional demands on City park and recreation facilities. However, as discussed in Section 4.11
of the FEIR, in addition to park facilities being constructed within the project, the additional
residential units will pay required City park fees, which will reduce any impacts to recreational
facilities to a level of less than significance, and the proposed changes would not result in any
new or increased significant impacts.
Other Impacts Described in the FEIR and FSEIR
Several impacts described in previous CEQA documentation are based on the amount of land
converted to development activities. The issues include Agricultural Resources, Biological
Resources, Cultural Resources, Hazards, Hydrology/Water Quality, and Land Use. Because the
development footprint would not change under the updated Project, impacts and mitigation
measures related to these issues would not change.
G. DETERMINATION
In accordance with Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of San Luis Obispo (City)
has determined that this Addendum to the certified FSEIR is necessary to document changes or
additions that have occurred in the project description since the FSEIR was originally certified.
The City has reviewed and considered the information contained in this Addendum and finds that
the preparation of subsequent CEQA analysis that would require public circulation is not
necessary.
Attachment 4Item 2
Packet Page 59
RESOLUTION NO. PC-1006-20
A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 296-UNIT MULTI -FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT WITHIN THE NG-30 ZONED PORTION OF
THE SAN LUIS RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN AREA, AND A
DETERMINATION THAT THE PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE
CERTIFIED FINAL EIR FOR SAN LUIS RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN AND
EXEMPT FROM FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA); AS
REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED
MARCH 11, 2020 (1035 MADONNA ROAD, ARCH-0459- 2019)
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo
conducted a public hearing in the Council Hearing Room of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California, on December 2, 2019, recommending directional items and approval of the
project to the Planning Commission based on consistency with the Community Design Guidelines
and San Luis Ranch Specific Plan (SLRSP), pursuant to a proceeding instituted under ARCH-
0459-2019, MI San Luis Ranch, LLC, applicant; and
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
March 11, 2020, which was continued from a public hearing held on February 26, 2020, pursuant
to a proceeding instituted under ARCH-0459-2019, MI San Luis Ranch, LLC, applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo has duly considered
all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and evaluation and
recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of
San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. The Planning Commission hereby grants final development plan
approval to the project (ARCH-0459- 2019), based on the following findings:
As conditioned, the project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of persons
living or working at the site or in the vicinity because the project respects site constraints and
will be compatible with the scale and character of the neighborhood.
2. The project is consistent with the General Plan because it promotes policies related to
compatible development (LUE 2.3.9), residential project objectives (LUE 2.3.11), and
housing production (HE 6.10).
Attachment 5Item 2
Packet Page 60
Resolution No. PC-1006-20
1035 Madonna Road, ARCH-0459-2019
Page 2
3. The project is consistent with the Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 4.4.3 because
the project promotes higher -density, compact housing to achieve more efficient use of public
facilities and services and to improve the City's jobs/housing balance.
4. The project is consistent with Housing Element Policies 6.1 and 7.4 because the project
supports the development of more housing in accordance with the assigned Regional Housing
Needs Allocation and establishes a new neighborhood, with pedestrian and bicycle linkages
that provide direct, convenient and safe access to adjacent neighborhoods consistent with the
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan (SLRSP).
5. The project is consistent with the goals and policies of the SLRSP, especially as they relate
to allowed land uses within the NG-30 zone, the density of development within that area,
design considerations and urban form, parking requirements, community open space
provisions, and housing affordability.
6. As conditioned, the project design is consistent with the San Luis Ranch Design Guidelines
within the SLRSP, and consistent with the Community Design Guidelines for multi -family
housing design and Infill Development because the architectural styles are complementary to
the surrounding neighborhood including site design, roofing style, front porches, balconies,
siding materials, finish, and scale. The project design incorporates articulation, massing, and
a mix of color/finish materials that are compatible with the neighborhood and complementary
to other development within the immediate vicinity.
7. The proposed height, mass and scale of the project will not negatively alter the overall
character of the neighborhood or the streets appearance because the development is designed
in a manner that does not deprive reasonable solar access to adjacent properties by positioning
the majority of the building mass along the street frontage that incorporates vertical and
horizontal wall plan offsets providing a high -quality and aesthetically pleasing architectural
design.
8. The proposed height, mass and scale of the project is necessary to provide dwelling units that
can achieve the required 26 "very low income" deed restricted units that are included in the
project.
SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The project is consistent with the certified Final
Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for SLRSP and exempt from the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15182(c) (Residential Projects
Implementing Specific Plans). On July 18, 2017, the City Council certified the FEIR for the
SLRSP and approved the SLRSP through Council Resolution 10822 (2017 Series). A Final
Supplemental EIR to address modifications to the phasing plan within the SLRSP was certified by
the City Council on July 17, 2018, through Council Resolution 10927 (2018 Series). All
mitigation measures adopted as part of the SLRSP FEIR and FSEIR that are applicable to the
proposed project are carried forward and applied to the proposed project to effectively mitigate the
impacts that were previously identified. The project is exempt from the provisions of the CEQA
under Government Code §65457 because the project consists of a residential development and is
Attachment 5Item 2
Packet Page 61
Resolution No. PC-1006-20
1035 Madonna Road, ARCH-0459-2019
Page 3
consistent with the SLRSP, which was approved following certification of the SLRSP FEIR in
2017. No Supplemental Environmental Impact Report is required pursuant to Public Resources
Code §21166 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 because: 1) the project does not include
or require any revisions to the certified SLRSP FEIR or FSEIR; 2) no substantial changes would
occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is being undertaken, and no
revisions to the SLRSP FEIR or FSEIR are required; and 3) no new information of substantial
importance is available that was not already known at the time the SLRSP FEIR and FSEIR were
certified.
SECTION 3. Action. The project conditions of approval do not include mandatory code
requirements. Code compliance will be verified during the plan check process, which may include
additional requirements applicable to the project. The Planning Commission hereby grants final
approval to the project with incorporation of the following conditions:
Planning Division
1. Final project design and construction drawings submitted for a building permit shall be in
substantial compliance with the project plans approved by the Planning Commission (ARCH-
0459-2018). A separate, full-size sheet shall be included in working drawings submitted for
a building permit that lists all conditions and code requirements of project approval listed as
sheet number 2. Reference shall be made.in the margin of listed items as to where in plans
requirements are addressed. Any change to approved design, colors, materials, landscaping,
or other conditions of approval must be approved by the Director or Architectural Review
Commission, as deemed appropriate.
2. The project shall comply with all mitigation measures and conditions applicable to the project
site, as established under City Council Resolutions No. 10822 (2017 Series) and No. 10927
2018 Series).
3. Plans submitted for a building permit shall call out the colors and materials of all proposed
building surfaces and other improvements. Colors and materials shall be consistent with the
color and material board submitted with Architectural Review application. The project shall
avoid repetition of design color schemes, such that adjacent townhomes or buildings of a
similar layout use different color schemes. Plans shall clearly note that all stucco surfaces
have a smooth hand -troweled or sand finish appearance.
4. Plans submitted for a building permit shall include recessed window details or equivalent
shadow variation, and all other details including but not limited to awnings and railings. Plans
shall indicate the type of materials for the window frames and mullions, their dimensions, and
colors. Plans shall include the materials and dimensions of all lintels, sills, surrounds recesses
and other related window features. Plans shall demonstrate the use of high -quality materials
for all design features that reflect the architectural style of the project and are compatible with
the neighborhood character, to the approval of the Community Development Director.
Plans submitted for a building permit shall clearly depict the location of all required short and
Attachment 5Item 2
Packet Page 62
Resolution No. PC-1006-20
1035 Madonna Road, ARCH-0459- 2019
Page 4
long-term bicycle parking for all intended uses, plans submitted for construction permits shall
include bicycle lockers or interior space within each residential unit or parking area for the
storage of at least two bicycle per residential unit. Sufficient detail shall be provided about
the placement and design of bike racks and lockers to demonstrate compliance with relevant
Engineering Standards and Community Design Guidelines, to the satisfaction of the Public
Works and Community Development Directors.
6. Plans submitted for building permit shall include a photometric plan, demonstrating
compliance with maximum light intensity standards not to exceed a maintained value of 10
foot-candles. The locations of all lighting, including bollard style landscaping or path lighting,
shall be included in plans submitted for a building permit. All wall -mounted lighting fixtures
shall be clearly called out on building elevations included as part of working drawings. All
wall -mounted lighting shall complement building architecture. The lighting schedule for the
building shall include a graphic representation of the proposed lighting fixtures and cut -sheets
on the submitted building plans. The selected fixture(s) shall be shielded to ensure that light
is directed downward consistent with the requirements of the City's Night Sky Preservation
standards contained in Chapter § 17.70.100 of the Zoning Regulations.
7. Mechanical and electrical equipment should be located internally to the buildings. With
submittal of working drawings, the applicant shall include sectional views of the buildings,
which clearly show the sizes of any proposed condensers and other mechanical equipment. If
any condensers, transformers, or other mechanical equipment are to be ground mounted or
placed on the roof, plans submitted for a building permit shall confirm that these features will
be adequately screened. A line -of -sight diagram may be required to confirm that proposed
screening will be adequate. This condition applies to initial construction and later
improvements.
8. The storage area for trash and recycling cans shall be screened from the public right-of-way
consistent with § 17.70.200 of the Zoning Regulations. The subject property shall be
maintained in a clean and orderly manner at all times; free of excessive leaves, branches, and
other landscape material. The applicant shall be responsible for the clean-up of any landscape
material in the public right-of-way.
9. A final landscaping plan, including irrigation details and plans, shall be submitted to the
Community Development Department along with working drawings. The legend for the
landscaping plan shall include the sizes and species of all groundcovers, shrubs, and trees
with corresponding symbols for each plant material showing their specific locations on plans.
Landscaping plans shall include the following information, at a minimum:
a. The species, diameter at breast height, location, and condition of all existing trees;
b. Identification of trees that will be retained, removed, or relocated;
c. Location and size of plant and tree species proposed to be planted;
d. The location of proposed utilities, driveways, street tree locations, and the size and
species of proposed street trees; and
e. A reclaimed water irrigation plan.
Attachment 5Item 2
Packet Page 63
Resolution No. PC-1006- 20
1035 Madonna Road, ARCH-0459-2019
Page 5
10. Plans submitted for construction permits shall include elevation and detail drawings of all
walls and fences. Fences, walls, and hedges will comply with the development standards
described in the Zoning Regulations (§ 17.70.070 —Fences, Walls, and Hedges).
11. The location of any required backflow preventer and double-check assembly shall be shown
on all site plans submitted for a building permit, including the landscaping plan. Construction
plans shall also include a scaled diagram of the equipment proposed. Where possible, as
determined by the Utilities Director, equipment shall be located inside the building within 20
feet of the front property line. Where this is not possible, as determined by the Utilities
Director, the back -flow preventer and double-check assembly shall be located in the street
yard and screened using a combination of paint color, landscaping and, if deemed appropriate
by the Community Development Director, a low wall. The size and configuration of such
equipment shall be subject to review and approval by the Utilities and Community
Development Directors.
12. The design of proposed structures will incorporate noise attenuating construction techniques
that reduces noise exposure to acceptable levels. Exposure in outdoor activity areas must not
exceed 60 dB and indoor exposure must not exceed 45 dB consistent with the City's Noise
Ordinance. Plans submitted for construction permits must clearly indicate and describe noise
attenuation measures, techniques, and materials, and demonstrates their compliance with
noise levels limits.
13. Prior to occupancy, an overflight notification shall be recorded and appear with the property
deed. The applicant shall also record a covenant with the City to ensure that disclosure is
provided to all buyers and lessees at the subject property. Notice form and content shall be to
the satisfaction of the Community Development Director and include the following language:
NOTICE OF AIRPORT IN VICINITY: This property is presently located in the vicinity of an
airport, within what is known as the airport influence area. For that reason, the property may
be subject to some of the annoyances or inconveniences associated with proximity to airport
operations (for example: noise, vibration, or odors). Individual sensitivities to those
annoyances can vary from person to person. You may wish to consider what airport
annoyances, if any, are associated with the property before you complete your purchase and
determine whether they are acceptable to you.
14. The site plan and landscape plan shall be modified to clearly show a pedestrian walkway on
the north side of the 30'-wide main east -west driveway within the townhome neighborhood
that connects to the north -south shared street for the multi -family project, consistent with what
is indicated on VTTM 3150 as proposed.
Housing Programs — Community Development Department
15. A. Base Inclusionary Housing Requirement: Prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy,
the City and the project owners shall enter into an Affordable Housing Agreement for the
inclusionary affordable housing units to be developed in the NG-30 Zone, which will be
Attachment 5Item 2
Packet Page 64
Resolution No. PC-1006-20
1035 Madonna Road, ARCH-0459- 2019
Page 6
recorded in the office of the County Recorder. The ten (10) deed restricted "workforce" units
shall be shown in the final Affordable Housing Agreement to be spread throughout the Zone,
as described in the Affordable Housing Plan dated October 24, 2019. The twenty-six (26) deed
restricted "very low" income level units shall be operated by a qualified affordable housing
provider and may be clustered into one or more buildings, the location and unit mix of which,
is described in the Affordable Housing Plan for the project dated October 24, 2019. Services
offered by the qualified housing provider may be provided either on or off -site pursuant to an
agreement with the qualified housing provider approved by the City prior to initial occupancy
of the first very low-income level unit, and as updated from time to time. All "workforce"
and "very -low" deed restricted units shall be either sold or rented subject to the inclusionary
housing provisions of the City per the final recorded Affordable and Workforce Housing
Agreement and Declaration of Restrictive Covenants for the San Luis Ranch project.
B. The Base Inclusionary Housing Requirement may be modified by the Community
Development Director in the event that an application for an Affordable Housing Project on
the NC portion of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan area is approved providing for the
development of at least the same number (26) very -low income affordable housing units
currently proposed for the multi -family site, in addition to the 34 very -low income affordable
housing units already required on the NC site through previous project entitlements.
C. This approval shall not be construed to limit the amount of affordable housing that can be
provided on the project site. Additional affordable housing units, as may be necessary to
qualify for certain grant applications, may be provided.
Engineering Division — Public Works/Community Development
16. The building plan submittal(s) shall show and note compliance with all conditions of approval,
mitigation measures, Notice of Requirements, and Specific Plan related to San Luis Ranch
and Tract 3096. The plans shall show and note compliance with both the project Architectural
approval and the conditions of approval for the proposed resubdivision and Vesting Tentative
Map (VTM) for Tract 3150.
17. The building plan submittal and reports shall show and note compliance with the existing and
proposed subdivision improvements for Tract 3096. Changes to the approved subdivision
plans necessary to accommodate the project plans shall be approved prior to approval and
permit issuance of the project plans.
18. The Tract 3150 subdivision improvement plans shall be approved prior to building permit
issuance for the new structures.
19. The building plan submittal shall show and note compliance with the project master drainage
report, City Drainage Design Manual, Floodplain Management Regulations, and Post
Construction Stormwater Regulations. The plans and reports shall agree with the master
Attachment 5Item 2
Packet Page 65
Resolution No. PC-1006-20
1035 Madonna Road, ARCH-0459-2019
Page 7
report and drainage compliance strategy for Tract 3096 or the master report shall be amended
to accommodate the specific project.
20. The building plan submittal shall show and label all existing and proposed property lines and
easements in accordance with the previous entitlement(s) and the VTM for Tract 3150.
21. The building plan submittal and subdivision improvement plans shall show compliance with
and reference the City's Benchmark System and Horizontal Control Network.
22. The building plan submittal shall include the latest information regarding the floodplain as
adjusted through the phased Letter of Map Revisions (LOMR) or as defined by the
Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) and any accepted depths of flooding from the
respective reports for both the Cerro San Luis Channel and Prefumo Creek. If any structure
is located within an existing mapped zone, the structure(s) shall be shown to comply with the
Floodplain Management Regulations or the final LOMR shall be completed show that the
buildings have been removed prior to building permit issuance. The plans and reports shall
show that the new building pads are at least one foot above the Base Flood Elevation for any
areas of known flooding that are outside the FEMA studied Special Flood Hazard Area
SFHA) or X shaded (XB) floodzones.
23. The building plan submittal shall include a complete grading, drainage and erosion control
plan. The grading plan shall show existing structures and grades located within 15' of the
property lines and/or building pad in accordance with the grading ordinance. The plan shall
include all existing and proposed grades, finish floor elevations, and spot elevations to depict
the site drainage. The plan shall include all existing and proposed drainage devices and
systems. The plan shall consider historic offsite drainage tributary to this property that may
need to be conveyed along with the improved on -site drainage.
24. General Construction Activity Storm Water Permits are required for all storm water
discharges associated with a construction activity where clearing, grading or excavations
result in land disturbance of one or more acres. Storm water discharges of less than one acre,
but which is part of a larger common plan of development or sale, also requires a permit.
Permits are required until the construction is complete. To be covered by a General
Construction Activity Permit, the owner(s) of land where construction activity occurs must
submit a completed "Notice of Intent" (NOI) form, with the appropriate fee, to the State
Regional Water Quality Control Board. An application is required to the State Board under
their Stormwater Multi -Application, Reporting, and Tracking System (SMARTS). Waste
Discharge Identification Number (WDID) shall be include on the building plan submittal.
The project may be developed under the master application and WDID number or could stand
alone.
25. Provide a Private Stormwater Conveyance System Management and Maintenance Agreement
Operations and Maintenance Agreement) on a form provided by the city. The agreement
shall be recorded and shall reference any separate maintenance program documents and the
approved building plans.
Attachment 5Item 2
Packet Page 66
Resolution No. PC-1006-20
1035 Madonna Road, ARCH-0459- 2019
Page 8
26. The building permit plan submittal shall include all required parking lot improvements,
dimensions, space dimensions, maneuverability, materials, space and aisle slopes, drainage,
pavement marking, signage, and striping in accordance with the Parking and Driveway
Standards and disabled access requirements of the CBC.
27. Development of the driveway and parking areas shall comply with the Parking and Driveway
Standards for dimension, maneuverability, slopes, drainage, and materials. Alternate paving
materials are recommended for water quantity and/or quality control purposes and in the area
of existing or proposed trees and where the driveway or parking area may occur within the
dripline of any tree. Alternate paving material shall be approved to the satisfaction of the
Planning Division.
28. The building plan submittal shall show the location of the proposed mail receptacles or mail
box unit (MBU) to the satisfaction of the Post Master and the City Engineer. Provide a
mailbox unit or multiple units to serve all dwelling units in 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.
29. The building plan submittal shall include a complete site utility plan. All existing and
proposed utilities along with utility company meters shall be shown. Existing underground
and overhead services shall be shown along with any proposed alterations or upgrades.
30. New and existing wire utilities including electrical service, phone, and cable TV shall be
placed underground. This condition does not apply to transformer boxes and related
infrastructure. The undergrounding of utilities shall be completed without a net increase in
the number of required utility poles.
31. The building plan submittal shall show the location of the fire service lateral, double-check
assembly, and fire department connection (FDC) on the site utility plan. Show the location
of the fire riser room and interior fire riser in accordance with the ARC approvals and/or the
Planning Divisions architectural guidelines. Provide access to the fire riser and appurtenances
in accordance with the UFC and as approved by the Fire Marshal. Clarify to the satisfaction
of the Fire Marshal whether an FDC should be provided at the double-check assembly,
remoted FDC, or on each respective building.
32. The building plan submittal shall show all existing trees on the property with a trunk diameter
of 3" or greater. Offsite trees along the adjoining property lines with canopies and/or root
systems that extend onto the property shall be shown to remain and be protected. The plan
shall note which trees are to remain and which trees are proposed for removal. Include the
diameter and species of all trees. Tree canopies should generally be shown to scale for
reference. Tree removals may require approval by the City Arborist and/or Tree Committee.
The plan shall show all existing and proposed street trees.
Attachment 5Item 2
Packet Page 67
Resolution No. PC-1006-20
1035 Madonna Road, ARCH-0459- 2019
Page 9
33. The building plan submittal shall show and label all proposed street trees per City Engineering
Standards, subject to the satisfaction of the City Arborist and Public Works Director,
consistent with the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan.
Building Division — Community Development
34. Construction plans submitted for Building permits shall be designed in accordance with the
applicable codes in effect at time of submittal. Review of the general information provided
for entitlement is cursory and does not guarantee code compliance for a future construction
submittal.
Utilities Department
35. The proposed utility infrastructure shall comply with the latest engineering design standards
effective at the time the building permit is obtained and shall have reasonable alignments
needed for maintenance of public infrastructure along public roads.
36. The proposed project is within an area subject to shallow groundwater, therefore heat -fused
HDPE pipe shall be used for the proposed private and public sewer collection system to
prevent groundwater infiltration. All proposed sewer creek crossings shall be detailed in
profile view within the proposed infrastructure improvement plans.
37. Any private sewer services that cross one parcel for the benefit of another shall provide
evidence that a private utility easement appropriate for those facilities has been recorded prior
to final Building Permit.
