HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-09-2022 PC Agenda Packet
Planning Commission
AGENDA
Wednesday, February 9, 2022, 6:00 p.m.
Teleconference - Broadcast via Webinar
Pursuant to Executive Orders N-60-20 and N-08-21 executed by the Governor of California, and
subsequently Assembly Bill 361, enacted in response to the state of emergency relating to novel
coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and enabling teleconferencing accommodations by
suspending or waiving specified provisions in the Ralph M. Brown Act (Government Code § 54950 et
seq.), commissioners and members of the public may participate in this regular meeting by
teleconference.
Using the most rapid means of communication available at this time, members of the public are
encouraged to participate in Planning Commission meetings in the following ways:
Remote Viewing - Members of the public who wish to watch the meeting can view:
View the Webinar (recommended for the best viewing quality):
URL: https://slocity-
org.zoom.us/j/86961953124?pwd=V2F3RFd4UUI1OWFWN0ttK3VDYlUzZz09
Telephone Attendee: +1 (669) 900-6833
Webinar ID: 869 6195 3124; Passcode: 105749
Note: The City utilizes Zoom Webinar for City Council Meetings. All attendees will enter
the meeting muted. Prior to joining the meeting, consider reviewing the following tutorials:
Joining a Zoom Meeting, Zoom Audio & Video Basics, Basic In-Meeting Navigation
Televised live on Charter Cable Channel 20
View a livestream of the meeting on the City’s YouTube channel: http://youtube.slo.city
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. All emails will be archived/distributed to Commissioners, however, submissions
after 3:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting may not be archived/distributed until the
following day. Emails will not be read aloud during the meeting.
Verbal Public Comment
In Advance 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 Commissioners and saved
as Agenda Correspondence. Voicemails will not be played during the meeting.
During the meeting – Join the webinar (instructions above). Once public comment for the
item you would like to speak on is called, please raise your virtual hand, your name will be
called, and your microphone will be unmuted. If you have questions, contact the office of
the City Clerk at cityclerk@slocity.org or (805) 781-7100.
Pages
1.CALL TO ORDER
Chair Jorgensen will call the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission to
order.
2.PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
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.
3.CONSENT
Matters appearing on the Consent Calendar are expected to be non-
controversial and will be acted upon at one time. A member of the public may
request the Planning Commission to pull an item for discussion. The public may
comment on any and all items on the Consent Agenda within the three-minute
time limit.
Recommendation:
To approve Consent Item 3a.
3.a.CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES - DECEMBER 8, 2021 PLANNING
COMMISSION MINUTES
5
Consideration of the Planning Commission Minutes of December 8,
2021.
4.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 hearing. 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.
4.a.55 BROAD AND 625 RAMONA (ARCH-0386-2020) REVIEW OF A
NEW 79,492 SF, THREE TO FOUR STORY PROJECT CONSISTING
OF 59 ROOMS BETWEEN TWO STRUCTURES FOR THE
RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITY KNOWN AS THE VILLAGES.
9
Recommendation:
Adopt the Draft Resolution adopting the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration and approving the project, based on findings and subject to
conditions of approval.
4.b.1146 FARMHOUSE (SBDV-0781-2021) REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE AN
EXISTING 5.09-ACRE PROPERTY INTO A TWO LOT COMMERCIAL
SUBDIVISION (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SLOAL 21-0025)
183
Recommendation:
Adopt the Draft Resolution approving the project and associated
Addendum to the Senn-Glick IS/MND, based on findings and subject to
conditions of approval.
5.COMMENT AND DISCUSSION
5.a.STAFF UPDATES AND AGENDA FORECAST
Receive a brief update from Deputy Community Development Director
Tyler Corey.
6.ADJOURNMENT
The next Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for
February 23, 2022 at 6:00 p.m. via teleconference.
LISTENING ASSISTIVE DEVICES for the hearing impaired--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 meetings are televised live on Charter Channel 20 and on
the City's YouTube Channel: http://youtube.slo.city. Agenda related writings or
documents provided to the Planning Commission are available for public
inspection on the City’s website: https://www.slocity.org/government/advisory-
bodies/agendas-and-minutes/planning-commission. Meeting video recordings
can be found on the City’s website:
http://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/city-clerk/on-demand-
meeting-videos
1
Planning Commission Minutes
December 8, 2021, 6:00 p.m.
Teleconference - Broadcast via Webinar
Planning
Commissioners
Present:
Commissioner Hemalata Dandekar, Commissioner Emily
Francis, Commissioner Michael Hopkins, Commissioner Steve
Kahn, Commissioner Mike Wulkan, Vice Chair Nick Quincey,
Chair Bob Jorgensen
City Staff Present: Community Development Director Michael Codron, Deputy
Community Development Director Tyler Corey, Assistant City
Attorney Markie Jorgensen, and Deputy City Clerk Kevin Christian
_____________________________________________________________________
1. CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo Planning Commission was called to
order on December 8, 2021, at 6:02 p.m. by Chair Jorgensen with
Commissioners present via teleconference.
2. OATH OF OFFICE
Deputy City Clerk Christian administered the Oath of Office to Commissioner
Emily Francis.
3. PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
Public Comment:
None
--End of Public Comment--
4. CONSENT
4.a CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES - NOVEMBER 17, 2021, PLANNING
COMMISSION MINUTES
Approve the Planning Commission Minutes of November 17, 2021.
Motion By Commissioner Wulkan
Second By Commissioner Dandekar
To approve the Minutes of the November 17, 2021 Planning Commission
Minutes with a clerical change to Item 4a, Condition #68.
Page 5 of 222
2
Ayes (6): Commissioner Dandekar, Commissioner Hopkins,
Commissioner Kahn, Commissioner Wulkan, Vice Chair Quincey, and
Chair Jorgensen
Abstained (1): Commissioner Francis
CARRIED (6 to 0)
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
5.a 1320 ROUNDHOUSE ST. REVIEW OF THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT PREPARED FOR THE LOSSAN RAIL CORRIDOR
AGENCY’S CENTRAL COAST LAYOVER FACILITY
Senior Planner Brian Leveille introduced the item, reviewed previous
meetings held on the item and alerted the commission that the intent for
this meeting is to allow the public and Commission to provide input to the
project team on the Draft EIR.
LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency representatives James Campbell and Tim
Gnibus presented an overview of the Central Coast Layover Facility
project, reviewed the EIR process of which this meeting is a portion,
addressed issues concerning noise, air-pollution, biological and historical
resources, and responded to questions.
Chair Jorgensen opened the public hearing.
Public Comments:
Pete Rodgers, SLOCOG Director
Noted that the project is supported by SLOCOG. Additionally noted
support for bike path and crossings at Francis and Roundhouse.
Lea Brooks
Questioned when the bike trail would be built, noting it isn't clear if it is in
Phase 1 or as part of Landscaping. Also questioned how the desired
crossings would be initiated.
Helene Finger
Proposed including acknowledgement that the planned fencing creates a
barrier and believes that an appropriate cost-effective mitigation is an at-
grade crossing of the tracks at Francis.
Kizen Sugano
Desires more information justifying the selected location versus
alternatives given the recent increase in housing nearby.
--End of Public Comment--
Page 6 of 222
3
Chair Jorgensen closed the public hearing.
The Commission discussed the item and provided the following comments
for inclusion on the Draft EIR:
Commissioner Wulkan:
Hazardous Materials Impact discussion HAZ - 1: Clarify if mitigation
applies to daily operation or just construction.
Noise Impact discussion NV-3: Parking of trains to block and mitigate
noise impacts from trains being worked on only applies to later phases
of the project. What about the initial Phases when additional trains in
later phases won’t be there to block the noise?
How will noise from the wash track to the west be mitigated for the
residential units to the west. There are several multi-family buildings
and two were pointed out in the EIR subject to noise impacts, one is an
eight unit building and one is a 20-unit building. How will the noise be
mitigated to those buildings since the wash track will only partially be
blocked by the buildings in the project? This was not explained in the
EIR and should be.
Transportation – Two concerns about conclusions in the EIR. What is
the basis for the conclusion the planned grade separated crossing at
Roundhouse planned to connect to Bishop St. would not be precluded
by the proposed project? There was no basis or discussion on the
feasibility of completing the crossing. It does not appear possible to get
a road, bike path, or pedestrian path in from Roundhouse over such a
short distance. The same goes with the crossing at Francis Ave. Can
that be accomplished with the security fencing. How does the project
not preclude that future crossing at Francis?
Consistency with plans – Commission indicated desire to see more on
building designs in previous review. No design or conceptual design of
buildings provided in the DEIR. How will the project be consistent with
the Railroad District Plan as no building design is included?
Commissioner Dandekar:
LOSSAN should invest resources on a strategy for the interpretive
elements about the historic roundhouse feature. A significant amount
of information is available. The Roundhouse is a focal point to
understand what went on at this place. Hopes there is significant
follow up in what actually gets built and that money is put into the
interpretive side of things.
Page 7 of 222
4
Final comments for inclusion are due by December 20, 2021, 5:00 p.m.
Written comments may be mailed to:
James Campbell, Operations Officer
600 S. Main St., City of Orange, CA 92863
Emailed comments to:
capitolprojects@lossan.org
Include "CCLF" in the subject line
6. COMMENT AND DISCUSSION
6.a SENATE BILL 9 PRESENTATION
Community Development Director Michael Codron introduced the item
and summarized the various existing City guidelines that have a
relationship with SB9 requirements, including the recently adopted
Objective Design Standards. Housing Policy and Programs Manager
Teresa McClish presented the staff report and responded to Commission
inquiries.
Public Comment:
None
--End of Public Comment--
The Commission discussed the item but took no action as this was an
informational presentation.
6.b STAFF UPDATES AND AGENDA FORECAST
Deputy Community Development Director Tyler Corey provided an update
of upcoming projects.
7. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 8:21 p.m. The next Regular Meeting of the
Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for January 26, 2022 at 6:00 p.m. via
teleconference.