38. If commercial uses in the project include food preparation, provisions for grease interceptors
and FOG (fats, oils, and grease) storage within solid waste enclosure(s) shall be provided with
the design. These types of facilities shall also provide an area inside to wash floor mats,
equipment, and trash cans. The wash area shall be drained to the sanitary sewer.
39. The proposed private fire protection system shall be separate from the private domestic water
distribution system. The fire service shall connect to the water main within the public right of
way, and shall install a RPDA backflow preventor system. If private hydrants are proposed,
the RPDA shall be equipped with a detector assembly to track water used by the hydrants.
40. The domestic water service shall have a separate water system with a master meter and private
sub -meters that includes a RP-backflow preventor per Engineering Standards for sites
utilizing recycled water.
41. The site is within the City's Water Reuse Master Plan area and landscape irrigation for the
project shall utilize recycled water.
Attachment 5Item 2
Packet Page 68
Resolution No. PC-1006-20
1035 Madonna Road, ARCH-0459-2019
Page 10
42. Irrigation systems using recycled water shall be designed and operated as described consistent
with the City's Procedures for Recycled Water Use, including the requirement that sites
utilizing recycled water require backflow protection on all potable service connections.
43. The project's Landscape Plan shall provide total estimated total water use (ETWU), and
maximum applied water allowance (MAWA).
44. Recycled water, San Luis Ranch onsite wells, or another non -potable water source, shall be
used for construction water (dust control, soil compaction, etc.). An annual Construction
Water Permit is available from the City's Utilities Department.
45. Final grades and alignments of all public and/or private water, recycled water, and sewer shall
be approved to the satisfaction of the Utilities Department. The final location, configuration,
and sizing of on -site service laterals and meters shall be approved by the Utilities Director in
conjunction with the review of the building plans, fire sprinkler plans, and/or public
improvement plans.
46. Management of refuse generations for waste, recyclables, and organics shall comply with state
law per AB 1826 and the local waste management ordinance to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions.
47. Driveways and access routes to all refuse receptacles shall be designed to accommodate the
size and weight of the garbage trucks; a written confirmation from the San Luis Garbage
Company shall be included in the building permit plans for the proposed project.
48. Trash enclosure(s) shall conform the access requirements by the San Luis Garbage Company
and refuse bins shall be sized to provide a reasonable level of service.
49. Trash enclosures shall be sized appropriately such that bins within the enclosure shall not be
stacked in front of other bins. The building permit submittal shall submit trash enclosure
details that are consistent with the City's Development Standards for Solid Waste.
50. Per the General Requirements of the City's Development Standards for Solid Waste, bin
enclosure walls shall be at least 6' or the height of the bin enclosure door, whichever is greater.
51. Existing well(s) shall be destroyed per County Health Requirements and the California
Department of Water Resources Standard Bulletin 74-81 and 74-90, except for the dewatering
wells. Dewatering well(s) must be kept in service and offered to the City for groundwater
motoring programs; this item may be waived to the satisfaction of the City if the well
abandonment is necessary for site development or if the abandonment is required by separate
private agreement.
Transportation Division — Public Works
52. Crosswalk across the Barnview Road entrance to project from Madonna Road shall comply
with MUTCD 313-17, installed with yield markings and R1-5 "Yield here to Ped" signs.
Attachment 5Item 2
Packet Page 69
Resolution No. PG 1006-20
1035 Madonna Road, ARCH-0459-2019
Page 11
53. Applicant shall install a High -visibility crosswalk across the Barnview Road entrance to
project from Madonna Road per City Standard 7350.
54. The applicant shall submit public improvement plans for the proposed right -out only access
driveway, including applicable signing and striping to convey access restrictions, to the
satisfaction of the Public Works Director.
55. With addition of the right -out only access driveway, the planned median along Madonna Road
must be extended further to the east to functionally restrict potential left -turns to and from the
access driveway, to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. Modifications to the planned
median design shall be submitted for City approval as a revision to the previously approved
San Luis Ranch Public Improvement Plans, or as a separate Public Improvement Plan submittal
for the multi -family development project.
56. Applicant shall provide submittal for typical bicycle storage rack equipment.
Indemnification
57. The applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers
and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City and/or its agents, officers
or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul, the approval by the City of this project, and
all actions relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review ("Indemnified
Claims"). The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any Indemnified Claim upon being
presented with the Indemnified Claim and the City shall fully cooperate in the defense against
an Indemnified Claim.
On motion by Vice -Chair Dandekar, seconded by Commissioner Jorgensen, and on the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Jorgensen, McKenzie, Quincey, Stevenson, Vice -Chair Dandekar
and Chair Wulkan
NOES: None
REFRAIN: Commissioner Kahn
ABSENT: None
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 1 lth day of March, 2020.
Tyler Corey, Se rY
Planning Commission
Attachment 5Item 2
Packet Page 70
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: Conceptual review of a mixed-use project consisting of 280 residential units and 15,000
square feet of commercial space, including a General Plan Map Amendment to rezone the property
from Business Park (BP-SP) to Commercial Services (C-S-SP), and an associated Airport Area
Specific Plan Amendment to address the rezone and the development plan for the mixed-use project
proposal at the subject property.
PROJECT ADDRESS: 600 Tank Farm Road BY: Kyle Bell, Associate Planner
Phone Number: (805) 781-7524
E-mail: kbell@slocity.org
FILE NUMBER: ARCH-0216-2020 FROM: Tyler Corey, Principal Planner
RECOMMENDATION
Provide direction to the applicant and staff on items to be addressed in plans submitted for formal
entitlement review.
SITE DATA
SUMMARY
The project application includes proposals for a General Plan Map Amendment to rezone the property
from Business Park (BP-SP) to Commercial Services (C-S-SP) zone and an Airport Area Specific
Plan (AASP) Amendment to allow for a mixed-use project. The BP zone as well as the AASP prohibit
residential uses at this location. The project application proposes to amend the AASP and rezone the
property to Commercial Services (C-S-SP) zone to allow for a mixed use project, similar to what has
Applicant Covelop Holding, LLC
Representative Stephen Peck
Current Zoning BP-SP (Business Park within the
Airport Area Specific Plan)
Proposed Zoning C-S-SP (Commercial Services
within the Airport Area Specific
Plan)
General Plan
Current
Business Park
General Plan
Proposed
Commercial Services
Site Area ~11.1 acres
Environmental
Status
Final plans for the proposed
project will require further
environmental analysis. A Draft
Environmental Impact Report is
under preparation.
Meeting Date: September 23, 2020
Item Number: 3
Time Estimate: 45 minutes
Item 3
Packet Page 71
ARCH-0216-2020 (Conceptual)
600 Tank Farm Road
Page 2
been proposed on the adjacent property 650 Tank Farm (Attachment 1, Project Description). The
proposed mixed-use project consists of 280 residential units and approximately 15,000 square feet
(SF) of commercial space. The residential units are provided within three different housing types: 140
townhomes, 100 stacked flat units, and 40 studio and one-bedroom units over the commercial
structures. The townhome and stacked flat units are intended as ownership units, while the mixed-use
units will likely be a rental product (Attachment 2, Project Plans).
1.0 COMMISSION’S PURVIEW
The purpose of conceptual review before the Planning Commission is to offer feedback to the
applicant and staff as to whether the project’s conceptual site layout and building design is headed in
the right direction before plans are further refined and formal entitlement applications are filed; and
to specifically discuss concerns and questions related to land use consistency.
2.0 BACKGROUND
On April 21, 2020, the City Council approved the initiation of the project and associated General Plan
Amendment, Rezoning and Specific Plan Amendment and authorized the issuance of a Request for
Proposals (RFP) for the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the project. The
Council with a vote of 5:0 provided direction to the applicant and staff to work toward a Development
Agreement to accomplish the needed planning area infrastructure outlined in the AASP and maximize
housing opportunities for those individuals in geographic areas included in the City’s annual jobs-
housing balance analysis (Attachment 3, Council Initiation 4.21.20).
On July 16, 2020, the Active Transportation Committee (ATC) reviewed the conceptual design of the
project and by consensus provided 21 directional items regarding the proposed bicycle and pedestrian
connectivity and safety, as well as consistency with the latest updates to the City’s Active
Transportation Plan for the applicant to incorporate into the project design and associated materials
(Attachment 4, ATC Report and Comments 7.16.20).
On August 17, 2020, the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) reviewed the conceptual design
of the project and by consensus provided nine directional items regarding building orientation in
Figure 1: Project Rendering as seen from High Street.
Figure 1: Rendering internal of the residential portion of the project
Item 3
Packet Page 72
ARCH-0216-2020 (Conceptual)
600 Tank Farm Road
Page 3
relation to site access and private/common open space areas, and provided comments on the
architectural style of the project in terms of compatibility between the different uses for the applicant
to incorporate into the project design and associated materials (Attachment 5, ARC Report and Draft
Minutes 8.17.20).
3.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
Site Information/Setting
The site is composed of 11.1 contiguous acres at the northeast corner of the designated Santa Fe Road
realignment and Tank Farm Road. It is comprised of two separate parcels: APN: 053-421-06 and
APN: 053-421-02. The site slopes from the northwest to southeast, with site elevations at 210 feet
at the top of the Flower Mound, and 150 feet at the Acacia Creek/Tank Farm Road headwall. Acacia
Creek borders the project on the east, although the creek area itself is located on the adjacent parcel
to the east.
Project Statistics
The application provided to assist with the conceptual review does not include sufficient information
to determine compliance with all development standards relevant to the project site (i.e. setbacks, lot
coverage, floor area ratio, etc.); therefore, the list below is a partial list of development standards that
were identifiable in the project plans.
Site Details Proposed Allowed/Required*
Creek Setback 35 feet 35 feet
Maximum Height of Structures 35 feet 35 feet
Density Units (DU) 255.52 DU 266.4 DU
Total # Parking Spaces 458 (8% reduction) 497
*2019 Zoning Regulations & AASP Development Standards
4.0 DISCUSSION
The conceptual review application is not intended to provide the necessary materials (supplemental
studies) needed to provide a detailed environmental review or analysis of the project. Staff has
identified a set of specific discussion items for Commission’s consideration. The following discussion
items highlight the key issues the Commission should discuss and provide direction to the applicant
and staff:
1. Specific Plan Amendment: The AASP was initially adopted on August 23, 2005 and provides a
planning framework for future growth and development within the approximately 1,500 -acre area
along the City’s southern boundary. The AASP sets forth guidance for land use, conservation and
resource management, community design, circulation and transportation improvements, and
utilities and services needed in the planning area. The AASP has been amended multiple times,
with the last amendment adopted in March 2019, with the approval of the 650 Tank Farm General
Plan Amendment, rezone and AASP Amendment.
The existing General Plan Business Park land use designation provides for research and
development and light manufacturing in a campus setting. The proposed General Plan Services &
Manufacturing designation provides for a wide range of uses including business and professional
services, medical services, research and development, and retail sales. It also provides for
Item 3
Packet Page 73
ARCH-0216-2020 (Conceptual)
600 Tank Farm Road
Page 4
residential uses as part of a mixed-use project with a residential density of up to 24 density
units/acre. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment would allow for the site to be developed with
a mixed-use project. This would accommodate the continuation and expansion of the residential
uses proposed in the vicinity (650 & 660 Tank Farm).
2. Airport Land Use Plan: The current and proposed county Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP) and
city airport compatibility regulations have significantly informed and influenced the location and
extent of the proposed uses. The project is outside of the Runway Protection Zone and within
Safety Area S-1c. Pursuant to the current ALUP, this safety area is very restrictive with residential
density allowing only 0.2 dwelling units per acre, which equates to about 24 units on the 11.1 -
acre portion of the site proposed for C-S-SP zoning.
This residential density restriction is based on noise and safety information that is known to be
outdated and the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) is now in the process of updating the
ALUP so that it is consistent with the operational projections in the Airport Master Plan, and with
the most recent version of the Caltrans Handbook. The extent of noise impacts is now known to
be confined to properties south of Tank Farm Road in the vicinity of the project. The ALUC is
reviewing its noise and safety zones which will be modified to reflect a more conventional
configuration, similar to those found in the Caltrans Handbook and those used for other County
airports. During the plan development process, the applicant team has consulted with ALUC staff
and commissioners to determine the location of key ALUP regulatory zones on the property, and
modified the product mix to be compatible with the anticipated updated ALUP policies and
standards. The project will be dependent on the ALUP update, which is anticipated to be complete
in 2021. As General Plan and Specific Plan amendments are proposed, the project will require
review by the ALUC at a future date.
3. Site Layout and Building Design: The proposed project provides a mixed-use development
within the Commercial Services zone. The project will be reviewed for consistency with
Community Design Guidelines Chapter 3.4 (Guidelines for Specific Commercial and Industrial
Uses) and Chapter 5.4 (Multi-family and Clustered Housing Design). Mixed-use developments
are conditionally allowed in the C-S-SP zoning district with a minor use permit.
Discussion Item #1: The Commission should discuss whether the conceptual site layout and
building design is compatible with adjacent uses. Specifically, the Commission should discuss
and provide direction to the applicant and staff regarding the building orientation along the street
frontages, parking throughout the site, and architectural styles in consideration of the context of
the site and projects within the vicinity.
4. Sante Fe Intersection Re-configuration. The project will implement several major
transportation features including the Santa Fe/Tank Farm Road roundabout, Santa Fe Road re-
alignment, and associated improvements for Santa Fe Road including two travel lanes and Class
IV bike paths. Santa Fe Road will be extended north along the west property line for
approximately 475 to 500 feet to a temporary offset cul-de-sac. Longer term, this temporary
terminus will be built as a 90-degree roundabout to connect Santa Fe Road to the Prado Road
extension by the developers of the Chevron or Damon Garcia properties.
Discussion Item #2: The Commission may provide comments, suggestions, or questions related
to the reconfiguration Santa Fe Road and pedestrian and bicycle connections for the applicant and
staff to address through the Draft EIR or associated application materials.
Item 3
Packet Page 74
ARCH-0216-2020 (Conceptual)
600 Tank Farm Road
Page 5
5.0 NEXT STEPS
Following conceptual review, the applicant will consider feedback received from the ATC, ARC, and
PC and prepare a formal application for complete review. Once all application materials are collected
and the project is deemed complete, and environmental review has been completed, the project will
proceed with review hearings to be scheduled before the Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC), ARC,
ALUC, PC, and City Council for review of the project. Associated entitlements are envisioned at this
time to include: General Plan Map Amendment (includes rezoning), Specific Plan Amendment,
Development Agreement, Minor Subdivision, Minor Use Permit, and Development Review (Major).
The City determined that the project would require the preparation of a Project EIR. Following the
authorization by the City Council on April 21, 2020, the City has released a Request for Proposals
(RFP) and selected a consultant (Rincon Consultants) to prepare the EIR. The City will hold a Notice
of Preparation of an EIR public hearing with the PC at a later date. The EIR will evaluate project-
specific and cumulative impacts, in addition to secondary effects that may occur as a result of
implementation of mitigation measures and conditions of approval, noting the other large
development projects (650 Tank Farm, 660 Tank Farm, San Luis Ranch, Froom Ranch, and Avila
Ranch) currently under review by the City, in addition to existing and reasonably foreseeable
development.
6.0 OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
A pre-application meeting was held on June 6, 2019, for an earlier design of a potential project,
comments from other City Departments including Engineering, Transportation, Utilities, Fire, and
Building have been provided to the applicant team outlining the necessity of the supplemental studies
and materials requested in conjunction with the entitlement application submittal. The Transportation
Division noted that a Traffic Impact Study would be required for the proposed project and that the
realignment of Santa Fe Road south of Tank Farm is not expected at this time to be required as part
of the project, but the roundabout would need to be designed to accommodate addition of the south
leg of the intersection when the Santa Fe Road realignment occurs at a later date.
7.0 ATTACHMENTS
1. Project Description
2. Project Plans
3. Council Initiation Report and Minutes 4.21.20
4. ATC Report and Comments 7.16.20
5. ARC Report and Minutes 8.17.20
Item 3
Packet Page 75
600 Tank Farm Road
Residential Mixed-Use Project
City GP/COZ Initiation
Covelop, Inc.
May 1, 2020
Item 3
Packet Page 76
600 Tank Farm Road 2 of 31
City Zoning, General Plan and ALUP Analysis
May 1, 2020
Introduction
A project is proposed at 600 Tank Farm Road that will provide for a mix of residential and com-
mercial uses, and that would complement the commercial, employment and residential uses now
planned in the vicinity of Broad and Tank Farm Road. It is being positioned to address housing and em-
ployment needs in the community through a combination of design excellence, value-added features,
and location. Proposed by Covelop Inc. of San Luis Obispo, it is comprised of APNs 053-421-02 and 053-
421-06 and located at what will be the northeast corner of Santa Fe and Tank Farm Road. (See Figure 1.)
The project involves the change in general plan designation, rezoning and an amendment to the Airport
Area Specific Plan from Business Park (BP) to Commercial Service (CS) on the property to allow a resi-
dential mixed-use development. This narrative and other supporting application materials explains the
justification for changing the city’s development regulations to allow the project.
As currently planned, it would include approximately 140 attached residences in a townhome
configuration at a density of 20 density units to the acre; 100 stacked flat units at up to 30 density units
per acre; and up to 40 studio and one-bedroom units over approximately 15,000 square feet of “Town
Center” commercial. Overall, the project would have 256 Density Units, approximately 23 density units
per acre, in compliance with the CS zone. The project is being designed and planned to address the
need for smaller dwelling unit sizes, especially smaller for-sale units, both for lifestyle preferences, and
affordability reasons. The townhomes will have a mix of one-bedroom, two-bedroom and three-bed-
room units ranging in size from 750 square feet up to 1,375 square feet with an average dwelling unit
size of less than 1,100 square feet. The stacked flats would range in size from 470 square feet to 925
square feet. Overall, the average unit size across the 280 units is less than 1,000 SF, lower than any
other recent mixed use/mixed tenancy project in the community. The townhome and stacked flat units
are intended as ownership units, while the mixed-use units will likely be as a rental product. The result-
ing project would provide for-sale units ranging in size from 470 square feet to 1,375 square feet,
providing an ownership opportunity to many families that currently don’t have that opportunity. The
project would be clustered around common open space, yards, and a recreation center with a commu-
nity building. Open space is planned along Acacia Creek and on the Flower Mound, with some units ori-
ented to those open space resources. Figure 2 shows the site plan for the project.
Various studies are underway, including a biological reconnaissance study, wetland delineation,
geotechnical study, noise study, traffic study (including capacity and lane configuration studies for Tank
Farm Road and Santa Fe), and others to satisfy City requirements. It is expected that the environmental
effects of the projects, and necessary mitigations, will be covered in an environmental impact report
(EIR).
Item 3
Packet Page 77
600 Tank Farm Road 3 of 31
City Zoning, General Plan and ALUP Analysis
May 1, 2020
The Project and Airport Development Regulations
The current and proposed county Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP) and city airport compatibility
regulations have significantly informed and influenced the location and extent of the proposed uses.
During the plan development process, we have consulted with ALUC staff and commissioners; commis-
sioned studies and technical analysis to determine the location of key ALUP regulatory zones on the
property; and modified the product mix to be compatible with the current and proposed ALUP policies
and standards. To that end, commercial and mixed use portions of the project have been located along
the project frontage in the 55 dB(A) CNEL noise zones (as determined by the May 2015 RS&H “CNEL
Contours and Technical Report for the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport” noise study that is used
by the Airport Land Use Commission to determine noise compatibility); the apartment/stacked flat por-
tion is located in the middle of the project site in the 50 dB(A) CNEL zone; and the townhome portion is
located in the rear of the project site which is least affected by traffic and aircraft noise. A noise study
prepared for the project by 45dB Consultants confirmed the RSH projections.
Figure 1
Project Location
Item 3
Packet Page 78
600 Tank Farm Road 4 of 31
City Zoning, General Plan and ALUP Analysis
May 1, 2020
Figure 2 Site Plan
Item 3
Packet Page 79
600 Tank Farm Road 5 of 31
City Zoning, General Plan and ALUP Analysis
May 1, 2020
FAA sectional charts, and approach and departure patterns were also reviewed, and it was con-
cluded that there is no potential for regular overflights by commercial or general aviation fixed wing air-
craft because of topographic constraints and established runway approach and departure corridors.
This would also indicate that the project site is appropriately classified in the ALUP current “S-2” Safety
Zone, or its Caltrans Handbook equivalent, Safety Zone 6. Both of these safety zones permit the project.
The project is located in the Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP), is part of the City of San Luis
Obispo’s Airport Compatible Open Space Plan (ACOS) with deed-restricted open space and reservation
areas nearby in the AASP and Margarita Area Specific Plan (MASP) areas, and is located in the ALUP’s
current “S-2” safety zone, or in the Caltrans Handbook Safety Zone 6. Neither of these safety zone des-
ignations have a limitation on the number of dwelling units (see Figure 4G of the Caltrans California Air-
port Land Use Planning Handbook with no overflights and no noise issues, and ALUP Table 7 with a CDZ,
DAP and ACOS). City zoning regulations for the CS zone specify a maximum density of 24 density units
per acre in the proposed CS zone, with the actual maximum number of permitted “doors” adjusted per
Section 17.70.040 (A) the zoning regulations. As currently planned, the project has approximately 280
total residential units and 256 City “density units” over 11.1 net acres, for a density of 23 density units
per gross acre.
The Project and City Development Regulations
The project site is currently zoned Business Park and is in the Airport Area Specific Plan area
(which is identified as Detailed Area Plan per the County’s Airport Land Use Plan). The project entitle-
ments will include a change in the land use designation from Business Park to Service Commercial, which
would permit a wide range of commercial uses, and up to 264 density units of residential development.
City development regulations also specify a setback for Acacia Creek of 35 feet. The project proposes a
variable riparian setback with an average setback of approximately 40 feet. Combined with the width of
the creek, and buffers and setbacks on the east side of Acacia Creek this will provide a wildlife/open
space corridor of 95 to 135 feet. Building and landscape setbacks along Tank Farm Road range from 10
to 15 feet (including the public sidewalk in a pedestrian easement), and 5 to 15 feet along Santa Fe.
City planning documents call for the development of Santa Fe as a Collector road with design
speeds of no more than 25 miles per hour, and a corresponding road centerline radius of 250-300 feet.
The project will implement the “alternative” design section for Santa Fe that has been identified by City
staff and in the Airport Area Specific Plan, with an interim design of one travel lane in each direction, a
vertically separated 6.5-foot Class IV bike path, a 7-foot parkway strip and a five-foot sidewalk, as shown
in Figure 3. Santa Fe will be extended north along the west property line for approximately 475 to 500
feet to a temporary offset cul de sac with a minimum 40-foot turning radius. Longer term, this tempo-
rary terminus will be built as a 90-degree roundabout to connect Santa Fe to the Prado Road extension
by the developers of the Chevron or Damon Garcia properties. The project will implement the City’s
plans for a roundabout at Tank Farm and Santa Fe, as illustrated in Figure 4. Final road geometry and
the number of lanes will be evaluated as part of the Project.
Item 3
Packet Page 80
600 Tank Farm Road 6 of 31
City Zoning, General Plan and ALUP Analysis
May 1, 2020
Figure 3
Santa Fe Cross Section
Ultimate and Interim Cross Section
Item 3
Packet Page 81
600 Tank Farm Road 7 of 31
City Zoning, General Plan and ALUP Analysis
May 1, 2020
Figure 4
Conceptual Illustration of Santa Fe/Tank
Farm Road Roundabout
Item 3
Packet Page 82
600 Tank Farm Road 8 of 31
City Zoning, General Plan and ALUP Analysis
May 1, 2020
The Site and the Project
The site is composed of 11.1 contiguous acres at the northeast corner of the designated Santa
Fe alignment and Tank Farm Road. It is comprised of two separate parcels: APN: 053-421-06 and APN:
053-421-02. The site slopes from the northwest to southeast, with site elevations at 210 feet MSL at the
top of the Flower Mound, and 150 feet MSL at the Acacia Creek/Tank Farm Road headwall. Acacia Creek
borders the project on the east, although the creek area itself is located on the adjacent parcel to the
east.
The immediate surrounding (1/2-mile radius) neighborhood provides a wealth of services, facili-
ties and resources. A day care, drug stores, restaurants, schools, a major grocery store, a bank, several
places of worship, a fitness center, medical and/or dental services, personal care services, and a full-ser-
vice supermarket are currently located within biking or walking distance of the project site.
The site is also located near significant open space areas that are contractually restricted to re-
main in open space that contribute to airport land use compatibility and safety. Those include proper-
ties north and south of Tank Farm Road that are in City and County open space preserves, areas in Wil-
liamson Act agricultural preservation contracts, ACOS open spaces areas in the Margarita Area Specific
Plan, the Chevron conservation/restoration area and other formal open space preserves. (See Figure 6.)
Not including other lands outside of the City’s URL, these open space lands amount to approximately
825 acres, or approximately 25 percent of the land area immediately north and west of the airport.
Development Potential and Land Plan
The land plan and development program prepared for the project are based on the physical and
regulatory constraints applicable to the site, including the following: Acacia Creek. During peak flood
times, Acacia Creek conveys 500-1,000 cubic feet per second (CFS) of stormwater flows. Its width cur-
rently varies from 30 to 50 feet and is on the adjacent parcel; City development regulations prescribe a
35-foot setback from the creek to preserve the riparian corridor. A variable width corridor is proposed,
ranging from 20 feet to 70 feet, with an average of 40 feet. The area where setbacks will be less than 35
feet are located at the creek crossing from 600 Tank Farm Road to 650 Tank Farm Road; this reduced
setback area will be less than 10 percent of the total length of the setback. Per Zoning Ordinance Sec-
tion 17.70.030 (3), third story building components will be setback an additional 10 feet for a total of a
45-foot setback (except in the limited area where there is the bridge crossing).
1. Designated Flood Areas. According to FEMA Community Panels 0679C1069G and 0679C1332G,
the project site has limited, if any, area that is in a flood prone area. Any such area appears to be
confined to the Acacia Creek channel or the riparian setback area. A drainage study prepared by
RRM Design Group determined that this flooding has been caused by an undersized culvert for
the vehicle bridge that connects 600 Tank Farm Road to 650 Tank Farm Road. This bridge will be
replaced as part of the 650 Tank Farm Road project, with a culvert that has the same hydraulic
Item 3
Packet Page 83
600 Tank Farm Road 9 of 31
City Zoning, General Plan and ALUP Analysis
May 1, 2020
capacity as the Tank Farm Creek culvert. No flooding issues are anticipated after that improve-
ment.
2. “Flower Mound”/Grading. The northwest corner of the project site includes a former quarry
area, colloquially referred to as the “Flower Mound”. This hard and red-rock mound spans the
project property, Chevron property to the west, and the Damon-Garcia property to the north.
Most of the Flower Mound will be left as is with development occurring below the 173-foot
(MSL) elevation contour line. The site will be stepped in four 5-foot benches, with an upper
bench of about 168 feet MSL at the northern one-fourth of the site, 160 MSL to 165 MSL from
the club house north, a middle bench of about 160 feet MSL around the main entry, and two
lower benches of about 153-156 feet MSL for the multifamily, and 152-153 MSL for the commer-
cial/mixed use areas. Total needed site drainage is estimated to be 31,000 cubic feet (CF). The
site will drain to localized surface swales totaling 35,000-40,000 cubic feet in parking lot land-
scaped areas, large open space areas, the Acacia Creek setback, and in the Tank Farm Road land-
scape frontage. LID/treatment areas will be located throughout the project.
Recreation and Amenities
The project site will be developed at an “urban” density of over 20 dwelling units per acre, with
shared public open spaces, private opens spaces, common yards, and common recreational amenities
will be used to provide the necessary relief. Balconies and small private yards will be developed
throughout the townhome and stacked flat product types with private open space areas. Balconies and
outdoor activity areas will be in areas least affected by vehicle traffic and airport noise, meaning they
will be located on the north and east faces of the buildings away from potential outdoor noise impacts.
The project’s required creek setbacks, common areas and the Flower Mound open space will
result in at 20 percent of onsite “green” common open space, including play areas, tot lots, and land-
scape parkways. Where possible, units will be oriented to common open space on the perimeter of the
site to encourage and open and spacious plan.
The project will also include a 2,250-square foot clubhouse building with a 2,800 square foot pa-
tio area. The clubhouse building will include meeting areas, an indoor game area, a common lounge, ad-
ministrative office area, and a community kitchen. It will also serve as a sales office and an administra-
tive building during project sales and construction.
The project also borders Damon-Garcia Park which will provide areas for organized sports activi-
ties.
Transportation and Circulation
The project will implement several major transportation features, the Santa Fe/Tank Farm Road
roundabout under a reimbursement agreement with the City, assuming enough project impact fees and
other revenues to reimburse Covelop during the term of the buildout. The Project will also construct in-
terim improvements for Santa Fe Road per Figure 3, including two travel lanes and Class IV bike paths.
Final improvements for the bike path, curbing, sidewalk, and parkway strip will be installed on the pro-
ject’s frontages. The Santa Fe/Tank Farm roundabout would also be constructed as part of the project.
Item 3
Packet Page 84
600 Tank Farm Road 10 of 31
City Zoning, General Plan and ALUP Analysis
May 1, 2020
Both Santa Fe and Tank Farm Road are TIF funded projects. Bike and pedestrian trips will be supported
by a connection to 650 Tank Farm Road, and extension of the onsite bike path to the bike path at the
Damon-Garcia sports park. A new bridge will be installed by 650 Tank Farm Road and serve as an emer-
gency access route using KnoxBox bollards.
General Plan Modification Justification
Oversupply of Commercial/Business Park Zoning
The modification of the permitted land uses on the project site is justified by several policy fac-
tors. The AASP and the Land Use Element designate the site for Business Park. This designation has
been driven by the policies of the County’s ALUP which generally prohibit residential land uses in the
AASP, except for those properties that are currently zoned or developed for residential purposes. This
land use restriction is based on noise and safety information that is known to be outdated and the ALUC
is now in the process of updating the ALUP so that it is consistent with the operational projections in the
Airport Master Plan, and with the most recent version of the Caltrans Handbook. The extent of noise
impacts is now known to be confined to properties south of Tank Farm Road in the vicinity of the pro-
ject. The ALUC has commissioned, and adopted, a noise study that documents the extent of these noise
issues, and the ALUC has been using that document as its office noise reference for approximately five
years now. The ALUC is also reviewing its safety zones and those zones will be modified to reflect a
more conventional configuration, more like that in the Caltrans Handbook and those used for other
County airports. Based on documents provided to the ALUC in November and consultation with ALUC
staff, it is believed that the S1-C Safety Zone designation will be eliminated, The updated safety zone
maps show the project in “Safety Zone 6” as defined by the Caltrans Airport Land Use Planning Hand-
book. Both the updated safety and noise analysis appear to support a revision to the land use designa-
tion for the site. The project will be dependent on the ALUP amendment, which is anticipated to be
complete in mid-2020.
The current ALUP has long confounded various City goals and policies associated with jobs-hous-
ing balance, infill development, the mixing (horizontal and vertical) of uses, and fiscal sustainability. Con-
sequently, the City has a bumper crop of Business Park, Service Commercial, Office and other non-resi-
dential land uses (having ‘defaulted’ to those uses when residential was not consistent with the ALUP),
with those uses being concentrated in the southern part of the community. As a result, the entire AASP
contains 320 acres of vacant commercial and industrial land uses capable of supporting 6,000 more jobs,
but with only 150 acres of residential land uses (650 Tank Farm, Avila Ranch and remaining Margarita SP
area) capable of supporting 2,800 additional residents and 1,800 workers (assuming 1.5 workers per
household). Providing more housing closer to the City’s concentration of employment, and with prefer-
ence given to those workers, is consistent with General Plan and AASP Policies.
The City General Plan Policy requires that the City maintain an adequate supply of land to retain
and expand the number of jobs in the community. According to SLOCOG/RHNA employment projec-
tions, the City may need to expand its 2010 supply of 643 developed industrial/employment acres to a
possible total of 843. That would indicate a need for 250 vacant acres of such land, assuming that there
would be a 25 percent estimating contingency. If the need for such land is based on the 11-year devel-
opment history for such land between 2008 and 2018, as reported in the General Plan Status Report,
Item 3
Packet Page 85
600 Tank Farm Road 11 of 31
City Zoning, General Plan and ALUP Analysis
May 1, 2020
the City would need an additional 132 occupied acres by 2035. There are approximately 332 vacant
acres of such land in an adjacent to the community to fill this need, providing anywhere from an 80-acre
to 160-acre surplus to meet local employment needs. Conversion of the 11.1-acre project property to
mixed use residential will therefore not hinder any City economic development goals.
Based on the above, it is concluded that conversion of the project site would be fiscally beneficial for the
City, would promote the completion of needed infrastructure (and several key pieces of infrastructure),
would significantly promote the City’s infill and jobs-housing balance (city macro and neighborhood mi-
cro) goals and policies, and would not hinder in any way, the City’s economic development policies and
objectives.
Infrastructure Financing Feasibility
Retention of the current Business Park land use and zoning designations will defeat several im-
portant infrastructure policies. First, the City’s infrastructure policies and implementation programs rely
almost exclusively on development projects to construct needed roads, sewer lines, water lines, parks,
etc. Except for key facilities like the treatment plant expansion, Prado Road overpass, LOVR interchange
and the Prado/San Luis Creek bridge, completion of other improvements is completely dependent on
the ability of individual development projects to construct, finance and be reimbursed for offsite im-
provements. The offsite improvements associated with the project, including Santa Fe, Tank Farm Road,
water and sewer improvements have a total cost estimated at approximately $2.5 million to $2.75 mil-
lion, with the predominant share of those costs being reimbursable from various City impact fee funds.
As shown in Table 1 below, impact fees from the project site as currently zoned would be insufficient to
pay for offsite traffic improvements, even assuming that 100 percent of the TIF fees were dedicated to
such repayment. The proposed project would make significantly greater contributions to all impact fee
programs and make a reimbursement program feasible. Otherwise, the City would need to step in with
additional funding.
The economics of developing the project as currently zoned has also been evaluated. A portion
of the project site was proposed for a data facility, and another portion of the site was evaluated for ex-
pansion of a local R&D business. Both those projects chose to not go forward because of the burden of
infrastructure costs (direct costs and fees), the site’s topographic and regulatory constraints, and better
opportunities elsewhere. There is also limited demand that could justify a speculative commitment (as
opposed to a larger build to suite) of the entire site as currently zoned. Based on City records, the total
amount of commercial/employment building growth in the community has been 30,000 to 100,000
square feet per year over the last 11 years, with an average of about 55,000 SF per year, according to
the most recent General Plan Status Report. It was concluded that the Project site could not capture a
significant enough share of annual demand to justify significant capital improvements.
Item 3
Packet Page 86
600 Tank Farm Road 12 of 31
City Zoning, General Plan and ALUP Analysis
May 1, 2020
Table 1
Project Development Options
Assessed Value and City Impact Fees
Filling and Need for Affordable Housing
The City’s emphasis on the production of housing is starting to show tangible results. There are
a numerous individual housing projects that are being marketed, and many more are in production. The
Orcutt Specific Plan, that was decades in the making, has half a dozen projects in construction. San Luis
Ranch and Avila Ranch have recently been approved, and are in the site development phase.
Nevertheless, many of these projects have housing size ranging from 1,100 square feet to 3,100
square feet, with the average housing unit size being 1,850 square feet. Table 2 shows the proposed
product mix, and the proposed sizes of the housing units. As shown in Figure 5 on the following page,
the project fills a need that is currently not being met by any of the adopted Specific Plans, or individual
development projects.
Special Project Design Features
Special design features have been added to address mobility issues, affordable housing, energy
conservation, greenhouse gas emissions, and transportation. These features will reduce vehicle miles
travelled, reduce the need for personal vehicles, resulting parking demand, and airport compatibility.
1. Building energy efficiency standards that will enable the project to comply with the “net zero”
energy requirements and compliance with the City’s Reach Code.
Business Park
Zoning
Prposed Mixed Use
Project
Gross Acres 11.67 11.67
ROW (Acres) 0.55 0.55
Open Space (acres 1.04 1.04
Net Area (Acres) 10.08 11.12
FAR (per AASP) 0.20 0.57
Residential SF 18,000 274,600
Non-Residential SF 87,818 19,100
Total SF 105,818 293,700
Dwelling Units 24.00 275.00
Assessed Value 35,549,851 136,937,500
City Imact Fees
City Traffic Fee 958,412$ 2,106,057$
Water Fee 381,609$ 2,450,656$
Wastewater Fee 381,483$ 2,222,378$
City Parks 144,744$ 1,658,525$
Police 36,309$ 166,139$
Fire 31,180$ 141,645$
Total 1,933,736$ 8,745,400$
Item 3
Packet Page 87
600 Tank Farm Road 13 of 31
City Zoning, General Plan and ALUP Analysis
May 1, 2020
Table 2
Unit Mix
Gross Area
APN 053-420-02 5.28
APN 053-420-06 6.39
Gross Area 11.67
ROW 0.81
Net 10.86
R3 MU
Type Size (SF)Units Density
Units Total Area Type Size (SF)Number Density
Units Total Area
1-BED 750 28 18.48 21,000 Studio 450 20 10.00 9,000
2-BED 1050 56 56.00 58,800 1-BED 625 20 13.20 12,500
2-BED TH 1200 28 28.00 33,600 Total 40 23.20 21,500
3-BED 1450 28 42.00 40,600 Average 538
Total 140 144.48 154,000 Acres 1.52
Average 1,100 Density Units/Acre 15.26
Acres 6.46 Units/Acre 26.32
Density Units/Acre 22.37
Units/Acre 21.67
R4 Total
Type Size (SF)Number Density
Units Total Area Type Size (SF)Units Density
Units Total Area
Studio 600 8 4.00 4,800 Studio-R4 600 8 4.00 4,800
1-BED 750 24 15.84 18,000 Studio-MU 450 20 10.00 9,000
2-BED 925 68 68.00 62,900 1-BED-R3 750 28 18.48 21,000
Total 100 87.84 85,700 1-BED-R4 750 24 15.84 18,000
Average 857 1-BED-MU 625 20 13.20 12,500
Acres 2.88 2-BED-R3 1050 56 56.00 58,800
Density Units/Acre 30.50 2-BED-R3 TH 1200 28 28.00 33,600
Units/Acre 34.72 2-BED-R4 925 68 68.00 62,900
3-BED 1450 28 42.00 40,600
Total 280 255.52 261,200
Average 933
Acres 10.86
Density Units/Acre 23.53
Units/Acre 25.78
600 Tank Farm Product Mix and Density
Item 3
Packet Page 88
600 Tank Farm Road 14 of 31
City Zoning, General Plan and ALUP Analysis
May 1, 2020
Figure 5 Project Housing Size Compared to Existing Approved Projects
2. Shared Mobility strategies would be included to reduce the necessity for additional vehicles for
each family. Shared cars will be provided in each area of the development at an initial rate of
no less than one car per 50 residences, with 100 percent of that fleet in the form of electric vehi-
cles.
3. Enhanced pedestrian and bicycle connectivity, including ped and bike connectivity to 650 Tank
Farm Road and 700 Tank Farm Road. The project will implement the City’s new raised “Class IV”
bike lanes. A parking requirement reduction/exception totaling 8 percent of the total statistical
parking demand per Section 17.72.050 will be part of the requested entitlements, and is justi-
fied based on shared parking between the residential and commercial in the mixed use center
(with peak residential parking in the evening and peak commercial parking in mid-day), car shar-
Item 3
Packet Page 89
600 Tank Farm Road 15 of 31
City Zoning, General Plan and ALUP Analysis
May 1, 2020
ing, pedestrian and bike connections to and through properties to the east, proximity to conven-
ience goods centers, onsite mixed use, and the buyer-renter preference program described be-
low.
4. Special at-grade “speed table” pedestrian street crossings have also been included. These pro-
vide for the traffic calming and a continuous walking experience.
5. Affordable housing will be provided at a rate above that required by City code. At a density of 23
Density Units per acre, and an average unit size below 1,100 square feet per dwelling unit (less
than 1,000 square feet per unit across the entire project), the project is affordable by design and
inclusionary housing is not required for the project. However, the project intends to collaborate
with a non-profit housing provider to build a mixed-use workforce and senior housing project
along the Tank Farm Road frontage for up to 20 affordable units and 15,000 square feet of com-
mercial and office space.
6. The project will include an onsite manager or contact who will be the first point of contact for
any noise complaints. Residents will also be required to certify that they have completed an
online training on airport operations, airport hazards and impacts, and acknowledgement that
they will contact onsite management for noise concerns.
7. An avigation easement will be placed on the property per County and ALUP regulations.
8. The project’s buildings will be arranged to diffuse sound, and to locate the most sensitive por-
tions on the project (ownership townhomes) on the rear half of the site. This will include ori-
enting any outdoor activity and patio areas so that they are the least impacted by airport and
traffic noise.
9. Per AASP Policy 4.5.3, all residential units shall be designed to limit the aircraft-related 24-hour,
10-second interval interior peak noise (Lmax) impacts to no more than 45 decibels, five decibels
less than in Table 4 or the current ALUP.
10. The project will implement a preference program for workers within a 1.5-mile radius of the
project site as shown on Figure 6. This area was selected to maximize the benefit to the employ-
ers and employees in the area, and to encourage bicycle commuting. For an avid rider, a five-
mile bike commute is considered feasible; a 1.5-mile radius bike commute is considered more
feasible for less experienced riders. This strategy will capture, and house, those working east of
Higuera, south of South/Santa Barbara, west of the railroad, and north of Crestmont Road. This
will provide preference to those working at MindBody, the San Luis Obispo Regional Airport,
Morabito Business Park, AeroVista Business Park, Sacramento Drive, and other south city Busi-
ness Park areas. Like the Avila Ranch and San Luis Ranch projects, this will ensure that existing
commuting employees are given first preference for housing, and that their commute trip
length will be reduced and that many home-work trip modes will be shifted from personal vehi-
cles to biking or pedestrian modes. This preference program, however, will be focused on the
Item 3
Packet Page 90
600 Tank Farm Road 16 of 31
City Zoning, General Plan and ALUP Analysis
May 1, 2020
south and southeast portions of the community to ensure the greatest reduction in vehicle
miles traveled and to maximize the potential for ped and bike trips from the project to work
destinations.