_________________________
APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION: XX/XX/202X
Page 8 of 222
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: REVIEW OF A NEW 79,492 SF, THREE TO FOUR STORY PROJECT
CONSISTING OF 59 ROOMS BETWEEN TWO STRUCTURES, INCLUDING
PROPOSED CREEK SETBACK EXCEPTIONS, WITHIN THE PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY FOR THE RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITY KNOWN AS
THE VILLAGES.
PROJECT ADDRESS: 55 Broad Street & BY: Kyle Bell, Associate Planner
625 Ramona Drive Phone Number: 805-781-7524
Email: kbell@slocity.org
FILE NUMBER: ARCH-0386-2020 FROM: Tyler Corey, Deputy Director
USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021
EID-0528-2021
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Draft Resolution (Attachment A) adopting the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration and approving the project, based on findings and subject to conditions of
approval.
SITE DATA
Applicant
Representative
Zoning
General Plan
Site Area
Environmental
Status
Morrison I, LP
Jay Blatter
R-4-PD (High Density Residential,
within Planned Development
Overlay
High Density Residential
4.55 acres
An Initial Study of environmental
impact has been prepared with a
recommendation for a Mitigated
Negative Declaration (IS/MND)
SUMMARY
The project consists of the expansion of an existing Residential Care Facility (The
Villages) to provide two new three to four story structures consisting of a total of 59 rooms.
The proposed project includes the demolition of existing parking facilities to provide for
the new project and includes site improvements such as site access upgrades, and
associated landscaping.
Meeting Date: 2/9/2022
Item Number: 4a
Time Estimate: 45 minutes
Page 9 of 222
Item 4a
ARCH-0386-2020 – 55 Broad Street & 625 Ramona Drive
Planning Commission Report – February 9, 2022
The project also includes the following exceptions: creek setback of 20 feet for the upper-
stories of Building A, and 28 feet for the upper-stories of Building B, where 30 feet is the
standard, creek setback for paving and grading, front yard exception of 7 feet where 10
feet is normally required, front yard parking exception, parking in the creek setback,
maximum building height deviation, monument signs, and trash enclosure located within
the street yard (Attachment B, Project Description).
The project is located within a Planned Development (PD) Overlay that was originally
established at this site to allow a student housing project. In 1997 the PD was amended
to allow the senior housing project that exists today. ‘The Villages’ Planned Development
currently consists of three three-story buildings, including: ‘Garden Creek’ an assisted
living facility with 64 rooms along Broad St., ‘The Oaks’ a 50-unit senior living facility along
Palomar Ave., and ‘The Palms’ a 127-unit senior living facility along Ramona Dr.
The project includes an amendment to the existing PD Precise Plan to address the two
new structures and a deviation from development standards1 to allow the maximum
height of Building A to be 45 feet and 3 inches, and the maximum height of Building B to
be 58 feet and 4 inches, where the maximum height is normally 35 feet (Attachment C,
Project Plans).
1.0 PLANNING COMMISSION’S PURVIEW
The Planning Commission’s role is to review the project for consistency with the General
Plan, Zoning Regulations, Community Design Guidelines (CDG), Sign Regulations and
applicable City development standards. Planning Commission (PC) review is required
for amendments to Planned Development to establish new buildi ngs within the Final
Development Plan, in accordance with Zoning Regulations Section 17.48.090 (PDEV -
0001-2021), as well as the associated Minor Use Permit (USE-0387-2020) requesting to
establish a residential care facility within the R-4 zone.
1 Zoning Regulations Section 17.48.030.D. Deviation from Development Standards . The application
of the PD overlay zone to property may include the adjustment or modification, where necessary and
justifiable, of any applicable development standard of this Title 17 (e.g., building height, floor area ratio,
parcel size, parking, setbac ks, etc.)...
Figure 1: Rendering of project design from the corner of Ramona and Palomar.
Page 10 of 222
Item 4a
ARCH-0386-2020 – 55 Broad Street & 625 Ramona Drive
Planning Commission Report – February 9, 2022
General Plan: https://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/community-
development/planning-zoning/general-plan
Zoning Regulations: https://sanluisobispo.municipal.codes/Code/17
Community Design Guidelines: https://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=2104
Sign Regulations:
https://www.slocity.org/home/showpublisheddocument/24661/637100098653570000
2.0 BACKGROUND
The PD Overlay that was originally adopted by the City Council on January 4, 1965,
through Council Resolution No. 1367 (1965 Series) that included a Precise Plan to
construct three buildings for student housing. On April 27, 1988, the Planning
Commission approved an amendment to the Precise Plan to replace the third structure,
which had not yet been constructed, with a new three-story structure with 42 residential
units, known as ‘The Gardens’.
On May 20, 1997, the Planning Commission approved an additional amendment to the
PD Overlay to convert the three residential structures into a senior housing facility, which
remains as the current use today.
On November 16, 2004, the City Council approved an additional PD Amendment to add
two additional structures to the Precise Plan, with one residential structure to replace the
parking lot between Old Garden Creek and ‘The Palms’ along Ramona Dr. and a two -
story parking structure west of the creek along Palomar Ave., however, these two
structures were not constructed and the entitlement approval of these two structures have
since expired.