Project Location Relative to Airport Facilities
The Project is located within 1,800 feet of airport Runway 11-29. One of the key factors in de-
termining compatibility with the airport is the project’s location relative to flight paths, regular and fre-
quent approaches and departures, and the ALUP’s various safety zone boundaries and noise contours.
The location of the various safety zones is driven by mathematical criteria associated with the location
of the runway facilities, distance from the runway ends, approved and frequently used approach and
departure corridors, and the probable elevation of aircraft at different points in their flight operations.
As described in Section 4.4.3.2 of the ALUP, the airport area is broken down into two Safety Areas and
three subzones. These zones are currently under review and refinement as part of the County’s update
of the ALUP. It is believed that the current zones will transition to the configuration and nomenclature
used in the Caltrans Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, with zone numbers from 1 through 6, and the
configuration prescribed in Handbook Figures 4B through 4G, and the zone dimensions described in
Handbook Figure 3A for a Long General Aviation Runway (runway length of 6,000 feet or more). See
Attachment A. (For the purposes of clarity and consistency with the existing and proposed ALUP safety
zones, the following refers to both the current zone names and the Caltrans safety zone names. For the
purposes of the discussion below, Caltrans Safety Zone “6” is essentially equal to current ALUP Safety
Zone “S-2”.)
In addition to safety zone considerations, there are also airspace, avigation and instrumentation
issues to consider. FAA Part 77 establishes imaginary surfaces to set the maximum height of structures
in the vicinity of the airport. None of the proposed structures will conflict with these maximums. ALUP
Policy 2.5.2.1 prohibits development of any structure that is higher than 200 AGL to protect the Part 77
air space surfaces. FAA Part 77.9 also has special regulations to control obstructions that may be a haz-
ard to avigation or to airport instrumentation. Projects that have an elevation greater than 1/100th of
their distance to the nearest runway end (that is, buildings and structures that penetrate an imaginary
surface that projects from the edges of the runway at a slope of 1 foot vertical for 100 feet horizontal)
are to be reviewed and cleared by the FAA before construction is proposed that penetrates this imagi-
nary service through a Form 7460-1 FAA Application. That is, any structures on the front of the site that
may have an elevation greater than 186 MSL (18 feet above the runway 11-29 threshold surface eleva-
tion 168 MSL), or any structures on the rear of the site that may have an elevation greater 192 MSL (24
feet above the runway 11-29 threshold surface elevation of 168 MSL) will need to be cleared by FAA
through the FAA Part 77.9 Form 7460-1 notification and review process. Based on the preliminary grad-
ing plan, structures on the north end of the site will have an elevation of 196-198 MSL; those in the mid-
dle of the site will have an elevation of 193-195 MSL and buildings along the Project’s frontage will have
an elevation of 188-190 MSL. The height of the structures will penetrate this imaginary 100:1 surface
by 2-5 feet in various portions of the site and will need to be evaluated. This application will be pre-
pared, and FAA responses provided as part of the formal application to the ALUC for a conformity deter-
mination.
Item 3
Packet Page 91
600 Tank Farm Road 17 of 31
City Zoning, General Plan and ALUP Analysis
May 1, 2020
Figure 6
Owner-Renter Preference Area
Project
Site
Item 3
Packet Page 92
600 Tank Farm Road 18 of 31
City Zoning, General Plan and ALUP Analysis
May 1, 2020
Figure 7
Existing Offsite ACOS Open Space
Project
Site
Item 3
Packet Page 93
600 Tank Farm Road 19 of 31
City Zoning, General Plan and ALUP Analysis
May 1, 2020
Airport Land Use Plan Safety Zones
Safety Area S-1 is the area within the vicinity of the airport within which aircraft operate fre-
quently or in conditions of reduced visibility at altitudes below 500 feet above ground level (AGL). The
S-2 area is the area within two miles of the airport runway where aircraft may operate frequently or in
conditions of reduced visibility at altitudes between 501 and 1,000 feet AGL. In the S-2 Safety Area, fac-
tors of concern include circle-to-land instrument approaches south of Runway 11-29, extensive “pattern
work” by student pilots in fixed-wing aircraft (predominantly, but not exclusively to the south and west
of the airport), and extensive practice flight by students in rotary-wing aircraft to the north of the air-
port. Nonetheless, because aircraft in Safety Area S-2 are at greater altitude and are less densely con-
centrated than in other portions of the Airport Planning Area, the overall level of aviation safety risk is
lower than that in the S-1 Safety Areas or the Runway Protection Zone. The project site is currently
shown in ALUP Figure 3 as being in Safety Zone S-1-C, the Sideline Zone. Safety Zone S-1-C is for areas
with occasional or frequent overflights at or below 500 AGL because of downwind approach to Run-
way 29, circling procedures or touch and go trainings. However, local topography (South Hills) se-
verely limits Project site overflights. As shown in ALUP Figure 10, and the various FAA approach and
departure charts (see Attachment 1), the project site is not located in any touch and go pattern, or
designated approach or departure corridor to either runway 7-25 or 11-29. Therefore, based on the
definitions provided in the ALUP, the project site is in Safety Zone S-2, (or Caltrans Zone 6, the ALUP S-
2 equivalent).
Safety Area S-1C is related exclusively to Runway 11-29 operations and downwind approach
procedures and includes areas within one half nautical mile (a distance of 3,038 feet) of the Runway 11-
29’s centerline to accommodate low-visibility downwind aircraft operations at less than 500 feet AGL.
The location of this theoretical line would contain the entire Project site (see ALUP Figure 3). However,
based on the definition of and justification for the S-1-C zone in ALUP Figure 3 and ALUP Section 4.4.4.2,
this safety zone is believed to be potentially appropriate for areas south of the Runway 11-29, but not
north of it in the vicinity of the Project. Further, The ALUC is reviewing the location of the safety zones.
Based on the comments on that review it is believed that the Project is to be classified in the S-2 or
the Handbook Zone 6 safety zone.
Noise Zones
As with the safety area criteria, the noise impact contours also follow mathematical rules re-
lated to noise dispersion, and aircraft type and flight frequency along established and flight corridors.
Peak and average noise levels that are mapped in the ALUP were projected through the usage of the
FAA’s Integrated Noise Model, and contours are normally mapped relative to runway centerlines. In the
case of the San Luis Obispo Regional Airport, it is estimated that approximately 97%+ of the flights use
Runway 11-29, and that those flights that use Runway 7-25 normally use Runway 25 as an alternate ap-
proach. According to the Airport Master Plan, Runway 11-29 provides 98.9% favorable wind coverage,
and so the usage of Runway 7-25 is rare. Therefore, the ALUP’s and the Master Plan’s airport noise con-
tours are both mapped relative to the extended centerline of Runway 11-29, and there are no special
contours for Runway 7-25. A noise study was also prepared for the ALUC by RS&H that utilizes the most
current and validated version of the Integrated Noise Model confirmed these conclusions.
Item 3
Packet Page 94
600 Tank Farm Road 20 of 31
City Zoning, General Plan and ALUP Analysis
May 1, 2020
A portion of the mixed-use area of the project is in CNEL 55 according the RSH Noise Study. The
ground floor commercial will is deemed compatible, and the impacts to the second-floor residential
uses will be mitigated by architecture and structural features that will ensure that outdoor and indoor
noise levels are per City and ALUP standards, including orientation of any balconies or outdoor activity
areas to the north; additional noise insulation and baffling. CNEL 55 is considered to be consistent with
residential land uses, according to City, state and federal regulations. Part 150 of the Federal Aviation
Regulations (FAR) which implement the 1979 Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Act specify that all
land uses are consistent with 65 CNEL/Ldn/DNL or less. California Airport Regulations in PUC Section
21669, and Section 5000 of the California Code of Regulations also states that 65 CNEL or less is accepta-
ble for residential uses. Further, 65 CNEL and greater is considered compatible if there is an avigation
easement, indoor noise exposure is limited to 45 dB(A) CNEL or less. The City noise standard is for an
interior CNEL/Ldn of 45 dB(A) or less, and an outdoor level of 60 dB(A) or less.
The RSH noise study places about half of the mixed use/commercial portion of the project in the CNEL
55 noise band, and the balance of the Project site in the CNEL 50 noise band. A noise study prepared
for the Project by 45dB confirmed that the noise level on the Project site from airport operations are
consistent with the RSH noise model projections. The airport related Lmax was determined to be 62
dB(A) on the north half of the site and 79 dB(A) on the southern portion of the site closest to the air-
port. The Project complies with federal, state, City and ALUP standards.
Airport Land Use Compatibility
The project is consistent with the ALUP’s compatibility criteria, zones and contours. Observa-
tions from those findings for the ALUC’s consideration and review are the following:
1. The project proposes development totaling 280 dwelling units and 256 City density units.
There is no limit on the number of dwelling units under the current ALUP assuming develop-
ment of a Detailed Area Plan (Airport Area Specific Plan), ACOS and CDZ. The AASP has 37
percent open space in the S-1 portions and 25 percent open space in the S-2 portions of the
plan. According to Section 4.5.1 of the AASP, approved by the ALUC, the AASP is a Detailed
Area Plan and a Compact Development Zone for the purposes of the ALUP.
2. The site itself contains 24.8 percent open space in the form of the Flower Mound, riparian
setback and corridor and adjacent landscaping. The site itself would qualify as a CDZ.
3. All residential development is confined to the S-2 (Caltrans Zone 6) zone.
4. There are Reservation Areas in the adjacent Margarita Area Specific Plan, and on the Chev-
ron property to the west. Since the Project is not under any sort of regular (or even occa-
sional) approach or departure corridor, no onsite Reservation Areas would be beneficial.
5. The ALUP amendment proposes to set the maximum permissible noise for residential area a
60 CNEL (see Attachment B). The RSH noise contours indicate that entire site is outside of
the 60 CNEL contour and there will be no inconsistencies of the proposed project with the
ALUP. Residential development is allowed on the entire site per the standards in the cur-
rent ALUP, and the proposed mitigations and project design features. Residential develop-
Item 3
Packet Page 95
600 Tank Farm Road 21 of 31
City Zoning, General Plan and ALUP Analysis
May 1, 2020
ment at the density proposed is also consistent with land use compatibility criteria con-
tained in Figure 4G for Caltrans Handbook Safety Zone 6. Lmax impacts will be the ad-
dressed with project design features described above.
The following sections provide a consistency analysis with each of the ALUP policies.
General Policies
Policy G-1: Notwithstanding any other provision of this ALUP, a proposed project or local action will be
determined to be inconsistent with the ALUP if the information required for review of the proposed lo-
cal action is not provided by the referring agency.
Response: The formal application will include all the necessary materials per the Referral Form and
Appendix 2 of the ALUC’s by-laws.
Policy G-2: Notwithstanding any other provision of this ALUP, a proposed project or local action will be
determined to be inconsistent with the ALUP if the proposal would, in the considered opinion of ALUC,
present specific incompatibilities to the continued economic vitality and efficient operation of the Air-
port with respect to safety, noise, overflight or obstacle clearance.
Response: Normal approach and departure flight tracks from Runways 7-25 and 11-29 indicate that
no aircraft traffic passes over the site at elevations below 1,000 AGL (South Hills are at 550-600 MSL
north of the Project site). All residential development is confined to the S-2 Safety Area, and the pro-
posed number of dwelling units is significantly less than that permitted by the ALUP. The project sta-
tistics demonstrate compliance with the density and noise requirements. A noise study was prepared
for the project as part of the EIR which confirmed the findings of the RSH noise contours. The ALUC
also commissioned a noise study that concluded that the peak and average contours do not occur on
the project site. Further, to reduce complaints related to noise events that are occur from operations,
a more restrictive 45-decibel interior peak noise standard is proposed. Therefore, there are no known
specific incompatibilities associated with the project.
Policy G-3: Except as provided in Policy G-4, a proposed project or local action will be determined to be
inconsistent with the ALUP if the proposal is not in conformance with all applicable Specific Land Use
Policies. If the site affected by a proposed project or local action is in more than one noise exposure area
or aviation safety area, the standards for each such area will be applied separately to the land area lying
within each noise or safety zone.
Response: Table 1 shows the site’s compliance with the various regulations applicable to the multiple
noise and safety zones on the project site. The 60 dB and 65 dB noise contours are located offsite, out-
side of the areas proposed for development, no residential uses are proposed for the ALUC S-1B and S-
1C Safety Areas, and the compatibility criteria for each Safety Area are applied separately to each
area. The project is in compliance with both the County ALUP safety and noise requirements, and
those in the Caltrans Airport Land Use Planning Handbook.
Item 3
Packet Page 96
600 Tank Farm Road 22 of 31
City Zoning, General Plan and ALUP Analysis
May 1, 2020
Policy G-4: When the site affected by a proposed project or local action is in more than one noise expo-
sure area or aviation safety area, the Airport Land Use Commission may, at its sole discretion, elect not
to apply the requirements of Policy G-3 if:
i. the total gross area(s) within the more restrictive area(s) is 2 acres or less; and
ii. the land area(s) within the more restrictive area(s) is less than 50% of the total gross land area af-
fected by the referred project or local action.
In such instance, the ALUC may elect to apply the policies applicable to the least restrictive noise and/or
safety zone to the entire site affected by the project or local action. The ALUC must adopt specific find-
ings that the proposed project or local action, so considered, would not result in the potential develop-
ment of land uses incompatible with current or future airport operations.
Response: All of the Project’s development is in the S-2 zone. The Project is consistent with the re-
quirements for that zone. This is in strict compliance with General Policy G-3.
Noise Policies
Maximum Allowable Interior Noise Exposure from Aviation-Related Noise Sources-- (The reference
event for determination of required single event noise mitigation shall be the straight-in arrival of a re-
gional airline jet landing on Runway 29 and the straight-out departure of a regional airline jet from Run-
way 29. Measurements are to be of the maximum noise level, are to be A-weighted, and are to be ob-
tained using a Fast response time).
Residential dwellings 50 dB(A) Lmax
Offices, office buildings 60 dB(A) Lmax
Response: The ALUP 65-decibel single event contour is located offsite. The noise study prepared for
the Project calculated an Lmax of 62 dB on the northern half of the site and 79 dB at the property line
nearest Runway 11-29. All buildings will be designed to ensure a maximum interior Lmax noise level
of 45 decibels or less.
Policy N-1 – Would permit or fail to sufficiently prohibit establishment within the projected 60 dB CNEL
contour of any extremely noise-sensitive land use.
Response: No portions of the site are within the 60 Ldn/CNEL area. This was confirmed by the map-
ping of the ALUP contours on the project site, by the noise study prepared for the project, and by the
ALUC-commissioned noise study prepared by RS&H.
Policy N-2 – Would permit or fail to sufficiently prohibit any extremely noise-sensitive land use within
the projected 55-dB CNEL contour, with the exception of developments which meet the criteria deline-
ated in Section 4.3.2.3 for designation as infill.
Item 3
Packet Page 97
600 Tank Farm Road 23 of 31
City Zoning, General Plan and ALUP Analysis
May 1, 2020
Response: Under current ALUP regulations only, Commercial/Mixed use development allowed within
the 55 dB Ldn/CNEL contour. The ALUP amendment will change the noise level permitted for residen-
tial area to 60 dB and below. According to the RSH Noise Study, none of the site is in the 60 CNEL con-
tour. This was confirmed by the mapping of the ALUP contours on the project site, by the noise study
pre-pared for the project, and by the ALUC-commissioned noise study prepared by RS&H. Structural
and architectural features will be used mitigate noise exposure.
Policy N-3 – Would permit or fail to sufficiently prohibit any moderately noise-sensitive land use within
the projected 55-dB CNEL contour, with the exception of developments which meet the requirements
for mitigation of interior noise levels specified in Table 4 and in Section 4.3.3.
Response: Commercial/mixed use development only is proposed within the 55 dB Ldn/CNEL contour.
All land uses are compatible with this noise level and there are on anticipated inconsistencies with the
proposed ALUP.
Policy N-4 – Would permit or fail to sufficiently prohibit, in any location which is within or adjacent to an
area of demonstrated noise incompatibility or in an acoustic environment substantially similar to an
area of demonstrated noise incompatibility:
a. Any new residential or other extremely noise-sensitive development
b. Any new moderately noise-sensitive development, unless adequate, specific, and detailed provisions
are set forth to mitigate noise incompatibility between allowable or proposed noise-sensitive uses (in-
cluding foreseeable outdoor activities) and airport operations.
Response: The mixed-use portion of the project would be in or adjacent to the 55 dB contour. Residen-
tial and commercial uses are permitted in areas with 60 dB i Mitigation measures will be included to
make these units compatible with the ALUP noise policies Noise monitoring on the site and the ALUC’s
RSH Noise Study confirm that the noise levels on the site do not exceed the levels projected in the
ALUP and there are no known noise impacts that are not adequately documented or accounted for in
the ALUP.
CNEL Level Compatibility
Extremely Noise Sensitive Moderately Noise Sensitive
(Residential) (Office/Retail)
Land Uses Land Uses
Inside 60 dB CNEL contour Prohibited With mitigation
Between 55- and 60-dB contours Infill only with mitigation
Outside 55 dB contour Allowable Allowable
Item 3
Packet Page 98
600 Tank Farm Road 24 of 31
City Zoning, General Plan and ALUP Analysis
May 1, 2020
Response: The mixed-use portion of the project would be in or adjacent to the 55 dB contour. Mitiga-
tion measures will be included to make these units compatible with the ALUP noise policies. Noise
monitoring on the site confirms that the noise levels on the site do not exceed the levels projected in
the ALUP and there are no known noise impacts that are not adequately documents or accounted for
in the ALUP. Further, the ALUP amendment currently proposed will permit all land uses proposed in
the project.
Safety Policies
Policy S-1 – Would permit or lack sufficient provisions to prohibit structures and other obstacles within
the Runway Protection Zones for any runway at the Airport, as depicted in Figure 4.
Response: The project is not located in a Runway Protection Zone or Safety Area S-1A.
Policy S-2 – Would permit or fail to adequately prohibit any future residential or nonresidential develop-
ment or redevelopment which would create, within the site to be developed or redeveloped, a density
greater than specified in Table 7 or any mixed-use development or redevelopment which would create,
within the site to be developed or redeveloped, densities greater than illustrated in Figures 5 through 8.
Response: Table 1 hereof demonstrates the compliance of the project with the ALUP Table 7 (See Ta-
ble 2, reproduced below). There is no residential development proposed in Safety Areas S-1C and S-1B.
With the City adopted ACOS and the Airport Area Specific Plan as a Detailed Area Plan, the AASP and
Project site as a Cluster Development Zone in Safety Area S-2 (or this site as CDZ), the number of per-
mitted dwelling units is “unlimited”. Two hundred eighty (280) dwelling units are proposed at a com-
posite density of 24 dwelling units per gross acre. The Project qualifies as a Cluster Development Zone
as well since it has more than the 25 percent open space called for in Section 4.4.5.4 of the ALUP.
Maximum proposed density is 35 dwelling units to the acre in the stacked flat portion of the site that
is in the S-2 zone. As a Detailed Area Plan with an ACOS and CDZ, maximum residential density for in-
dividual parcels or subareas is “unlimited”.
Policy S-3 – Would permit or fail to adequately prohibit any future development project which specifies,
entails, or would result in a greater building coverage than permitted by Table 7.
Response: Projects which have a Detailed Area Plan (AASP and Development Plan), an ACOS, and a
CDZ do not have a coverage standard per ALUP Table 7. However, for the sake of information, total
projected building coverage in the S-2 zone is estimated to be 25 percent compared to the 20 percent
maximum in ALUP Table 7 (for projects without an ACOS, CDZ or DAP).
Policy S-4 – Would permit or fail to adequately prohibit high intensity land uses or special land use func-
tions (impaired egress uses or unusually hazardous uses), except that, when conditions specified by Ta-
ble 7 for density adjustments have been determined to be met by the ALUC, high intensity land and/or
special function uses may be allowed in Aviation Safety Area S-2.
Item 3
Packet Page 99
600 Tank Farm Road 25 of 31
City Zoning, General Plan and ALUP Analysis
May 1, 2020
Response: Section 4.4.2.2 of the ALUP defines “High Intensity Land Uses” as any use which is charac-
terized by a potential to attract dense concentrations of persons to an indoor or outdoor area, even
for a limited period of time. Such uses include amusement parks, fairgrounds, convention/exhibit
halls, major auditoriums, stadiums and arenas, temporary events attracting dense concentrations of
people such as fairs, circuses, carnivals, revival meetings, sports tournaments, conventions, but not
including events for which exposure to aviation safety hazard is a well-known expectation (air shows,
airport open houses, pilot’s meetings, etc.) None of these uses are proposed for the project site and
are prohibited in the S-2 zone per the City’s Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 17.57), and the Airport Area
Specific Plan.