3.0 PREVIOUS REVIEW
On October 25, 2021, the Tree Committee (TC) reviewed the proposed tree removals
and compensatory planting plan (TC Report 10.25.21). The TC recommended that the
Planning Commission (PC) find the project consistent with the Tree Removal Regulations
(vote 4-0-1, Meeting Minutes).
On November 1, 2021, the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) reviewed the project
for consistency with the Community Design Guidelines (ARC Report 11.1.21). The ARC
continued the project to a date uncertain, and provided eleven directional items for the
applicant and staff to address in the project plans (vote 4 -0-3, Meeting Minutes).
The applicant revised the project to address ARC comments, and on December 6, 2021,
the ARC reviewed the project for consistency with the CDG (ARC Report 12.6.21). The
ARC determined that the project was consistent with applicable design guidelines and
provided two design suggestions for the applicant to address related to building and site
design and recommended that the Planning Commission approve the project (6-0-1,
Meeting Minutes). The applicant has provided responses to the ARC’s suggestions which
are further discussed in Section 5.4 of this report.
Page 11 of 222
Item 4a
ARCH-0386-2020 – 55 Broad Street & 625 Ramona Drive
Planning Commission Report – February 9, 2022
4.0 PROJECT STATISTICS
Site Details Proposed Allowed/Required*
Setbacks
Street Yard (Ramona)
Corner Yard (Palomar)
Trash Enclosure (Palomar)
Side Yard
23.2 feet
7 feet
6.5 feet
12.7 feet
10 feet
10 feet
10 feet
10 feet
Creek Setback – Building A
First and Second Stories
Third and Fourth Stories
20 feet
20 feet
20 feet
30 feet
Creek Setback – Building B
First and Second Stories
Third and Fourth Stories
25 feet
28 feet
20 feet
30 feet
Maximum Height of Structures
Building A
Building B
45.25 feet
58.3 feet
35 feet
35 feet
Max Lot Coverage 33% (total) 60%
Affordable Housing In-lieu fee On-site or In-Lieu fee
Monument Sign
Zone
Height
Size
Illumination
Exception Requested
4.5 feet
24 square feet
Non-illuminated
Not allowed in R-4 zone
6 feet
24 square feet
Externally Illuminated
Vehicle and Bicycle Parking
Number of Vehicle Spaces
EV Spaces
37
3 (EV ready)
7 (EV capable)
28
1 (EV ready)
7 (EV capable)
Bicycle Spaces
Short-term
Long-term
2
6
2
5
Motorcycle Parking 3 1
*2019 Zoning Regulations
5.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS
The proposed improvements must conform to the intentions, standards and limitations of
the Zoning Regulations and Engineering Standards and be consistent with the applicable
CDG. Staff has evaluated the project’s consistency with relevant requirements and has
found it to be in substantial compliance, as discusse d in this analysis.
Page 12 of 222
Item 4a
ARCH-0386-2020 – 55 Broad Street & 625 Ramona Drive
Planning Commission Report – February 9, 2022
5.1 Consistency with the General Plan
The Land Use Element designates the subject property as High Density Residential
intended to provide for high density residential development having locations and forms
that provide for attached dwellings in two- and three-story buildings, with common outdoor
areas and very compact private outdoor spaces. The Housing Element encourages the
creation of housing for those with special housing needs such as facilities for aging in
place in locations where public transit and commercial services are available. The project
is consistent with the General Plan Housing Element for this location since the project
proposes to expand an existing residential care facility that includes opportunity for
housing for the elderly and residential uses that are consistent with activities envisioned
by the High-Density Residential Land Use designation.
5.2 Consistency with the Zoning Regulations
In accordance with Table 2-1 of the Zoning Regulations, residential care facilities require
a Minor Use Permit to be constructed within the R-4 zone. Minor Use Permits require
specific findings regarding General Plan consistency, neighborhood c ompatibility,
findings for health, safety and welfare, and findings for site suitability regarding design,
traffic generation, and public services. The project design includes requests for deviations
from several development standards for the R-4 zone, as part of the PD Overlay (see
Section 4.0 Project Statistics).
Residential Care Facility: Residential Care Facilities are licensed by the State to provide
permanent living accommodations and 24-hour primarily non-medical care and
supervision for persons in need of personal services, supervision, protection, or
assistance for sustaining the activities of daily living. Living accommodations are shared
living quarters with or without separate kitchen or bathroom facilities for each room or
unit. This classification includes facilities that are operated for profit as well as those
operated by public or not-for-profit institutions, including hospices, nursing homes,
convalescent facilities, and group homes for minors, persons with disabilities, and people
in recovery from alcohol or drug addictions.
Consistent with requirements for consideration of a Minor Use Permit (Zoning Regulations
Section 17.110.070) for the proposed use, the project has been designed with
consideration of the existing topography to ensure that buildings appear lower toward the
nearby low-density neighborhood, with buildings primarily oriented toward the intersection
of Ramona Drive and Palomar Avenue. The project has been designed to protect the
privacy between neighboring residential uses and the care facility. The project design
incorporates specific design features to minimize potential impacts to and from adjacent
properties by orienting open areas for residents internal to the project site.
Maximum Building Height: Zoning Regulations Section 17.48.030.D stipulates that
projects within PD Overlays may incorporate deviations from development standards
such as maximum height, where determined necessary and justifiable to accommodat e
the development of the project. The applicant is requesting a deviation from development
standards associated with the PD amendment to exceed the 35 -foot height standard
within the R-4 zone.
Page 13 of 222
Item 4a
ARCH-0386-2020 – 55 Broad Street & 625 Ramona Drive
Planning Commission Report – February 9, 2022
The project requests a maximum height of 45 feet and 3 inches for Building A, and a
maximum height of 58 feet 4 inches for Building B, where normally limited to 35 feet.
Although the proposed project would be taller than surrounding development, it would not
impede any scenic views in the area, including Bishop Peak to the northwest, Cerro San
Luis to the southwest, or the Cal Poly “P” to the northeast. The proposed project would
also be similar in nature to the density and style of surrounding high -density residential
development in the vicinity. The project also includes a vegetative screen along Ramona
Drive and Palomar Avenue, which would conceal lower portions of the buildings from the
public right-of-way. For these reasons, the project would not substantially degrade the
existing visual character or quality of public views of the site, nor would the project conflict
with regulations that have been established for the purpose of preserving scenic quality
or resources, see the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Aesthetics section for
a more in-depth analysis of the maximum building height request.
Creek Setback Paving: The Zoning Regulations require a 20-foot setback from the top of
bank. Section 17.70.030.G states that replacement of existing paving within a creek
setback that existed on or before October 3, 1996 with new paving is not allowed unless
a discretionary approval is obtained. The proposed p roject is requesting to repave the
existing parking area on the east side of Old Garden Creek within the same footprint as
the existing parking area which results in the same 0-foot setback from the top of bank
for the pavement area in some areas (Attachme nt D, Creek Improvement Exhibit). Zoning
Regulations Section 17.70.030 stipulate that an exception to the creek setback
requirements may be considered where substantiated evidence is available that
demonstrates that there is no practical way to comply with the provisions and that no
other feasible alternatives will result in better implementation of other Zoning Regulations
or General Plan policies while allowing reasonable use of the site, subject to required
findings.
The project is limited to the repaving of an existing parking lot within the creek setback
which will have no impact to any biological resources. A biological resource assessment
was prepared by Keven Merk Associates, LLC (2021), and all recommended mitigation
measures to address any potential impacts to biological resources have been
incorporated into the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. Redesign of the project
to avoid parking areas within the creek setback would deny the property owner
reasonable use of the property, because the existing parking lot that is to be repaved
provides for the required parking for the existing uses on the property, and the parking lot
cannot be redesigned in a way that would avoid encroaching in the creek setback and
satisfy the parking requirements for the property due to the odd configuration of the lot.
The project has been reviewed in accordance with the required findings for a creek
setback exception which have been incorporated into the draft resolution.
Page 14 of 222
Item 4a
ARCH-0386-2020 – 55 Broad Street & 625 Ramona Drive
Planning Commission Report – February 9, 2022
Upper-Story Creek Setback: The proposed project is also requesting an exception for
Building A to encroach within the upper-story creek setback2 by 10 feet, resulting in a 20-
foot upper-story setback for the third floor, where 30 feet would normally be required; and
an exception for Building B to encroach by 2 feet, resulting in a 28-foot upper-story
setback, where 30 feet would normally be required (see Attachment C, Project Plans
Sheet A1.2). Zoning Regulations Section 17.70.030.G.4 stipulates that an exception to
the creek setback requirements may be considered where substantiated evidence
demonstrates that there is no practical way to comply with the provisions and that no
other feasible alternatives will result in better implementation of other Zoning Regulations
or General Plan policies while allowing reasonable use of the site, subject to required
findings. The City’s creek setback regulations provide provisions for setback exceptions
that are consistent with State and Federal Law, and the request does not result in any
specific adverse impact to the public health, safety, or the physical environment. No useful
purpose would be realized by requiring the full 30-foot creek setback for the upper stories
because no significant fire protection, emergency access, privacy, or biological resources
impacts would occur. A larger creek setback within the project design is not possible
without a substantial project redesign that could adversely affect site circulation, safety,
functionality, and the provision of housing consistent with City goals. Thus, the proposed
design exception is supportable in the larger context of achieving multiple City goals to
the extent possible.
Front Yard Setback: The Zoning Regulations require a street yard setback of 10 feet
within the R-4 zone, and 10 feet for additional street yards on corner lots (§17.18.020).
Due to the unique configuration of the lot, Building B is surrounded by two street frontages
and a creek. Zoning Regulations Section 17.70.170.D.1.b stipulates that new structures
that provide a creek setback larger than required may reduce the front yard setback
requirement by one foot for each additional foot of separation from the 20 -foot creek
setback3. Building B provides a 25-foot setback from the creek and is requesting a front
yard encroachment of 3 feet into the front yard (along Palomar Ave.) resulting in a 7-foot
front yard setback where 10 feet would normally be required. The requested setback of 7
feet for Building B is consistent with the intent of Section 17.70.170.D.1.b.