Reserve Space - Reserve space shall be provided where deemed necessary which meets the design crite-
ria specified in Table 6 of the ALUP, and is restricted in perpetuity by deed restriction, easement, or
other suitable legal instrument to uses characterized by low occupancy levels and substantially free of
structures. Land uses which may, if the standards established in Table 6 are met, be consistent with this
definition of Reserve Space include: 1) undeveloped land – “green belt” reserve; 2) parks; 3) agriculture;
4) certain low intensity recreational uses such as golf courses, shooting ranges; and, 5) cemeteries.
Response: There are designated Reservation Areas to the north in the Margarita Area Specific Plan
and to the west on the Chevron property. Since there are no overflights over the Project site, a Reser-
vation Area is not necessary.
Runway Protection Zones – Areas immediately adjacent to the ends of each active runway, within which
the level of aviation safety risk is very high and in which, consequently, structures are prohibited, and
human activities are restricted to those which require only very low levels of occupancy. The size and
configuration of the Runway Protection Zones are specified by Federal Aviation Regulations. The Run-
way Protection Zones are also referred to as the “clear zones” for each runway.
Response: The project is not located in a Runway Protection Zone or Safety Area S-1A.
Safety Area S-1A – Those portions of Safety Area S-1 which are located within 500 feet of the extended
runway centerline of Runway 11-29 and within 5,000 feet of an existing or planned runway end or which
are within 250 feet of the extended runway centerline of Runway 7-25 and within 3,000 feet of the run-
way end.
Response: The project is not located in a Runway Protection Zone or Safety Area S-1A.
Safety Area S-1B – Those portions of Safety Area S-1 which are not included in Safety Area S-1a, but are
within probable gliding distance for aircraft on expected approach or departure courses; also, includes
State-defined sideline safety areas, inner turning zones and outer safety zones for both Runway 11-29
and Runway 7-25 and portions of existing Airport Land Use Zone 3. Aviation safety hazards to be particu-
larly considered in this area include mechanical failures, fuel exhaustion, deviation from glideslope or
MDA during IFR operations (due to pilot error or equipment malfunction), loss of control during short
approach procedures, stall/spin incidents during engine-out maneuvers in multi-engine aircraft, loss of
control during “go around” or missed approach procedures, and midair collisions. Figure 3 description:
Areas within gliding distance of prescribed flight paths for aircraft operations at less than 500 feet above
Item 3
Packet Page 100
600 Tank Farm Road 26 of 31
City Zoning, General Plan and ALUP Analysis
May 1, 2020
ground level, plus sideline safety areas, and inner turning zones and outer safety zones for each runway.
Figure 3 of the ALUP also defines this zone as being “areas within gliding distance of prescribed flight
paths for airport operations at less than 500 feet AGL, plus sideline safety areas, inner turning zones,
and outer safety zones for each runway.
Response: The project is not located in a Runway Protection Zone or Safety Area S-1A.
Safety Area S-1C – Those portions of Safety Area S-1 which are not included in Safety Areas S-1a or S-1b
but are adjacent to (within 0.5 nm) frequent or low-visibility aircraft operations at less than 500 feet
above ground level. Aviation safety hazards to be considered in this area include mechanical failures,
deviation from localizer or VOR during IFR operations (due to pilot error or equipment malfunction),
stall/spin incidents during engine-out maneuvers in multi-engine aircraft, loss of control during “go
around” or missed approach procedures, and loss of visual references by aircraft performing circle-to-
land procedures. ALUP Figure 3 description: Areas not included in Safety Areas S-1a or S-1b, but adja-
cent (within 0.5 nm) to aircraft operations at less than 500 feet above ground level.
Response: While the Project site is currently mapped in the S-1C area per Figure 3 of the ALUP, it does
not meet any of the avigational criteria for that Safety Zone. There are no “frequent or low-visibility
aircraft operations at less than 500 feet above ground level” and there are no resulting aviation safety
hazards associated with mechanical failures, deviation from localizer or VOR during IFR operations
(due to pilot error or equipment malfunction), stall/spin incidents during engine-out maneuvers in
multi-engine aircraft, loss of control during “go around” or missed approach procedures, and loss of
visual references by aircraft performing circle-to-land procedures. Therefore, the Project site is in
ALUC Zone S-2 or Caltrans Handbook Zone 6. No development is proposed in the S-1C Safety Area.
Safety Area S-2 – The area, as designated in Figure 3, within the vicinity of which aircraft operate fre-
quently or in conditions of reduced visibility at altitudes between 501 and 1,000 feet above ground level
(AGL). Aviation safety hazards to be considered in this area include mechanical failures, fuel exhaustion,
loss of control during turns from downwind to base legs or from base to final legs of the traffic pattern,
stall/spin incidents during engine-out maneuvers in twin engine aircraft, and midair collisions. Aircraft in
Area S-2 are at greater altitude and are less densely concentrated than in other portions of the Airport
Planning Area, the overall level of aviation safety risk is considered to be lower than that in Area S-1 or
the Runway Protection Zones
Response: The project site meets the definition of Safety Zone S-2 and the safety risks are considered
low. Proposed development is for 280 dwelling units, at or below the City Zoning maximum.
Airspace Protection Policies
Policy A-1 – Projects shall ensure that no structure, landscaping, apparatus, or other feature, whether
temporary or permanent in nature, shall constitute an obstruction to air navigation by having a height
that is 200 feet above ground level (AGL) or is above 409 feet MSL, whichever is greater, or obstruct the
approach or departure “imaginary surface” as defined in Section 77.25 or 77.29 of the Federal Aviation
Item 3
Packet Page 101
600 Tank Farm Road 27 of 31
City Zoning, General Plan and ALUP Analysis
May 1, 2020
Regulations and as illustrated in Figure 9 of the ALUP. Further, that no use or activity shall constitute a
hazard to air navigation by constructing an object which entails or is expected to entail characteristics
which would potentially interfere with the takeoff, landing, or maneuvering of aircraft at the Airport,
including objects that create electrical interference with navigation signals or radio communication be-
tween the aircraft and airport, has lighting which is difficult to distinguish from airport lighting, produces
glare in the eyes of pilots using the airport, contains uses which attract birds and create bird strike haz-
ards, contains uses which produce visually significant quantities of smoke, and contains uses which en-
tail a risk of physical injury to operators or passengers of aircraft (e.g., exterior laser light demonstra-
tions or shows).
Response: City Zoning Ordinance regulations and the AASP limit the height of structures to 35 feet to
the highest architectural feature, and the projected maximum elevation of any structure on the pro-
ject site is 200 MSL. Development on the project site will not exceed the 200 AGL or 409 MSL stand-
ards, lower than the elevations required for FAA Form 7460 notification and determination. FAA noti-
fication will be required per Part 77.9 evaluation relating to any structures which are higher than a
100:1 slope from the edge of the runway. Runway 11 is approximately 1,775 feet from the Project site
boundary so any commercial structure greater in height than 163 MSL (runway elevation plus 18 feet)
will require FAA review, and any residential structure greater in height than 165 MSL will require re-
view. The results of this review will be provided as part of the final application.
Policy A-2 – Would permit or lacks sufficient provisions to prohibit any new landfill or other disposal site
at a site or of a configuration which is not consistent with all current state and federal statutes, FAA reg-
ulations, and FAA Advisory Circulars concerning the relationship of landfills and waste disposal sites to
aeronautical operations and facilities.
Response: The project does not involve the development of a landfill site.
Overflight Policies
Policy O-1 – Notwithstanding any other provision of this ALUP, any proposed general plan, general plan
amendment, specific plan, specific plan amendment, zoning ordinance, zoning ordinance amendment,
building regulation modification, or individual development proposal will be determined to be incon-
sistent with the ALUP if the proposed local action lacks sufficient provisions to ensure that both of the
following provisions will be carried out:
1. Avigation easements will be recorded for each property developed within the area included
in the proposed local action prior to the issuance of any building permit or conditional use
permit; and,
2. All owners, potential purchasers, occupants (whether as owners or renters), and potential
occupants (whether as owners or renters) will receive full and accurate disclosure concern-
ing the noise, safety, or overflight impacts associated with airport operations prior to enter-
ing any contractual obligation to purchase, lease, rent, or otherwise occupy any property or
properties within the airport area.
Response: Avigation Easements and Natural Hazard Disclosure Reports are required for real estate
transactions in the Airport Area. An enhanced Avigation Easement is proposed, as well as additional
Item 3
Packet Page 102
600 Tank Farm Road 28 of 31
City Zoning, General Plan and ALUP Analysis
May 1, 2020
disclosures for the first buyer and subsequent buyers of homes, standardized deed restrictions and dis-
closures recorded with the property, and standard lease conditions for rental properties.
Item 3
Packet Page 103
600 Tank Farm Road 29 of 31
City Zoning, General Plan and ALUP Analysis
May 1, 2020
Table 3
ALUP Table 7
Item 3
Packet Page 104
600 Tank Farm Road 30 of 31
City Zoning, General Plan and ALUP Analysis
May 1, 2020
Attachment A
Existing Conditions, Site Plan and Preliminary Civil
Site Plan
Item 3
Packet Page 105
1622-01-LP19 FEBRURARY 17, 2020
600 TANK FARM ROAD
600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
A1
INITIATION
PACKAGE
TITLE SHEET
PROJECT STATISTICS
PROJECT ADDRESS:600 TANK FARM ROAD
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401APN:053-421-006 & 053-421-002EXISTING ZONING:BP-SPPROPOSED REZONE:CSTOTAL SITE AREA:11.1 ACRES ALLOWED DENSITY:24 DU/ACREALLOWED DU: 266.4 DU
UNIT MIX & DENSITY
ALLOWED
STUDIO 0.5 DU/UNIT
1-BED 0.66 DU/UNIT
2-BED 1 DU/UNIT
3-BED 1.5 DU/UNIT
PROPOSED
TOTAL UNIT COUNT TOTAL DU
STUDIO 28 (28 X 0.5 ) = 14 DU
1-BED 72 (72 X 0.66) = 47.52 DU
2-BED 152 (152 X 1) = 152 DU
3-BED 28 (28 X 1.5) = 42 DU
TOTALS 280 UNITS 255.52 DU
PARKING
REQUIRED (INCLUDING GUEST PARKING)
STUDIO 1.2 SPACES/UNIT (28 X 1.2 ) = 33.6 SPACES
1-BED 1.2 SPACES/UNIT (72 X 1.2) = 86.4 SPACES
2-BED 1.7 SPACES/UNIT (152 X 1.7) = 258.4 SPACES
3-BED 2.45 SPACES/UNIT (28 X 2.45) = 68.6 SPACES
COMMERCIAL 1 SPACE/300 SF (15,000 SF/300) = 50 SPACESTOTAL497 SPACES
PROPOSED (INCLUDING 8% REDUCTION 457.2 SPACESPROVIDED458 SPACES
PROPOSED # OF BUILDINGS
RESIDENTIAL 19
MIXED USE 2TOTAL21
CS ZONING REGULATIONS (PER MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 17.36.020)
MAX. DENSITY 24 UNITS/ACRE
MIN. SETBACKS FRONT 10 FEET (BLDGS),
WHERE NO BUILDING ADJOINS 5’-0” (PARKING
LOTS)
INTERIOR SIDE AND REAR N/A
CORNER LOT-STREET SIDE 10 FEET (BLDGS),
WHERE NO BUILDING ADJOINS 5’-0” (PARKING
LOTS)
MAX. BLDG. HEIGHT 35’-0”
MAX. LOT COVERAGE 75%
MAX. FLOOR AREA RATIO 1.5
MIN. LOT AREA 9,000 SF
Item 3
Packet Page 106
1622-01-LP19 FEBRURARY 17, 2020
600 TANK FARM ROAD
600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
A2
INITIATION
PACKAGE
EXISTING CONDITIONSN:\1600\1622-01-LP19-600-Tank-Farm-Road-Due-Diligence-Assistance\Engineering\DesDev\Exhibits\Site Plan (Existing)_021320.dwg, SHEET TITLE, Feb 17, 2020 3:48pm, ngwaltersFebruary 17, 2020
EXISTING CONDITIONS C1
0 feet100
1"=50'
50 150
600 TANK FARM
Item 3
Packet Page 107
1622-01-LP19 FEBRURARY 17, 2020
600 TANK FARM ROAD
600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
A3
INITIATION
PACKAGE
PRELIMINARY CIVIL SITE PLANN:\1600\1622-01-LP19-600-Tank-Farm-Road-Due-Diligence-Assistance\Engineering\DesDev\Exhibits\SitePlan_021320.dwg, SHEET TITLE, Feb 17, 2020 3:49pm, ngwalters0 feet100
1"=50'
50 150
February 17, 2020
PRELIMINARY CIVIL SITE PLAN
600 TANK FARM C2
Item 3
Packet Page 108
1622-01-LP19 FEBRURARY 17, 2020
600 TANK FARM ROAD
600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
A4
INITIATION
PACKAGE
CONCEPTUAL SITE SECTIONS
SECTION A-A
SECTION B-B
Item 3
Packet Page 109
1622-01-LP19 FEBRURARY 17, 2020600 TANK FARM ROAD
600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 1622-01-LP19 FEBRUARY 12, 2020
A2SITE PLAN - OPTION 1
BUILDING 3
BUILDING 2
BUILDING 2
BUILDING 2
BUILDING 3
BUILDING 1 BUILDING 1 BUILDING 1 BUILDING 1
BUILDING 1 BUILDING 1 BUILDING 1
BUILDING 1 BUILDING 1 BUILDING 1
BUILDING 1 BUILDING 1 BUILDING 1
BUILDING 1
MIXED-USE
MIXED-USE
SCALES: 1:50 (24X36 SHEET)
1:100 (12X18 SHEET)
PARKING:
REQUIRED:497 SPACES
PROPOSED:457.2 SPACES (BASED ON 8% REDUCTION FROM CITY REQUIREMENTS INCLUDING GUEST PARKING)
PROVIDED:458 SPACES 600 TANK FARM ROAD
600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
A5
INITIATION
PACKAGE
CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN
RIPARIAN SET BACK
RIPARIAN SET BACK
BIKE/PEDESTRIAN PATH
0’100’50’25’150’
0’200’100’50’300’SCALES: 1” = 100’- 0” (12”X18” SHEET)
1”=50’-0” (24”X36” SHEET)NORTH
Item 3
Packet Page 110
1622-01-LP19 FEBRURARY 17, 2020
600 TANK FARM ROAD
600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
A6
INITIATION
PACKAGE
CHARACTER SKETCH
Item 3
Packet Page 111
600 Tank Farm Road 31 of 31
City Zoning, General Plan and ALUP Analysis
May 1, 2020
Attachment B
ALUC Proposed ALUP Safety Zone Maps
(Contained in November 2019 Agenda Packet)
Item 3
Packet Page 112
0 0.75 1.50.375 Miles
Legend
Zone 1: Runway Protection Zone
Zone 2: Inner Approach/Departure Zone
Zone 3: Inner Turning Zone
Zone 4: Outer Approach/Departure Zone
Zone 5: Sideline Zone
Zone 6: Traffic Pattern Zone
±10,000'1,000'500'3,000' at 30°6
,
0
0
0
'
a
t
3
0
°1,500'4,00
0
'1,000'1,00
0
'500'500' Extension
DRAFT #2 - Attachment 1
Page 1 of 1
Item 3
Packet Page 113
0 0.65 1.30.325 Miles
Legend
Zone 1: Runway Protection Zone
Zone 2: Inner Approach/Departure Zone
Zone 3: Inner Turning Zone
Zone 4: Outer Approach/Departure Zone
Zone 5: Sideline Zone
Zone 6: Traffic Pattern Zone
±
CNEL 60
CNEL 65
CNEL 70
CNEL 75
Safety Zones
Noise Contours (RJ Service Only Scenario)
DRAFT
#2 - Attachment 4
Page 1 of 1
Item 3
Packet Page 114
1622-01-LP19JUNE 19, 2020600 TANK FARM ROAD600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A1CONCEPTUAL REVIEW PACKAGETITLE SHEETPROJECT STATISTICSPROJECT ADDRESS:600 TANK FARM ROADSAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401APN:053-421-006 & 053-421-002EXISTING ZONING:BP-SPPROPOSED REZONE:CSTOTAL SITE AREA:11.1 ACRES ALLOWED DENSITY:24 DU/ACREALLOWED DU: 266.4 DU UNIT MIX & DENSITYALLOWEDSTUDIO 0.5 DU/UNIT1-BED 0.66 DU/UNIT2-BED 1 DU/UNIT3-BED 1.5 DU/UNIT PROPOSEDTOTAL UNIT COUNT TOTAL DUSTUDIO 28 (28 X 0.5 ) = 14 DU1-BED 72 (72 X 0.66) = 47.52 DU2-BED 152 (152 X 1) = 152 DU3-BED 28 (28 X 1.5) = 42 DUTOTALS 280 UNITS 255.52 DUPARKINGREQUIRED (INCLUDING GUEST PARKING)STUDIO1.2 SPACES/UNIT(28 X 1.2 ) = 33.6 SPACES1-BED1.2 SPACES/UNIT(72 X 1.2) = 86.4 SPACES2-BED1.7 SPACES/UNIT(152 X 1.7) = 258.4 SPACES3-BED2.45 SPACES/UNIT (28 X 2.45) = 68.6 SPACESCOMMERCIAL1 SPACE/300 SF(15,000 SF/300) = 50 SPACESTOTAL497 SPACESPROPOSED(INCLUDING 8% REDUCTION457.2 SPACESPROVIDED 458 SPACESEV PARKINGREQUIRED RESIDENTIALREADY 10% OF REQUIRED 45 SPACESCAPABLE50% OF REQUIRED 224 SPACEPROPOSED RESIDENTIALREADY45 SPACESCAPABLE224 SPACEREQUIRED COMMERCIALREADY 10% OF REQUIRED 5 SPACECAPABLE 25% OF REQUIRED 13 SPACESPROPOSED COMMERCIALREADY5 SPACECAPABLE13 SPACESPROPOSED # OF BUILDINGSRESIDENTIAL 19MIXED USE 2TOTAL 21CS ZONING REGULATIONS (PER MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 17.36.020)MAX. DENSITY24 UNITS/ACREMIN. SETBACKSFRONT10 FEET (BLDGS), WHERE NO BUILDING ADJOINS 5’-0” (PARKING LOTS)INTERIOR SIDE AND REARN/ACORNER LOT-STREET SIDE10 FEET (BLDGS), WHERE NO BUILDING ADJOINS 5’-0” (PARKING LOTS)MAX. ALLOWABLE BLDG. HEIGHT35’-0”MAX. ALLOWABLE LOT COVERAGE75%MAX. ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA RATIO1.5MIN. ALLOWABLE LOT AREA9,000 SFItem 3Packet Page 115
1622-01-LP19JUNE 19, 2020600 TANK FARM ROAD600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A2CONCEPTUAL REVIEW PACKAGEEXISTING CONDITIONSItem 3Packet Page 116
1622-01-LP19JUNE 19, 2020600 TANK FARM ROAD600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A3CONCEPTUAL REVIEW PACKAGEPRELIMINAR CIVIL SITE PLANXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
/////
/XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXSSXX////////////XXX
XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXXXXXX
XXXXXX
XXX
XXXXXX
XXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XX
XXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXXX XXX XX XXX XXX XXXX X XXXXXXX XXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXX XXXX XXX XXX XXXXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXXX XXX XXX XXX XXXX XXX XXXXX XXXX XXXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXXX XXX XXX XXXXXXXX
XXX XXX XXX XXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXXX XXX XXXX XXX XXXX XXX XXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXX XXX XXXX XX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXXXX XXX XXXX XXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXX XXX XXX XXXXXX XXXXXX XXXX XXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXX XX XXX XXXX XXX XXXXXXXXX XXX XXX
XXX
XXXXXX
XXX
XXXX
XXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXX
XXXX
XXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXX
XXXXX
XXXXXXXXXX
X
XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XX
XX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXX
XXX
XXXXXX
XXXXXXX
XXX
XXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXX XX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXXX XXX XXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXX
XXXXX
XXX XX XXXXXX XX XXX XXX XXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXX XXXXXXXXXXXX XX XXX XXXXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXX XXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXXX XXX XXX XXXXXX XXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXX XXXX XXX XXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX
XXX XXXXXXXX XXX XXXXX XXX XXXXXXX XXXXX XX XXXX XXX XXXXX XXX XX XXX XXX XXX XX XXXXXX XXX XX XXXX XXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXX XXXX XXX XXXXX XXXX XXXX XXX XXX XXXX XX XXXXXXXX XXX XXXX XXX XXX XXX XX XXXXX XXX XXXX XXXXXXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XX XXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXX XXXX XXXX XX XX X XX XXX XXX XX XXX XXX XXXX XXX XXXX XX XXXX XX XXX XXX XXX XXXX XXX XXXX XXX
XXXXXXXXXXXX XXX XXX
XX XXXXXXXXX X XXX XXX
XXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXX XXXXXX XX XXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXX
XXX
XX
XX
X XXXXXXXXXXX XXX X X XXX XXXX XXXX
X
XXXXXXXXXXXXXX X XXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXX
XXX
XX XXXXX XXX
XXXX XXX XXXXXXXXXXXX
X XXXXXX XXXX X
XXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXX
XXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X XXX XXX XXX XXX X X X X X XXX X X X X X X X XX X X X X XX X X X XX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 161.4
55.4155
4
54155.15555.444155.4455.455.444444444444
154.7154.77771111
15
155
3
155
3
155
3
155.355555
156.1115111115111151151515
159.
161.6
163.6163.63.66666666
162.6162.6162.61111621166626666666262
6
22
DENSE TREE COVER
DENSE TREE
COVER
COVERDENSE TREE
DENSE TNNSE TENTREE
CCOVERCR
54545141111141411411111451141114111144111141015015015555555515551555160016006666060600011605555555
150501150165165145111145114R
R
15150D E
V
CE
5555155515555 165E
V
NSE
O
454E
VE
NEN
C
T
E
DE
C
TR
ER
D
150R
R
EDENSE TREE
DENS
O
EEDENSE TREE COV
D E
OV
EOVERCOEN
TR
VE
COENOS
00E
1160EEECOOVERVDDDDDD
N
CCCCC
SE
OVV
SE
V
EE
V
SE
V
EE
V
E
V
SE
VVOVV
S
O
4511XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
X XXXXXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXX XXX XXX XXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXX XXX XXX X XXXX
SS
XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXX X
X XXXX
X XXX XX X
SSSS
XX XXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXX X XXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX33.333
55555555555
3.33333333
5555555555555555
RRRREREREREOVOVVEVEVEVEVEVEOVOVVVVCCEEEEEEEEREREEEERENENNNENENNNSNSNSENSNSNSDEEDEDENSDEDRRRRRREREEREEREOVVVEVEVEVEEEVEVVEVOVOOVOVVVEEEEEEEEEEREEEEREEREEEEENEENENNNNENENNNNNSNSNSNSNSNSENSNSNSDEEDEEEEDEDEDDDEDREREROVOVVVVEECEEEEEENNSNNSNSNSDEDE159.0FS153.5FSFFF = 153.0±FF 53.0FF = 153.0±FF = 155.0±FFF = 156.0±56.066FF = 156.0±FFFF = 155.0±FF = 156.0±FF =1=15656666666666FFFF 1156.00FF = 161.0±FFFF = 164.5±FF = 164.5±FF = 167.07FF= 167.0±FF = 161.0±FFF = 162.5±FF = 164.0±FF = 168.0±FF = 169.0±FF = 165.5±FF = 165.5±FF = 167.0±67.077FF = 167.0±6.0X6FF = 164.0±A-AAAAAAAAAAAAAA-AA------------AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAB-BBBBBBBXBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB-BBBBBB-BB-BB-BBBBBXBBXBBBBXBBXBBBBBBBBBBB
ACACIA CREEKACCACACIA CEKCACIA CREEACIA CRKEREEREERRRCCCAACCCACAAAAAACACIA CREEKACACIA CREEKCIA CREEKEEKACACIA CREEKACACACKKEEREEEEREEEEREEEEEEEEEEECCAAAAAAAAACCCACAEXISTING PROPERTY LINEXXPRELIMINARY PROPOSEDRIGHT OF WAY DEDICATIONFUTURE ADDITIONAL PAVE OUTFOR TRUCKTURNAROUNDPROPOSED SANTA FE INTERIMIMPROVEMENTSSANTA FE ROADTANK FARM ROAD RIGHT OF WAY NEEDS FORTANK FARM ROADIMPROVEMENTSINTERIM BIKE LANEIMPROVEMENTS ONLY — NOSIDEWALK SOUTH SIDE ONLYPROPOSED BIKE AND PEDIMPROVEMENTSRIGHT TURN IN AND RIGHTTURN OUT MOVEMENTSONLY5050500500501550000000005005050050500500500500500500500500500500500500505050505050505050050505050505050505050505050505050505050505050505050505050505050150501505015050150505050155155155155155150505050505050505050505050501505015015050150501505155505051505151555151115155111511515150515051505150515051505150515051505150515051505150515015150155511150515015150151515511150155155511150501501555155511111501551555111150155155511115015551555111115155115051501550505515555111115015505050550505055151551111111501555155511111501550505515551111150155050551555111115155515111501555555551511505555550555551515555555551515115155555551115155555551115155515111511515505555551515151515555551515555555555555151151151555555551515151515151511515115151511111
1555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555515515555555555555555555551555155515551555515551555155515555155551555515555155551555515555155551555515555155551555515555155551555155551555515555155151555155515551555155151551515515155151551515515155151551515511551515511551551551551151151151151151151155151515515515515151551515151515151515151555151555111116016000606060606060606060606060606060606060606016060160116016016011601160116011601601160161601160161601616601601160161601616016160160160161601616016160160160160160160160601606016060166016016016060160601660160601606016001600160016001600160016016001600160016001600160016001600160016001601601601601601616161661661616161616161161161161611611616161611611155111155555555555555555555555555555656665616566661666556566666566661111111111111111111111170170117070170070717000000000000700707070700707707707707707707070707070170707070707170017017017001701700170017001700170017001700170017170701700700700170017001770071707017070170701707017070170701707017017070170701707017070170701707017070170701707017070170701707017070170717071707170171701717071707170717017170171701717017170177017701770171701701717017017011701170117011701170117017017017017017017017017017011717171717171717171717171717171111111711717177555555555555755757557575757557557557557575757575757575757575751175717575777575751777577575775757517171717171717171717177171717117117117117171711717117111111111757517171751717117517555555575555575575757575757557557557557557755775575575575575575757557557557557557551757575757575757575757575757575757575757575757575175751757517575175751757517575175751757517517517517517517517517517575175175175175175175175171751751751751751751751717517175171751717517175171717175171751775751751717171757175775717517175717571751717517175717517175171751717517175171751717517175117517175117511751175117511751117511751171171171171171175117177171717717171717171117117111111111111111111111111
14814481484884888148481481414148144148148148141414814814448148141414814814414814141481441488148814881414148484881441488148814481414848148141484814811481441441414811481484144148141414814814414814814814814814814814814814814814814814814811148148114141441444949494949999999994949499499499499499499499499499494994994994949494949494949499494949494949494949494949494949494949491491414914144141414494949494949494949494949149494949494949494949141494949494949149491494914949144949414941494914941494149491441494494941444944149414941494149414914149414941494141414914149144949149141491414144941491414914149141491414914149141491414914149141491414914149141411411411411411411411411411411411414141414141414114141411111
15115151515151515115155151115515515111151151111115115151511511515151151155151515115115151515151515151515151515151515155115515151515151515151511515151515151151511515115151151515151151551515115151151511515115155515151515151555515155151151515155151515115515515115151511515151151515115151515515115155551511515115151511515151151515515551511511151151515115515151511515115151511515111515551515151115151551515151151111515111551515151115151511151515111151511515551511515111511151115115115115115115111155515115111511511511511511511511511511511511511555151515515111111111122 152211522215225212225252522152152521521521521152152215221521522152215215151525215515215215215215151525215515215215155215522222222222222222222222222222222222222222252152525252222152215215215215221521521521521521521522152152252152525215252525215151525252151525221522151115215215151551555225225221521525525525525225525155552515521525255215525525215152152525215151152225521515525221552211111152111252525252115222111521111112521215211125225222522152111521112522211152111152222222152151111522552552511522515225125222152252211521511111152151152151111111111111152511111111111111152221152151111152151115315333333153355553555351535153311521521521522522331531531531531531531531531531531531531531531153115311531153333333331531153331535335315553535553535353153331553351553355555355555333333333331535333333333531531515531551153551535355515315315315315315315333153331533315311111133333315333333111133333315333333111133315335555355551333333315331533153315331533153315333531533335353333315333331533333333153333351535151511531515155353531535351535553515555351551531515151551551535153553535315335331533153553515553515515315315311111111521521521521521521521521521521521521521521521521533153153522115215252211521521515151511521521152152522151551111111521152115151515151515151515115211521511521152151111115252522522152152551521521521525552521521521515151552521515551522151555511521521522151555511521152151152152115215222115215211521521152152211521521115215215251152111111521522115211521111154115455541545515455154115415415415415415411541154115411541154115411541154154154154154154115411541541541545415454154151544154151541541544154415415415441541541541541541541541541541541545154515415415451545154515451545154515451545154154515515515451555154154154154154154154154154154154154154156115561565656565615656561565615615615615615615615665656156615565156615661566156615661565615661556156615661561561565615656156561556156151561515615156151561515615615561515611561156156156156565615156151556515615615615615615656561561565651561561515151515151515
1575157571575755757715715177775775575757575757557557575575757557575775757557575575755757557575575757555757555757157571577157571577157755757157571575715757157571575715757157571575715757157571575715757157571575715751575715751575157515751575157515751575157151575157515751575157515751571515715157151571515715157151571515711571157115711571157115711571157115711571157115115115115115115115151515555151551515151515151515151515151511111111
15851585558158155851581158588888888888855885588885585585585585855855585855855858585858585858585585858585858585858585858585815855858585858585815855815855815855815855815855815855815855815855815855815855815855581585581585558158558158558158558515855815855851585581585581585558158555158558515851585158515851585158555158555158558515851581515851585158515815158151581515815158151581515811581158115811581158115811581158115851158115851158511585158515851551551551515151551515151515111511
591595159159599999999999959995995959595959591599599599599599599599599595995995991599159915991599159915991599159591599159915991599159915991595915959159915915915915915915915915915915915959159515915915951595159515951595159515951591591591515951595159515951591159115911591159115911591159115911115911591159159159111511151159111511151111591159151151159111159111151111591159591591111159111159111591115951591159115151515151515551515551515151111111111
1161111611111111111611161611616161616616161616116116161161161161116111611161116111611161116111611161161616161616116161161616161616161611616116111616161616161611616161611161116111611161116161616161616111611161161161161161161116111611616161611616616161161616161616161616161616616166161111111111
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX1622261622622622262262XX62X222216622222262262XXX2222222222262262XXXX262262XXX62262XXXXXXX2262262XXXXXXX2262262XXXXXXX2262262XXXXXXX2262262XXXXXXX2262262XXXX262262XXXX262262XXX62262XXXXXXX2262262XXXXXXX2262262XXXXXXX2262262XXXX2262262XXXXX2262262XXXXX2262262XXXXX2262262XXXX2262262XXXX2262262XXXXX2262262XXX62X2262262XXXX262262XXXX262262XX62X2262262XX62X2262262XXXX262262XX62X2262262XX62X2262262XX6262262262XX62X2262262XX62262262XX62262262XX62X2262262XX6262262262XX6262262262XX626226222X626226222X626226222X6262262262XX6262216222X6262226222X626226222X626221622626262262226222X62622162262262221622626222162262622216226222622216262226221626222622162622262216226226222162622262621626222626221622226262162222626216262226221626226216262226262162622626216262262621626226216262262166162622626216262262626226262622621626226162622616262261666262262616116162226162226162226162226162226162226162226162226162226162226162226162226162226162616226162261622616261626162261621616261626162161621162116216162161621162116261621162116211611611611611611611611611611611611611611611611611611611611611611611611611611611616113111113333333333333333333333333363631631633636636111111111111111111111111111114111114444444444444444444444444444444446464164164464664611111111111111111111111111111111111111166666666616616166666666666666111666666666666611111111111167667676676766716161616161617777777777777777777777777777777777777777777676676767676676767676777676676766767667676676766767667676676766767667676676766767676676766767667676676766767667676676766767676676766767667676676766767667676766716161667667666666161616166161616616161616161661161616611616161616161616161616161616161616161616161616161616161616161616161616161616161616161616111616111111111116868616868686881681616116618888888686888868688686868686886868686886868868688686886868688686868868686886868868688686886868868688686886868688686886868868688686886868868688686886868868688686868686868686886868868688686868686868686868168686868686868686816868168681686816868168681686816868168681686868168681686816868168681686868681686868168686816868616868616868681686868168686816868616868616868616868616868616616868668686868168681616868616868616668686168161686816168681616868161681616816168161686816168161686816168161681616816168681168681168681168681168681168681168681168681161168681161161161161161161161161161616161616161611111111
169616969699691691699996969696969696969696969696969696969696969696969696969699696969969969699699169916991699169969916991699169916969169691699169916991696916969169691696916969161696969696969169691669696169691696916969169691696916961696916961696169616961696169616961696169161696169616961696169616961691616916169161691616911691616916169116116916169161691616916169116116911669161616911691161616161616166161616161666616616616161616161616111
1711117117171111111171111711717171717171717171171711711711711711111711711711111171111171111171111171111171111171111171111171111171111171111117111171111711117111171111711111171111171111117117117117117117171171171171171111711717117171171711717117171171771771711171117117111717111171111711117111171111711171711171711717111117111117111711111711111711117111711171117111711171117111711171117111711171117717717117117117111771777777777717717717717717177777171771717717717717717717717717717717717717717717717717717177177177171771711111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111721722722727272722272722222722727272272272272721722722722722722172217221722172217221722172217221722172217221722172217221722172217221722172217221722222172217221722222222172217222221722222172222217222221722222172222217222221722222172222217222272222172222217222221722222172222217222221722222172221721722222172227217222721721717217172171721717217172171721717217217217217217217217217211721172122172117212217211721172172172172172172172172172117211721172117211721172111711172117111711111111111111
1737331117313173177371731711717111337377333333737373373737373773777377377777773777777377373773373777717317737173177373737777377373773777173117737173117737173117737173117737173177371711771173177377373737371731171371711777373771731737173173717313173111317311131731113173131731317313173111317313117313173131731317313173131173131173131173131117313173311173131173131173131117331117331117331173311171111731317317337331731317313171117337173131731173131731173111337333317313733173137331731113337333173133317313331731333173133317313331731133733317311337333173137331733331731333173333173333173133317333317333317333317331733173317333317317317171731771731731731731731731731731731731717 173171737337333737373731737317317317317317317317317317317317317317317317317317317317373731731737371733173317331737317171733173317331771737317373737373737373737373737373173731737373737173171737173717371737173773173717311711717317317177317311731731731173731173173173173173173173173173173173173173171731731717171777117771117317331733333333333333733373733737317317317317317317317317317317171731731771733173317317317331733173173317331733173317331731731737317373173731733173171731717317173171731717317173171731717317731773171731731731731731731737373173173737171731731731731731731731731731731731717317171717171717711111 1731773173333333373337331737373173173731731731731731731731731731731731731731731731731737373173173737173173173173173173173173173173731737317317317373173177331733173173177317731717317317173117311731731731731731731731731731731731731731731731731731731731731731731731731731731731731731117417171174174444444744744747447447447474747447447447447447447474747474747474747474747474747474747474747474741741774747474747474747474747417417747747747417417174171741717417174171741717417171174171711711711711717117171717171717171711711111111174747474747474741717171444444447444747474747474747474747474747474747474747474747474747777177474747477747474174747417747417747417417474174747417747417417411741174174174741174174174741741741741741741174747417417474117474747417417474174174741741747411747474741174747474117447474117447474117474747411747474411747474741174747474117474747411747474411747474411747474741174741744117474744117474744111747417741174741741174741741174747441174174171741174741774117474177411741741744117474177411741741411741741474741741741171711717117417417474174174117417411717117171717417417474747417171171717474717171171711717171717171717171717171717171717171717171717171717171717171717171171171171717117117117117117117111111111111111111111
EXISTING TOPOF BANK35' TOP OF BANK AND EDGEOF RIPARIAN SETBACKPROPOSED INTERIM BULB-OUTIMPROVEMENTSIHHW
Item 3Packet Page 117
1622-01-LP19JUNE 19, 2020600 TANK FARM ROAD600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A4CONCEPTUAL REVIEW PACKAGECONCEPTUAL SITE SECTIONSSECTION A ASECTION B B0 100 0 2 1 0 0 200 100 0 00 SCALES 1 100 - 0 (12”X18” SHEET) 1 0 -0 (24”X36” SHEET)Item 3Packet Page 118
1622-01-LP19JUNE 19, 2020BUILDING 3BUILDING 2BUILDING 2BUILDING 2BUILDING 3BUILDING 1BUILDING 1BUILDING 1BUILDING 1BUILDING 1BUILDING 1BUILDING 1BUILDING 1BUILDING 1BUILDING 1BUILDING 1BUILDING 1BUILDING 1BUILDING 1MIXEDUSEMIXEDUSE600 TANK FARM ROAD600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A CONCEPTUAL REVIEW PACKAGECONCEPTUAL SITE PLANCREEK RIPARIANSETBACKBIKE PEDESTRIAN PAT CREEK RIPARIAN SET BACKA7A6A8EXISTING CONNECTION TO BE DESIGNED AND APPROVED B OT ERS0 100 0 2 1 0 0 200 100 0 00 SCALES 1 100 - 0 (12”X18” SHEET) 1 0 -0 (24”X36” SHEET)N Item 3Packet Page 119
1622-01-LP19JUNE 19, 2020600 TANK FARM ROAD600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A6CONCEPTUAL REVIEW PACKAGEC ARACTER SKETC MIXED USE BUILDINGS PERSPECTIVEItem 3Packet Page 120
1622-01-LP19JUNE 19, 2020600 TANK FARM ROAD600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A CONCEPTUAL REVIEW PACKAGEC ARACTER SKETC R 4 RESIDENTIAL AREA BUILDINGS PERSPECTIVEItem 3Packet Page 121
1622-01-LP19JUNE 19, 2020600 TANK FARM ROAD600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A CONCEPTUAL REVIEW PACKAGEC ARACTER SKETC R 3 RESIDENTIAL AREA BUILDINGS PERSPECTIVEItem 3Packet Page 122
1622-01-LP19JUL 1 , 2020IMAGE N.T.S600 TANK FARM ROAD600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A1EX IBITSBIC CLE CIRCULATION EX IBIT OPTION 1ADJACENT PROJECT PROPOSED BIKE/PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATIONPROPOSED PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATIONPROJECT PROPOSED PATHSPROJECT PROPOSED PATHSINTERIM CLASS II.CLASS IV AT FUTURE CHEVRON DEVELOPMENTFUTURE 800,000 SF COMMERCIAL PROJECTWETLAND MITIGATION AREAN Item 3Packet Page 123
1622-01-LP19JUL 1 , 2020IMAGE N.T.SWETLAND MITIGATION AREA600 TANK FARM ROAD600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A2EX IBITSBIC CLE CIRCULATION EX IBIT OPTION 2ADJACENT PROJECT PROPOSED BIKE/PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATIONPROPOSED PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATIONPROJECT PROPOSED PATHSFUTURE 800,000 SF COMMERCIAL PROJECTINTERIM CLASS II.CLASS IV AT FUTURE CHEVRON DEVELOPMENTN Item 3Packet Page 124
•Council Agenda Report
Department Name: Community Development
4003 Cost Center:
For Agenda of:
Placement:
Estimated Time:
FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Director
Prepared By: Kyle Bell, Associate Planner
April 21, 2020
Public Hearing
15 Minutes
SUBJECT: INITIATION OF A PROJECT TO REZONE A PROPERTY FROM BP-SP TO
C-S-SP TO ALLOW FOR A MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
CONSISTING OF 280 RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND 15,000 SQUARE FEET
OF COMMERCIAL SPACE. PROJECT INCLUDES AUTHORIZATION OF A
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR THE PREPARATION OF AN
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
RECOMMENDATION
Receive a summary presentation on the project proposal from staff and the project applicant and
consider directing staff to proceed with the following:
1.Proceed the processing of the Project through the entitlement process; and
2.Authorize the issuance of a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the preparation of an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Project and related entitlements; and
3.Authorize the City Manager to enter into a consultant services agreement with the consultant
that best responds to the RFP in terms of qualifications, cost, and approach, that is funded
( consultant and staff costs) solely by the Applicant.
DISCUSSION
The purpose of the initiation of this Project before the City Council is to provide for the orderly
processing of a Project Application requesting a General Plan Amendment and Rezone in a
manner consistent with the overall goals of the community's planning program and the
requirements of State law. It is intended to assure that the General Plan is amended for good
reason and with due consideration of community-wide interests, to achieve and maintain internal
consistency of General Plan elements, and conformance with other guiding documents such as
the Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP).
Staff has determined that California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) compliance for the
project requires preparation of a Project EIR that evaluates potential environmental effects and
identifies project alternatives. If initiated by Council, an RFP (Attachment A) will be published
on the City's website and distributed to consultants with relevant experience in the preparation of
a project-level EIR with similar environmental issues and constraints.
Item 3
Packet Page 125
Background
The site is composed of 11.1 contiguous acres at the northeast comer of the designated Santa Fe
realignment and Tank Farm Road. It is comprised of two separate parcels: APN: 053-421-06
and APN: 053-421-02. The site slopes from the northwest to southeast, with site elevations at
210 feet at the top of the Flower Mound, and 150 feet at the Acacia Creek/Tank Farm Road
headwall. Acacia Creek borders the project on the east, although the creek area itself is located
on the adjacent parcel to the east.