2 Zoning Regulations § 17.70.030.E.3 Additional Upper Story Setbacks. Where the zone allows more
than two stories, an additional 10-foot step back (upper story building setback) shall be provided
beginning at the third story level. The upper story step back shall be provided along all building
elevations with creek-facing frontage
3 Zoning Regulations § 17.70.170.D.1.b Reduced Front or Street Side Setback for New Structure
Providing Additional Creek Setback. Where a new structure provides a rear or side creek setback
larger than required by these Zoning Regulations, the required front and/or street side setback,
respectively, shall be reduced by one foot for each one foot of additional creek setback, so long as the
front and street side setback is at least one-half that required by the zone in which the property is
located. Refer to the front and street side setback standards for each zone in Chapter s 17.12 through
17.64, inclusive.
Page 15 of 222
Item 4a
ARCH-0386-2020 – 55 Broad Street & 625 Ramona Drive
Planning Commission Report – February 9, 2022
Front Yard Parking: Zoning Regulations Section 17.70.170.D.2.a stipulates that projects
which require discretionary action may request front yard setbacks to be reduced to zero
for unenclosed parking spaces4. The project requests a 3-foot setback along Ramona
Drive for two vehicle parking spaces and one motorcycle parking space, and a 7 -foot
setback along Palomar Avenue for seven vehicle parking spaces, where 20 feet would
normally be required. All parking spaces are unenclosed and do not exit directly onto the
street right-of-way. The proposed parking layout is consistent with the existing conditions
of the property, and the project provides for the replacement of the existing parking lot
configuration for this portion of the site. The required findings for the front yard parking
exceptions have been incorporated into the draft resolution. Condition No. 15 requires
design improvements to the parking areas as viewed from the public right -of-way by
requiring a landscape buffer between the parking pavement and the back of sidewalk.
Trash Enclosure Setback: The proposed trash enclosure area consists of a CMU block
structure with a wood trellis covering intended to screen the location of the trash area
along Palomar Avenue. Typically, trash enclosures that are constructed with permanent
screening facilities are limited to a minimum of a 3 -foot setback from the public right-of-
way. The proposed trash enclosure provides a 5-foot setback from the public-right-of-way
and would be oriented away from the primary building entrances with the access gate
facing away from the street so that it does not interfere with on -site or off-site circulation
areas. Condition No. 15 requires design improvements to the trash enclosure as viewed
from the public right-of-way by requiring a landscape buffer between the enclosure and
the back of sidewalk.
Parking: The project provides 37 new parking spaces on site, which exceeds the parking
requirement of 28 spaces for the project. The proposed project and the existing structures
within the PD Overlay require a total of 143 parking spaces, and upon completion of the
two new structures, the project will provide a total of 152 parking spaces on -site for all
uses, which exceeds minimum parking requirements.
5.3 Consistency with the Sign Regulations
The Sign Regulations are intended to protect and enhance the character of the
community against visual blight and the proliferation of signs, which can seriously detract
from the pleasure of observing the natural scenic beauty of San Luis Obispo. Signs have
an important design component and must be architecturally compatible with the character
of surrounding development. It is the intent of the Sign Regulations to regulate the time,
place and manner under which signs are permitted, and not the content of si gnage.
Content shall not be used as a basis for determining whether or not a proposed sign may
be permitted.
4 Zoning Regulations 17.70.170.D.2.a Reduced Front and Street Side Setbacks. Upon approval of a
Director’s Action, or in conjunction with tandem parking approval, the Director may allow front and/or
street side setbacks to be reduced to zero for unenclosed parking spaces.
Page 16 of 222
Item 4a
ARCH-0386-2020 – 55 Broad Street & 625 Ramona Drive
Planning Commission Report – February 9, 2022
The 2019 Sign Regulations Section 15.40.460.A (Sign Standards by District) identifies
the sign types and size limitations for signs in the R-4 zone. The Sign Regulations only
allow for wall signs, hanging/suspended signs, freestanding post signs, and flags, with a
cumulative area of 20 square feet (SF). Monument signs are not identified as a sign type
allowed in the R-4 zone, and therefore a sign program is required. A sign program has
been presented as an opportunity to allow monument sign s within this property. The
applicant has proposed three additional monument signs with 24 SF of area each, in
addition to the two existing monument signs on the property (Broad Street), resulting in a
cumulative signage area of 120 SF. Each monument sign has a maximum height of 4.5
feet, where 6 feet is normally allowed for monument signs (Attachment C, Project Plans
Sheet A6.1). Exceptions to the Sign Regulations are subject to Section 15.40.610
(Findings for Approval of an Exception) and granting an exception must meet all of the
required findings5. The ARC reviewed the sign exceptions at the December 6, 2021
hearing, and did not identify any concerns with the proposal; therefore, staff has
incorporated the required findings as part of the draft resolution to this report for the PC’s
consideration.
5.4 Architectural Review Commission Directional Items
The ARC found the project consistent with the CDGs and provided two suggestions for
the applicant to consider incorporating into the project design to be reviewed and
evaluated by the PC prior to taking final action on the project:
ARC Directional Item #1: Consider a material change to the wainscoting on the base of
Building A - veering and cap to add more authenticity.
ARC Directional Item #2: Consider a plane change on Building A such as adding a
smooth surface like faux stone, cast concrete, or incorporate matching tile.