Figure 1: Conceptual Site Plan
The project site is currently zoned Business Park (BP-SP) within the AASP. The BP zone as well
as the AASP prohibit residential uses at this location. The project application proposes to amend
the AASP and rezone the property to Commercial Services (C-S-SP) zone to allow for a mixed
use project, similar to what has been approved on the adjacent property at 650 Tank Farm
(March 5, 2019, Council Agenda Report for the Ordinance Adoption of 650 Tank Farm:
http://opengov.slocity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=91166&dbid=O&repo=CityClerk ). The
proposed mixed-use project consists of 280 residential units and approximately 15,000 square
feet of commercial space. The residential units are provided within three different housing types:
140 townhomes, 100 stacked flat units, and 40 studio and one-bedroom units over the
commercial structures. The townhome and stacked flat units are intended as ownership units,
while the mixed-use units will likely be a rental product (Attachment B).
The project will be required to construct or contribute to several major improvements to
transportation infrastructure as identified by the Circulation Element and AASP including the
Santa Fe/Tank Farm Road roundabout, Santa Fe re-alignment, and associated improvements for
Santa Fe Road including two travel lanes and Class IV bike paths. The full extent to fair share
contributions and/or mitigation measures to implement transportation projects will be fully
evaluated and defined through the development review process.
Policy Context
Land Use Designation. The Business Park land use designation provides for research and
development and light manufacturing in a campus setting. The Project's proposed Services &
Manufacturing designation provides for a wide range of uses including business and professional
services, medical services, research and development, and retail sales. It also provides for
residential uses as part of a mixed-use project with a residential density of up to 24 density
units/acre.
Item 3
Packet Page 126
The development conceptually identified for the project site would be consistent with allowances
for mixed-use projects in the Services & Manufacturing land use designation. The City's General
Plan provides several policies regarding mixed-use development. The following provides a
discussion and initial analysis of the proposed project in regard to these policies.
Major City Goal. Housing was determined to be one of the most important, highest priority goals
for the City to accomplish over the 2019-21 Financial Plan. The goal states: Facilitate the
production of housing with an update of the Housing Element, including an emphasis on
affordable housing (including unhoused people) and worlforce housing through the lens of
climate action and regionalism.
Housing Element. The Housing Element (HE) Policy 6.10 encourages infill residential
development and the promotion of higher-residential density where appropriate'.
Land Use Element. In accordance with the Housing Major City Goal cited above and Housing
Element policies and programs, the proposed General Plan amendment, Specific Plan
amendment and Rezone would allow for the development of a mixed-use project. The proposed
project would facilitate several General Plan policies such as: Land Use Element (LUE) Policy
2.2.62, as the project site provides a variety of housing types within close proximity to public
transportation and is located within walking distance to MindBody Headquarters, SESLOC
Federal Credit Union, and other nearby employers, as well as retail uses and other services of the
Marigold Shopping Center; and LUE Policy 1.5 3, as the project would help reduce the gap
between housing demand and supply by supporting additional residential units
Additionally, the LUE encourages mixed-use projects where they can be found to be compatible
with existing and potential future development. The LUE encourages compatible mixed uses in
commercial districts and specifically discusses residential and commercial mixed use (LUE
Policy 2.3.6)4 . LUE Policy 10.1 (Neighborhood Access) states that all residences should be
within close proximity to food outlets including grocery stores, farmers' markets, and community
gardens.
1 HE Policy 6.10. To help meet the Quantified Objectives, the City will support residential infill development and
promote higher residential density where appropriate.
2 LUE Policy 1.5. Jobs/Housing Relationship. The gap between housing demand (due to more jobs and college
enrollment) and supply should not increase.
3 LUE Policy 2.2.6. Neighborhood Characteristics. The City shall promote livability, quiet enjoyment, and safety
for all residents. Characteristics of quality neighborhoods vary from neighborhood to neighborhood, but often
include one or more of the following characteristics: A mix of housing type styles, density, and affordability.
Design and circulation features that create and maintain a pedestrian scale. Nearby services and facilities
including schools, parks, retail (e.g., grocery store, drug store), restaurants and cafes, and community centers or
other public facilities. A tree canopy and well-maintained landscaping. A sense of personal safety .... Convenient
access to public transportation. Well-maintained housing and public facilities.
4 LUE Policy 2.3.6. Housing and Businesses. The City shall encourage mixed use projects, where appropriate and
compatible with existing and planned development on the site and with adjacent and nearby properties. The City
shall support the location of mixed-use projects and community and neighborhood commercial centers near
major activity nodes and transportation corridors I transit opportunities where appropriate.
Item 3
Packet Page 127
LUE Policy 10.4 (Encourage Walkability) states that the City shall encourage projects which
provide for and enhance active and environmentally sustainable modes of transportation, such
as pedestrian movement, bicycle access, and transit services. The immediate surrounding
neighborhood provides services, facilities and resources within a half mile of the project site: a
day care, drug stores, restaurants, schools, a major grocery store, a bank, several places of
worship, a fitness center, medical and/or dental services, personal care services, and a full
service supermarket are currently located within biking or walking distance of the project site.
Airport Area Specific Plan. The AASP was initially adopted on August 23, 2005 and provides a
planning framework for future growth and development within the approximately 1,500-acre
area along the City's southern boundary. The AASP sets forth guidance for land use,
conservation and resource management, community design, circulation and transportation
improvements, and utilities and services needed in the planning area. The AASP has been
amended multiple times, with the last amendment adopted in March 2019, with the approval of
the 650 Tank Farm project. Amendments to the AASP require review by the County Airport
Land Use Commission (ALUC).
The proposed Specific Plan Amendment would allow for the site to be developed with a mixed
use project. This would accommodate the continuation and expansion of the residential uses in
the vicinity (650 Tank Farm). This residential expansion is an example of urban infill
development that would improve and enhance the supply of housing near jobs and services, and
is consistent with many General Plan goals, policies, and programs (as discussed above). The
project would need to conform to all relevant design considerations and performance standards.
Consistency COVID-19 Orders and Current Fiscal Contingency Plan.
This activity, planning for housing production, is presently allowed under the State and Local
emergency orders associated with COVID-19. This Project, the EIR, and associated staff work,
will be reimbursed by the Developer directly or indirectly through fees and therefore consistent
with the guidance of the City's Fiscal Health Contingency Plan.
Next Steps
Once all application materials are collected and the project applications are deemed complete,
and environmental review has been conducted pursuant to CEQA, public hearings will be
scheduled before the ALUC and Architectural Review Commission (ARC). The ARC will
provide a recommendation to the Planning Commission (PC). The PC will review the project and
associated entitlements for consistency with the General Plan, Zoning Regulations, and
applicable City development standards and guidelines, with a recommendation to City Council
for final action. Associated entitlements are envisioned at this time to include: Environmental
Impact Determination, General Plan Map Amendment (includes rezoning), Specific Plan
Amendment, Minor Subdivision, Minor Use Permit, and Development Review (Major).
Public Engagement
Consistent with the City's Public Engagement and Noticing (PEN) Manual and the City's
Municipal Code, the project was noticed per the City's notification requirements for
Development Projects. Newspaper legal advertisements were posted in the New Times ten days
prior to the hearing. Additionally, postcards were sent to both tenants and owners of properties
located within 300 feet of the project site ten days before the hearing.
Item 3
Packet Page 128
CONCURRENCE
The project was previously reviewed by other City Departments through a pre-application
meeting held on June 6, 2019 including Community Development (Planning and Engineering)
and Public Works (Transportation), Fire, Building, Utilities, and Administration (Natural
Resources). No additional concurrence has occurred at this time as further review from the other
departments is dependent on the results of the Council initiation. The project entitlements will be
routed to the various City Departments to ensure that staff has adequate information for a
complete application to evaluate the project and identify any conflicts with City standards or
guidelines. All City Departments will be providing comments that will be incorporated into the
staff reports and recommended resolution/ordinance as conditions of the project.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The CEQA does not apply to the recommended action in this report because the action does not
constitute a "Project" under CEQA Guidelines Sec. 15378. Future applications for entitlements
will be subject to CEQA at the time the applications are filed.
FISCAL IMPACT
Budgeted: Yes Budget Year: N/ A
Funding Identified: No
Fiscal Analysis:
Current Remaining Annual
Total Budget Funding Balance Ongoing Cost
Funding Sources Available Request
General Fund NIA
State
Federal
Fees
Other:
Total
There is no fiscal impact associated with initiating project applications. The developer will
reimburse the City for all staff and consultant fees associated with processing the applications.
As part of the applications, the applicant will be required to prepare a fiscal impact study that
would analyze the project's effects on the City. Due to the size of the project, the applicant will
be paying for actual costs for staff and consultant time rather than a flat fee to process all of the
required permits and to coordinate the preparation of an EIR.
Item 3
Packet Page 129
ALTERNATIVES
1.Deny the consideration of the application. The Council should provide findings in reference
to specific General Plan provisions that identify the project as inconsistent with overall
General Plan policy direction.
a.Decline to authorize the RFP or deferred to a future time.
2.Continue consideration of the application to a future date. The Council can continue review
of the project to a future meeting. If this alternative is taken, the Council should provide
direction to staff regarding additional information needed to provide further direction
regarding the project application.
a.Provide direction regarding an amended RFP and continue authorization of the RFP to a
date uncertain. This alternative is recommended if the City Council would like to review
and consider major revisions to the RFP.
3.Initiate the proiect application and provide direction regarding an amended RFP. The
Council may authorize the RFP based on finalization and approval by the Community
Development Director. This alternative is recommended if the Council provides direction
resulting in minor revisions to the RFP.
Attachments:
a -Request for Proposal to Prepare EIR
b - COUNCIL READING FILE -Project Proposal
Item 3
Packet Page 130
Tuesday April 21, 2020
Regular Meeting of the City Council
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo City Council was called to order on Tuesday, April 21,
2020 at 6:01 p.m. by Mayor Harmon, with all Council Members teleconferencing.
ROLL CALL
Council Members
Present: Council Members Carlyn Christianson, Andy Pease, Erica A. Stewart,
Vice Mayor Aaron Gomez, and Mayor Heidi Harmon.
Absent: None
City Staff
Present: Derek Johnson, City Manager; Christine Dietrick, City Attorney; and Teresa
Purrington, City Clerk; were present at Roll Call.
PRESENTATIONS
1. SEXUAL ASSAULT AWARENESS MONTH PROCLAMATION
Mayor Harmon presented a Proclamation declaring April to be “Sexual Assault Awareness
Month” to RISE.
2. ECONOMIC RECOVERY AND RESILIENCY PROJECT PLAN PRESENTATION
City Manager Derek Johnson and Assistant City Manager Shelly Stanwyck presented a
PowerPoint on the Economic Recovery and Resiliency Project Plan.
PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
None
End of Public Comment---
CONSENT AGENDA
ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER STEWART, SECOND BY COUNCIL
MEMBER CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 5-0 to approve Consent Calendar Items 3 thru 7.
3. WAIVE READING IN FULL OF ALL RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
CARRIED 5-0, to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances as appropriate.
Item 3
Packet Page 131
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of April 21, 2020 Page 2
4. MINUTES REVIEW – APRIL 7, 2020 CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CARRIED 5-0, to approve the minutes of the City Council meeting held on April 7, 2020.
5. AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE ON-CALL SERVICES REQUEST FOR
QUALIFICATIONS – STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES
CARRIED 5-0, to:
1. Approve the Request for Qualifications (RFQ) to provide Structural Engineering Design
Services, Specification No. 5009.2020.SE; and
2. Authorize the City Manager to execute agreements with selected consulting firms; and
3. Authorize the Finance Director to execute and amend Purchase Orders for individual
consultant service contracts not-to-exceed the authorized project budget; and
4. Authorize the City Engineer to amend or extend the agreement for services in accordance
with its terms and within the available annual budget.
6. AGREEMENT WITH ASCENT ENVIRONMENTAL TO PREPARE THE
COMPREHENSIVE HAZARD AND VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENTS AND
ADAPTATION STRATEGIES FOR THE GENERAL PLAN SAFETY ELEMENT
RESILIENT SAN LUIS OBISPO)
CARRIED 5-0, to authorize the Community Development Director to enter into an agreement
with Ascent Environmental in the amount of $287,500 to prepare the comprehensive hazard
and vulnerability assessments and adaptation strategies for the General Plan Safety Element
update funded through the Caltrans Climate Change Adaptation Grant, “Resilient SLO.”
7. RECEIVE AND FILE THE 2020 AFFORDABLE HOUSING NEXUS STUDY
CARRIED 5-0, to receive and file the 2020 Affordable Housing Nexus Study, which
completes a significant Housing Major City Goal task.
RECESS
Council recessed at 7:10 p.m. and reconvened at 7:22 p.m., with all Council Members present.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS AND BUSINESS ITEMS
8. INITIATION OF A PROJECT TO REZONE A PROPERTY FROM BP -SP TO C-S-
SP TO ALLOW FOR A MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CONSISTING OF
280 RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND 15,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL SPACE
AND AUTHORIZATION OF A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR THE
PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Council Members Pease noted her Ex Parte Communication with Steve Pack, Applicant’s
Representative regarding the project. Council Member Christianson, Council Member
Stewart, Vice Mayor Gomez, and Mayor Harmon reported having no Ex Parte
Communications.
Community Development Director Michael Codron and Associate Planner Kyle Bell provided
an in-depth staff report and responded to Council questions.
Item 3
Packet Page 132
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of April 21, 2020 Page 3
Public Comments:
Stephen Peck
End of Public Comment---
ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER PEASE, SECOND BY COUNCIL
MEMBER CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 5-0 to:
1. Proceed the processing of the Project through the entitlement process; and
2. Authorize the issuance of a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the preparation of an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Project and related entitlements; and
3. Authorize the City Manager to enter into a consultant services agreement with the
consultant that best responds to the RFP in terms of qualifications, cost, and approach, that
is funded (consultant and staff costs) solely by the Applicant.
With the added direction to include requested changes by the Applicant, staff to work toward
a Development Agreement or other enforceable mechanism, with the applicant to accomplish
the infrastructure scope, the locals preference and other areas as determined by staff and to
include early feedback from the Active Transportation Committee and Planning Commission
for the conceptual review and scoping.
9. APPROVAL OF THE UPDATED EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN AS THE
COMPREHENSIVE DISASTER LEADERSHIP PLAN
Fire Chief Keith Aggson and Management Analyst James Blattler provided an in-depth staff
report and responded to Council questions.
Public Comments:
None
End of Public Comment---
ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER STEWART, SECOND BY COUNCIL
MEMBER CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 5-0 to approve the Comprehensive Disaster
Leadership Plan (CDLP) as the updated 2011 Emergency Operations Plan (EOP).
10. 2020 LEGISLATIVE PLATFORM
City Attorney Christine Dietrick provided an in-depth staff report and responded to Council
questions.
Public Comments:
None
End of Public Comment---
Item 3
Packet Page 133
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of April 21, 2020 Page 4
ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTIANSON, SECOND BY VICE
MAYOR GOMEZ, CARRIED 5-0 to:
1.Adopt Resolution No. 11112 (2020 Series) entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council
of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, establishing the City Legislative Action
Platform for 2020 and appointing the council member and staff person to act as liaison
between the City of San Luis Obispo and the League of California Cities;” and
2.Appoint the Mayor, City Attorney, and City Manager to act as the primary legislative
liaisons between the League of California Cities and the City of San Luis Obispo.
With changes proposed during the meeting.
11.DISCUSS AND PROVIDE DIRECTION REGARDING PROCLAIMING THE
CONTINUED EXISTENCE OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY REGARDING COVID-19
PANDEMIC
City Manager Derek Johnson provided an in-depth staff report and responded to Council
questions.
Public Comments:
None
End of Public Comment---
ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER PEASE, SECOND BY COUNCIL
MEMBER CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 5-0 to adopt Resolution No. 11113 (2020 Series)
entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo,
California, proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding the COVID-
19 Pandemic.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9:10 p.m. The next Regular City Council Meeting is scheduled for
Tuesday, May 5, 2020 at 6:00 p.m., via teleconference.
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk
APPROVED BY COUNCIL: 05/05/2020
Item 3
Packet Page 134
CityofSanLuisObispo, Agenda, Planning Commission
Agenda
ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
Thursday, July 16, 2020
6:00 p.m. REGULAR MEETING Teleconference
Based on the threat of COVID-19 as reflected in the Proclamations of Emergency issued by both the Governor
of the State of California, the San Luis Obispo County Emergency Services Director and the City Council of the
City of San Luis Obispo as well as the Governor’s Executive Order N-29-20 issued on March 17, 2020, relating
to the convening of public meetings in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the City of San Luis Obispo will
be holding all public meetings via teleconference. There will be no physical location for the Public to view
the meeting. Below are instructions on how to view the meeting remotely and how to leave public comment.
Additionally, members of the Active Transportation Committee are allowed to attend the meeting via
teleconference and to participate in the meeting to the same extent as if they were present.
Using the most rapid means of communication available at this time, members of the public are
encouraged to participate in Council meetings in the following ways:
1.Remote Viewing - Members of the public who wish to watch the meeting can view:
View the Webinar:
Registration URL: https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/6454527288375917837
Webinar ID: 915-314-723
2.Public Comment - The Active Transportation Committee will still be accepting public comment. Public
comment can be submitted in the following ways:
Mail or Email Public Comment
Received by 3:00 PM on the day of meeting - Can be submitted via email to advisorybodies@slocity.org or
U.S. Mail to City Clerk at 990 Palm St. San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Emails sent after 3:00 PM and up until public comment is opened on the item – will be archived and
distributed to Advisory Body members the day after the meeting. Emails will not be read aloud during meetings.
Verbal Public Comment
o Received by 3:00 PM on the day of the meeting - Call (805) 781-7164; state and spell your name, the
agenda item number you are calling about and leave your comment. The verbal comments must be limited
to 3 minutes. All voicemails will be forwarded to the Committee Members and saved as Agenda
Correspondence. Voicemails will not be played during the meeting
o During the meeting – Verbal comments may be made by joining the webinar (instructions above).
Verbal comments are limited to three minutes.
Item 3
Packet Page 135
Active Transportation Committee Agenda July 16, 2020 Page 2
All comments submitted will be placed into the administrative record of the meeting.
MISSION: The purpose of the Active Transportation Committee (ATC) is to provide oversight
and policy direction on matters related to bicycle and pedestrian transportation in San Luis Obispo
and its relationship to bicycling and walking outside the City.
CALL TO ORDER: Chair Jonathan Roberts
ROLL CALL : Committee Members Thomas Arndt, Lea Brooks (vice chair), Donette
Dunaway, Timothy Jouet, Briana Martenies, Russell Mills, Jonathan Roberts
chair)
PUBLIC COMMENT: At this time, people may address the Committee about items not on the
agenda. Persons wishing to speak should come forward and state their name and address.
Comments are limited to three minutes per person. Items raised at this time are generally referred
to staff and, if action by the Committee is necessary, may be scheduled for a future meeting.
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
1. Minutes of the June 11, 2020 Special Meeting
ACTION ITEM
2. 600 TANK FARM ROAD ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES
BELL – 60 MINUTES)
1) BACKGROUND
A project at 600 Tank Farm Road has been initiated to redevelop 11.1 acres at the northeast corner
of Tank Farm Road and the designated location for realignment of Santa Fe Rd. The applicant has
submitted a conceptual application as an early review of the project prior to the formal application
submission process. Given the early stage of the approval process, this meeting is intended to
receive comments on active transportation issues that should be considered as the application
develops further and work begins on the environmental study.
2) PROJECT INFORMATION
The 600 Tank Farm site is comprised of two separate parcels: APN: 053-421-06 and APN: 053-
421-02. The project site is currently zoned Business Park within the Airport Area Specific Plan
AASP). The AASP prohibits residential uses at this location and the project application proposes
to amend the AASP and rezone the property to Commercial Services zone to allow for a mixed
use project, similar to what has been proposed on the adjacent property at 650 Tank Farm. The
mixed-use project consists of 280 residential units and approximately 15,000 square feet of
Item 3
Packet Page 136
Active Transportation Committee Agenda July 16, 2020 Page 3
commercial space. The residential units are provided within three different housing types: 140
townhomes, 100 stacked flat units, and 40 studio and one-bedroom units over the commercial
structures.