Response: The applicant has noted these suggestions and intends to address these
comments upon building permit submittal. Staff recommends Condition No. 7 which
requires that plans submitted for a building permit, shall incorporate the design
considerations as described at the ARC hearing on December 6, 2021, and the final
designs of the proposed project shall be modified to incorporate the ARC
recommendations, subject to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director.
6.0 CONSISTENCY COVID-19 ORDERS & CURRENT FISCAL CONTINGENCY PLAN
This activity is presently allowed under the State and Local emergency orders associated
with COVID-19. This Project 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.
5 Sign Regulations Section 15.40.610: Findings for Approval of an Exception : C: The exception is
consistent with the intent and purpose of the sign regulations (see Section 15.40.110) and will not
constitute a grant of special privilege or entitlement inconsistent with limitations applied to other
properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. D: The sign exception is for superior design will not
result in visual clutter and is consistent with the intent and purpose of these Sign Regulations.
Page 17 of 222
Item 4a
ARCH-0386-2020 – 55 Broad Street & 625 Ramona Drive
Planning Commission Report – February 9, 2022
7.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
An Initial Study (IS) has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) to evaluate the potential environmental effects of the proposed
project. A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) is recommended for adoption (Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration). The IS-MND identifies that the project would
potentially affect the following environmental factors unless mitigated: air quality,
biological resources, cultural resources, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and
hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use planning, noise, tribal cultural
resources, and utilities and service systems. Mitigation measures have been identified to
reduce these potential impacts to less than significant, including, but not limited to,
standard idling restrictions, dust control measures, preparation of a geologic investigation
for asbestos containing materials, and implementation of best management controls for
construction traffic and noise. Based on the project’s location and proposed ground
disturbance, the project may have the potential to impact previously unidentified cultural
materials during subsurface grading and excavation activities. Mitigation measures have
been identified to require cultural resource awareness training of all constru ction
personnel and preparation of an archaeological monitoring plan that would ensure an
immediate halt work order shall be issued in the event that historical or archaeological
remains are discovered. With incorporation of mitigation measures, potential
environmental effects of the project would not directly or indirectly result in any substantial
adverse effects on the environment.
A 30-day public review period extended from October 21, 2021 through November 22,
2021, and comments were received from the Air Pollution Control District (APCD). APCD
communicated their support of the project as infill development consistent with San Luis
Obispo Council of Government’s Reginal Transportation Plan and Sustainable
Communities Strategy and identified minor discrepancies in the Initial Study including an
overestimation of emissions. The Initial Study has been corrected to address APCD
comments (Attachment E, Revised IS/MND).
https://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/community-
development/documents-online/environmental-review-documents/-folder-2192
8.0 OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
The project has been reviewed by various City departments and divisions including
Planning, Engineering, Transportation, Building, City Arborist, Utilities, and Fire. Staff has
not identified any unusual site conditions or circumstances that would require special
conditions. Other comments have been incorporated into the draft resolution as
conditions of approval.
Page 18 of 222
Item 4a
ARCH-0386-2020 – 55 Broad Street & 625 Ramona Drive
Planning Commission Report – February 9, 2022
9.0 ALTERNATIVES
1. Continue project. An action to continue the item should include a detailed list of
additional information or analysis required to make a decision.
2. Deny the project. An action denying the project should include findings that cite
the basis for denial and should referen ce inconsistency with the General Plan,
Community Design Guidelines, Sign Regulations, Zoning Regulations or other
policy documents.
10.0 ATTACHMENTS
A. Draft Resolution
B. Project Description
C. Project Plans
D. Creek Improvement Exhibit
E. Revised IS/MND
Page 19 of 222
Page 20 of 222
RESOLUTION NO. PC-XXXX-22
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING
COMMISSION APPROVING THE EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING
RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITY (THE VILLAGES) TO PROVIDE TWO
NEW THREE- AND FOUR-STORY STRUCTURES CONSISTING OF A
TOTAL OF 59 ROOMS. PROJECT INCLUDES AN AMENDMENT TO THE
EXISTING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PRECISE PLAN, THE PROJECT
ALSO INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING EXCEPTIONS: CREEK SETBACK
OF 20 FEET FOR THE UPPER STORIES OF BUILDING A, CREEK
SETBACK 28 FEET FOR THE UPPER STORIES OF BUILDING B,
CREEK SETBACK FOR PAVING AND GRADING, FRONT YARD
EXCEPTION OF 7 FEET WHERE 10 FEET IS NORMALLY REQUIRED,
FRONT YARD PARKING EXCEPTION, PARKING IN THE CREEK
SETBACK, MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT DEVIATION, MONUMENT
SIGNS AND TRASH ENCLOSURE LOCATED WITHIN THE STREET
YARD. THE PROJECT INCLUDES A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AS REPRESENTED IN
THE STAFF REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED FEBRUARY 9, 2022
(55 BROAD STREET, ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-
2021, & EID-0528-2021)
WHEREAS, the City Council 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 February 10, 1965, approved the Precise Plan for the Planned
Development located at 71 North Broad Street , pursuant to Resolution No. 1367 (1965
Series); Tropicana Housing, Ltd, applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Planning 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 April 27, 1988, to amend the Precise Plan to modify the third
structure into a three story building with 42 residential units, known as ‘The Gardens’,
pursuant to Planning Commission Resolution No. 1369, Tropicana Housing, Ltd,
applicant; and
WHEREAS, the City Council 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 May 20, 1997, to amend the Precise Plan to convert the student housing
residences into an assisting living center for senior housing, pursuant to Resolution No.