3) PROPOSED BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
As described in the Conceptual Application submitted by the applicant (See Attachment 2), the
bicycle and pedestrian facilities proposed as part of the development project are summarized as
follows:
Tank Farm Road Widening
o Widen westbound direction along the project frontage per Airport Area Specific
Plan (AASP) to provide:
2 westbound auto lanes
Width for center median/turn lane
Sidewalk with parkway
Class IV sidewalk-level cycle track (Modified from AASP, which
proposed Class II bike lanes)
Class I path between north-south creek path and Tank Farm/Santa Fe
intersection
Santa Fe Road Extension to the North
o New extension of Santa Fe Road north of Tank Farm, aligned west of the existing
Santa Fe Road alignment south of Tank Farm. Will ultimately connect with Prado
Road extension to the north. Cross section includes:
2 auto lanes (Modified from AASP, which proposes 4 auto lanes)
Center median/turn lane
Sidewalks with parkway (interim installation w/ no sidewalk on west
side—to be completed by Chevron development)
Class IV protected bike lanes (Modified from AASP, which proposed
Class II bike lanes. Interim installation with Class II bike lane on west
side—to be upgraded to Class IV with Chevron development)
Tank Farm/Santa Fe Extension Intersection
o New roundabout (traffic study will guide sizing/geometrics)
North-South Creek Path
o New north-south Class I path along west side of creek, connecting Tank Farm
Road north to Damon Garcia Park pathways
Connection to Adjacent 650 Tank Farm
o Proposed ped/bike/emergency access only bridge to adjacent 650 Tank Farm
development to the east.
Since the City’s Active Transportation Plan has not yet been adopted by the City Council, the
proposed facilities will be evaluated for consistency with the currently adopted Bicycle
Transportation Plan. Proposed bicycle facilities in the current Bicycle Transportation Plan relative
to this project include a Class I Shared Use Path on Tank Farm Road, a north-south Class I path
along the creek connecting to Damon Garcia Sports Fields, Class II bike lanes on Santa Fe Road,
and retaining existing Class II bike lanes on Tank Farm. As shown in the above summary list, the
applicant proposes to upgrade facilities in several locations to align with the preliminary concepts
presented as part of the ATP, which prioritize Class IV protected bike lanes along collector and
arterial streets.
Item 3
Packet Page 137
Active Transportation Committee Agenda July 16, 2020 Page 4
Additional summary maps are provided in Attachment 3 to help convey the proposed pedestrian
and bicycle connectivity within the greater vicinity of the proposed project site.
Staff Recommendation: Receive initial comments on the 600 Tank Farm project as submitted by
the applicant regarding the project’s consistency with the Bicycle Transportation Plan.
Attachment 2: 600 Tank Farm Rd Conceptual Application
Attachment 3: 600 Tank Farm Rd Maps
ACTION ITEM
3. CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FOR COMMUNITY RECOVERY
FUKUSHIMA – 45 MINUTES)
The Public Review DRAFT Climate Action Plan (CAP) for Community Recovery is currently
open for review. The CAP establishes a community-wide goal of carbon neutrality by 2035,
adopts sector specific goals, and provides foundational actions to establish a trajectory towards
achieving that goal while also recovering from the economic impacts of COVID-19.
Regarding Active Transportation, the CAP sets the policy framework as well as certain actions
for achieving climate neutrality by 2035 including:
Connected 1.1 – Establish a consistent method for tracking and reporting mode split metrics.
Connected 1.2 – Research and develop an approach to a “Mobility as a Service” platform for
people to easily use all modes of low carbon mobility in the City.
Connected 2.1 – Complete Active Transportation plan and begin implementation immediately.
Connected 2.2 – Launch micro mobility program by 2021
See Attachment 4 for an excerpt on the CAP on Pillar 4: Connected Community for more detail
on these actions.
The complete Public Review Draft of the CAP can be found at:
https://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/city-administration/office-of-
sustainability/climate-action/climate-action-plan-1949
In January 2019, the ATC received an update on the CAP. At this meeting, the ATC can provide
comments on the Public Review DRAFT. The document is open for public review until July 22nd
and the City Council will consider adoption on August 18th.
Staff Recommendation: Receive comments from the committee on the Public Review DRAFT
Climate Action Plan.
Attachment 4: CAP Pillar 4: Connected Community
ADJOURNMENT
Item 3
Packet Page 138
Active Transportation Committee Agenda July 16, 2020 Page 5
The next Regular Meeting of the Active Transportation Committee is scheduled for
Thursday , September 17 , 20 20, at 6:00 p.m., by teleconference.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Minutes of the June 11, 2020 Special Meeting
2. 600 Tank Farm Rd Conceptual Application
3. 600 Tank Farm Rd Maps
4. CAP Pillar 4: Connected Community
The City of San Luis Obispo wishes to make all of its public meetings accessible to the
public. Upon request, this agenda will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to
persons with disabilities. Any person with a disability who requires a modification or
accommodation in order to participate in a meeting should direct such request to the City Clerk’s
Office at (805) 781-7100 at least 48 hours before the meeting, if possible. Telecommunications
Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7107.
Agenda related writings and documents are available online or for public inspection at the Public
Works Department, 919 Palm Street, SLO. Meeting audio recordings can be found at the following
web address:
http://opengov.slocity.org/WebLink/1/fol/60965/Row1.aspx
Item 3
Packet Page 139
Minutes – Active Transportation Committee Meeting of July 16, 2020 Page 1
Minutes
ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
Thursday, July 16, 2020
Regular Meeting of the Active Transportation Committee
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Committee was called to order
on Thursday, July 16, 2020 at 6:05 p.m. via teleconference by Chair Roberts.
ROLL CALL
Present: Committee Members Thomas Arndt, Lea Brooks (vice chair), Timothy Jouet (joined
at 6:10), Briana Martenies, Russell Mills, and Jonathan Roberts (chair)
Absent: Donette Dunaway
Staff: Active Transportation Manager Adam Fukushima, Associate Planner Kyle Bell, and
Recording Secretary Lareina Gamboa
PUBLIC COMMENT ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
None.
--End of Public Comment--
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. Review Minutes of the Active Transportation Committee Meeting of June 11, 2020:
ACTION: UPON MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER BROOKS, SECONDED BY
COMMITTEE MEMBER MILLS, CARRIED 5-0-2 (COMMITTEE MEMBERS
DUNAWAY AND JOUET ABSENT), to approve the Minutes of the Active Transportation
Committee Meeting of June 11, 2020, as presented.
Public Comment
None.
--End of Public Comment--
ACTION ITEMS
2. 600 Tank Farm Road Active Transportation Facilities
Associate Planner Kyle Bell and Active Transportation Manager Fukushima provided a
presentation and responded to Committee inquiries in regards to the 600 Tank Farm Road mixed-
use development and its relation to Active Transportation projects in the city. The applicant for
Item 3
Packet Page 140
Minutes – Active Transportation Committee Meeting of July 16, 2020 Page 2
the project, represented by Darin Cabral from RRM Design Group, also provided a presentation
and responded to questions.
ACTION: UPON MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER BROOKS, SECONDED BY
COMMITTEE MEMBER ARNDT, CARRIED 6-0-1 (COMMITTEE MEMBER
DUNAWAY ABSENT), to recommend providing committee suggestions to staff and the
applicant for consideration as the project progresses.
Public Comment
None.
--End of Public Comment--
3. Climate Action Plan For Community Recovery
Active Transportation Manager Fukushima provided a PowerPoint presentation and
responded to Committee inquiries in regards to the Climate Action Plan for Community
Recovery and its relation to the Active Transportation Plan.
Public Comment
None.
--End of Public Comment--
ACTION: UPON MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER ARNDT, SECONDED BY
COMMITTEE MEMBER BROOKS, CARRIED 6-0-1 (COMMITTEE MEMBER
DUNAWAY ABSENT), to thank City staff for their work putting together the Climate
Action Plan, and moves to request that the list of Climate Action Plan comments recorded
during the meeting be included for consideration.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m. The next Regular Active Transportation Committee
meeting is scheduled for Thursday, September 17, 2020 at 6:00 p.m., by teleconference.
APPROVED BY THE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE: 08/20/2020
Item 3
Packet Page 141
July 16, 2020 -- Active Transportation Committee
Comments on 600 Tank Farm
Committee Member Lea Brooks
1) The project should consider bicycle and pedestrian connections along Tank
Farm Rd to improve east-west connections between Higuera and Broad Streets
2) The project should study bicycle and pedestrian impacts to the Broad/Tank
Farm Rd intersection
3) Concerned about connecting the Acacia Creek Path to a wrong way Class IV
bikeway
4) Consider the potential of connecting Clarion Court to Fiero Lane as an
alternative to Tank Farm Road for bikes and peds
5) If Hawthorne Elementary is the designated school for this site, consider how
children will walk and bike there
6) Consider what possible role a bridge across the Railroad Safety Trail at
Industrial Way could do to provide access to the east side of the railroad tracks
7) Consider the role that bike lanes on Industrial Road could play to improve
access to the site and avoid busy arterial streets like Tank Farm
8) Concerned about the impact widening Tank Farm Road to 5 lanes would have
on bicycle and pedestrian comfort levels.
Committee Member Thomas Arndt
1) Suggests the design of roundabout at Tank Farm / Santa Fe should separate bike
and ped modes
2) Requests that the Acacia Creek Path have adequate connections to other
bikeway and pedestrian facilities
3) Suggests considering other options before using bollards on the bike/ped bridge
across creek to 650 Tank Farm. If bollards are the only option, make safe as
possible.
Item 3
Packet Page 142
4) Avoid bike facility designs that encourage wrong way riding.
Committee Member Russell Mills
1) Recommends avoiding multilane road on Tank Farm to minimize bike/ped
impacts. Consider not widening Tank Farm Road for multilanes
2) Ensure adequate sidewalk connections throughout internal development
3) Suggests more separation than 2 feet between Class IV bikeway and motor
traffic. Suggests adding a parkway between the bike and motor vehicle modes.
Committee Member Briana Marteneis
1) Recommends that pathways for pedestrians throughout the development are
direct
Committee Member Tim Jouet
1) Please look for ways to incorporate design elements of the forthcoming Active
Transportation Plan as much as possible into the project
2) Recommends to incorporate slower roadway speeds where possible
3) Consider locating the bridge to 650 Tank Farm farther north
4) Please provide more separation between ped/bike/motor vehicle modes on Tank
Farm Road cross section
Committee Member Jonathan Roberts
1) Suggests that a lot of thought be put into how the project will provide good
bike/ped connectivity to destinations outside of the project
Item 3
Packet Page 143
Meeting Date: August 17, 2020
Item Number: 2
Item No. 1
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION REPORT
FROM: Shawna Scott, Senior Planner BY: Kyle Bell, Associate Planner
PROJECT ADDRESS: 600 Tank Farm FILE NUMBER: ARCH-0216-2020
APPLICANT: Covelop Holding, LLC REPRESENTATIVE: Stephen Peck
For more information contact: (Kyle Bell) at 781-7524 or kbell@slocity.org
1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND SETTING
The project application includes proposals to amend the General Plan and Airport Area Specific Plan
(AASP) to rezone the property to Commercial Services (C-S-SP) zone to allow for a mixed- use project,
similar to what has been proposed on the adjacent property 650 Tank Farm. The mixed-use project
consists of 280 residential units and approximately 15,000 square feet (SF) of commercial space. The
residential units are provided within three different housing types: 140 townhomes, 100 stacked flat
units, and 40 studio and one- bedroom units over the commercial structures. The townhome and
stacked flat units are intended as ownership units, while the mixed-use units will likely be a rental
product (Attachment 1, Project Plans).
General Location: The site is composed
of 11.1 contiguous acres at the
northeast corner of the designated
Santa Fe re-alignment and Tank Farm
Road. The site slopes from the
northwest to southeast. Acacia Creek
borders the project on the east.
Present Use: Off-site Vehicle Storage
Zoning: Business Park within the Airport
Area Specific Plan (BP-SP)
General Plan: Business Park
Surrounding Uses:
East: Mobile Home Park
West: Undeveloped County Land
North: Damien Garcia Sports Fields
South: Undeveloped County Land
2.0 PROPOSED DESIGN
Design details: Contemporary architecture, with gable roofs with exposed rafters, and flat/shed roofs
for commercial structures, covered entries and balconies, internal landscape pedestrian corridors
Materials: Stucco siding, horizontal/vertical lap siding, wood panels, metal and composite roofs (colors
and materials board not available at this time).
Figure 1: Subject Property
Item 3
Packet Page 144
ARCH-0216-2020 (600 Tank Farm)
Page 2
3.0 NEXT STEPS
The project was conceptually reviewed by the Active Transportation Committee (ATC) on July 17,
2020. Following this ARC conceptual review the project will be scheduled for conceptual review by the
Planning Commission (PC). Following conceptual review, the applicant will consider feedback from the
ATC, ARC, and PC and prepare a formal application for complete review. Once all application materials
are collected and the project is deemed complete, and environmental review has been completed,
the project will proceed with review hearings to be scheduled before the Cultural Heritage Committee
(CHC), ARC, County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC), PC, and City Council for final review of the
project.
4.0 FOCUS OF REVIEW
The ARC’s role is to review the project for consistency with the Community Design Guidelines, AASP
and applicable City policies and standards, to provide the applicant and staff with initial feedback on
the proposed conceptual design.
Community Design Guidelines: https://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=2104
Airport Area Specific Plan: http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=4294
5.0 AASP DESIGN GUIDELINES/DISCUSSION ITEMS
Highlighted Sections Discussion Items
AASP Chapter 5 – Community Design
§ Goal 5.1 Building Orientation
and Setback
The AASP states that buildings should be designed with a well-defined
streetscape edge that unifies and enhances the character of the
development areas and that supports pedestrian activity through its
site planning and design. The ARC should provide initial feedback
regarding the location of buildings and parking areas as viewed from
the public right-of-way.
Figure 2: Rendering internal of the residential portion of the project
Item 3
Packet Page 145
ARCH-0216-2020 (600 Tank Farm)
Page 3
§ Goal 5.4 Parking
The AASP states that vehicular parking areas should be designed to be
in scale with and visually subordinate to the development and
landscape setting. The ARC should discuss the proposed parking layout
in terms of minimizing the visual impact associated with large areas of
parking and pedestrian circulation.
§ Goals 5.9-14 Architectural
Character
The AASP is designated to be primarily a “work” environment (as
opposed to a retail or residential environment). Given the business,
service, and manufacturing uses proposed for the area, “function” will
typically be the primary generator of built form for future development,
but this does not suggest that the aesthetic character is any less
important. The ARC should provide initial feedback regarding
architectural styles as portrayed in the conceptual renderings of the
project.
CDG Chapter 5 – Residential Project Design Guidelines
§ 5.4: Multi-Family and Clustered
Housing Design
The CDG states that multi-family and clustered housing projects tend to
generate larger parking areas and provide less private open space. If
not properly designed, parking can dominate a multi-family site, and
open space may only be provided as “left over” areas, unrelated to
other project features, that are not usable for outdoor activities, and
expose residents to uncomfortable noise levels. The ARC should discuss
the residential layout and of the multi-family structures specifically in
regard to common and private open space areas, proximity to the creek
and other pedestrian circulation areas.
6.0 PROJECT STATISTICS/ASSOCIATED STUDIES
The application provided to assist with the conceptual review does not include sufficient information
to determine compliance with all development standards relevant to the project site (i.e. setbacks, lot
coverage, floor area ratio, etc.), the list below is a partial list of development standards that were
identifiable in the project plans.
Site Details Proposed Allowed/Required*
Creek Setback 35 feet 35 feet
Maximum Height of Structures 35 feet 35 feet
Density Units (DU) 255.52 DU 266.4 DU
Total # Parking Spaces 458 (8% reduction) 497
*2019 Zoning Regulations & AASP Development Standards
7.0 ATTACHMENTS
7.1 Project Description
7.2 Project Plans
Item 3
Packet Page 146
Minutes
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
Monday, August 17, 2020
Regular Meeting of the Architectural Review Commission
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the Architectural Review Commission was called to order on Monday,
August 17, 2020 at 5:00 p.m. via teleconference, by Chair Allen Root.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Michael DeMartini, Micah Smith, Vice Chair Christie Withers and
Chair Allen Root
Absent: Commissioners Richard Beller and Mandi Pickens
Staff: Senior Planner Shawna Scott and Deputy City Clerk Megan Wilbanks
PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
None
End of Public Comment--
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
1.Minutes of the Architectural Review Commission meeting of August 3, 2020.
ACTION: MOTION BY VICE CHAIR WITHERS, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER
SMITH CARRIED 4-0-2 (Commissioners Beller and Pickens absent), to approve the minutes
of the Architectural Review Commission meeting of August 3, 2020.
Item 3
Packet Page 147
Minutes – Architectural Review Commission Meeting of August 17, 2020 Page 2
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2.Project address: 650 Tank Farm Road; Case #: ARCH-0755-2019; Zone: C-S-SP; Agera
Grove Investments, LLC, owner/applicant. Review of a mixed-use development that
includes a 17,500 square foot, two-story commercial structure, 249 residential units that are
housed within 18, three-story structures, and a 4,325 square-feet single story clubhouse with a
creek setback exception request to allow a third-floor creek setback of 0 feet where 10 feet is
normally required. The project is consistent with a Mitigated Negative Declaration of
Environmental Review, adopted on February 5, 2019.
Contract Planner Brandi Cummings presented the staff report and responded to Commissioner
inquiries.
Applicant representatives, Pam Ricci and Scott Martin with RRM Design Group, responded to
Commissioner inquiries.
Public Comments:
None
End of Public Comment--
ACTION: MOTION BY VICE CHAIR WITHERS, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER
DEMARTINI CARRIED 4-0-2 (Commissioners Beller and Pickens absent), to recommend
that the Planning Commission approve the project with the following recommendations:
Vary the backside elevations of Townhome Buildings A and F (the side where garages
interface with the drive aisle) to address articulation and massing.
Suggestions include: adjusting tonality and brickwork, providing contrast, providing
materiality, applying a mix of techniques and aesthetic details, and demonstrating a higher
level of attention to provide four-sided architecture.
3.Project address: 600 Tank Farm Road; Case #: ARCH-0216- 2020; Zone: BP-SP;
Covelop Holdings, LLC, applicant. Conceptual review of a mixed-use project consisting of
280 residential units and 15,000 square feet of commercial space, the project also includes an
amendment to the Airport Area Specific Plan to rezone the property from Business Park (BP -
SP) to Commercial Services (C-S-SP), and an associated and a General Plan Map Amendment.
The project will include preparation of an Environmental Impact Report.
Associate Planner Kyle Bell presented the staff report and responded to Commissioner
inquiries.
Applicant representative, Scott Martin with RRM Design Group and Damien Mavis with
Covelop, responded to Commissioner inquiries.
Item 3
Packet Page 148
Minutes – Architectural Review Commission Meeting of August 17, 2020 Page 3
Public Comments:
None
End of Public Comment--
ACTION: BY CONSENSUS (COMMISSIONERS BELLER AND PICKENS ABSENT)
THE COMMISSION PROVIDED THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE
APPLICANT:
Incorporate more open space between the parking area and the commercial building
creating a plaza for patrons of the commercial businesses.
Incorporate more recessed windows to add articulation.
Identify fencing along Acacia Creek, promote Acacia Creek to be accessible to residents
as open space.
Consider ways to engage the street along the commercial building to encourage exterior
space along Tank Farm.
Consider adding small patios that relate to the retail use.
The residential and retail buildings would benefit from a common color pallet or more
compatible architectural styles.
Incorporate a serpentine pattern to the drive aisles on the site plan.
Create an interfacing element between the wood siding and the shed roof on the residential
units.
Incorporate a pronounced rafter tail (similar to the SESLOC building) on the edges of the
buildings to tie the commercial space with the residential.
4.Project Address: 830 Orcutt Road; Case #: ARCH-0764-2019, AFFH-0210-2020, USE-
0209-2020; Zone: Commercial Services (C-S) zone; 830 Orcutt, LLC, owner/applicant.
Continued review of a mixed-use project consisting of 15 residential units and 1,500 square
feet of commercial space within the Commercial Services (C-S) zone. The project includes a
density bonus of 20% including a request for an alternative incentive to relax development
standards for the creek setback requirement to allow a two foot setback, where 20 feet is
normally required, a request to allow residential uses on the ground floor within the first 50
feet of the structure along the street frontage, and a request for a 10 percent parking reduction.
Project is categorically exempt from environmental review (CEQA).
Associate Planner Kyle Bell presented the staff report and responded to Commissioner
inquiries.
Applicant representative, Bryan Ridley with Bracket Architecture, responded to Commissioner
inquiries.
Public Comments:
Karla Hodgson
End of Public Comment--
Item 3
Packet Page 149
Minutes – Architectural Review Commission Meeting of August 17, 2020 Page 4
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SMITH, SECOND BY VICE CHAIR
WITHERS CARRIED 4-0-2 (Commissioners Beller and Pickens absent), to recommend that
the Planning Commission approve the project with the following recommendations to the
applicant:
Consider improving the rhythm of the siding over the drive aisle by changing the material
pattern to A-B-A-B (wood versus Indigo) rather than A-B-B-B.
Considering incorporating planters to create a vehicle buffer around the garages and to
introduce vertical landscaping to soften the architecture along the drive aisle.
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION
Senior Planner Shawna Scott provided a brief agenda forecast.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 7:35 p.m. The next rescheduled Regular Meeting of the
Architectural Review Commission is scheduled for Monday, September 14, 2020 at 5:00 p.m. via
teleconference.
APPROVED BY THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION: 09/14/2020
Item 3
Packet Page 150