8673 (1997); and
WHEREAS, the Tree Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a web
based public hearing on October 25, 2021, recommending the Planning Commission find
the project consistent with the Tree Removal Ordinance, pursuant to a proceeding
instituted under ARCH-0386-2020, Morrison I, LP, applicant; and
Page 21 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
55 Broad Street, ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-2021
Page 2
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo
conducted a web based public hearing on November 1, 2021, continuing the project to a
date uncertain to address eleven directional items for consistency with the Community
Design Guidelines, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under ARCH-0506-2019, Morrison
I, LP, applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo
conducted a web based public hearing on December 6, 2021, recommending approval of
the project to the Planning Commission based on consistency with the Community Design
Guidelines, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under ARCH-0506-2019, Morrison I, LP,
applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a
web based public hearing on February 9, 2022, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under
ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-2021, Morrison I, LP,
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 approval to
the project (ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, & PDEV-0001-2021), based on the
following findings:
1. The project is consistent with the Land Use Element (LUE) because the project
provides multi-family dwellings which is consistent with uses intended for the High-
Density Residential land use designation (LUE Table 1). The project is also
consistent with the Circulation Element (CE) where new development is required to
provide fair share responsibility for improvements to the street, bike, lanes, sidewalks
and incorporates traffic calming measures to accomplish the objectives of the
General Plan.
2. As conditioned, the project is consistent with the Zoning Regu lations because the
proposed building design complies with the development standards for the project
within the High Density Residential (R-4) zone (Municipal Code Chapter 17.22).
3. The proposed Planned Development Precise Plan amendment is consistent with
Council Resolution No. 1367 (1965 Series) and Council Resolution No. 8673 (1997)
because the amendment is limited to changes in the size and position of structures
and does not include any changes to the overall density or land uses of the project
site.
Page 22 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
55 Broad Street, ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-2021
Page 3
Minor Use Permit Findings
4. As conditioned, the establishment, maintenance, or operation of the proposed project
will not, in the circumstances of this particular case, be detrimental to the health,
safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity of the proposed
use, or detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or
to the general welfare of the City because the project has been designed to address
noise, glare, and pedestrian traffic through the orientation of the building and internal
pedestrian connections to the street and adjacent uses. The project is compatible
and consistent with the mix of residential and non-residential uses in the
neighborhood.
5. As conditioned, the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan Housing
Element for this location since the project proposes to expand an existing residential
care facility that includes opportunity for housing for the elderly and residential uses
that are consistent with activities envisioned by the High-Density Residential Land
Use designation.
6. As conditioned, the project complies with all applicable provisions of the Zoning
Regulations as described within the property development standards for the R-4 zone
and in accordance with allowances under Chapter 17.48 (Planned Development
Overlay Zone). The proposed uses are compatible with the project site and with
existing and potential uses in the vicinity which include religious facilities, commercial
retail, and residential uses.
7. As conditioned, the residential care facility is compatible at this location because the
project is located in an area that has been developed with residential and non-
residential uses to the east and north. The project is compatible with existing and
future land uses in the vicinity because the project has been designed to reflect high-
density residential development with open space areas that are located internal to
the site.
8. The site is physically suitable in terms of public utilities, traffic generation, and public
emergency vehicle access, because the proposed project is within an existing
developed neighborhood that provides adequate utilities, vehicle parking, and site
circulation. The site is adequate for the project in terms of size, configuration,
topography, and other applicable features, and has appropriate access to public
streets with adequate capacity to accommodate the quantity and type of traffic
expected to be generated by the use.
Development Review Findings
9. As conditioned, the project is consistent with the Community Design Guidelines for
infill development because the architectural style is complementary to the
surrounding neighborhood and is designed consistent with the prevailing building
height and setback pattern of the neighborhood.
Page 23 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
55 Broad Street, ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-2021
Page 4
10. As conditioned, the project design is consistent with the Community Design
Guidelines by providing a variety of architectural treatments that add visual interest
and articulation to the building design that are compatible with the design and scale
of the existing structures in the surrounding neighborhood (CDG, Chapter 5.3).
11. As conditioned, the project respects the privacy of adjacent residences through
appropriate building orientation and windows that minimize overlook and do not
impair the privacy of the indoor or outdoor living space of neighboring structures.
12. The proposed height, mass and scale of the project will not negatively alter the overall
character of the neighborhood or the street’s appearance because the development
is designed in a manner that does not deprive r easonable solar access to adjacent
properties. The project incorporates vertical and horizontal wall plan offsets, which
provide a high-quality and aesthetically pleasing architectural design.
Planned Development (PD) Overlay Findings
13. The proposed PD amendment providing for the two new structures is consistent with
the General Plan because it provides for the expansion of an existing residential care
facility for seniors, which is consistent with the intent of the High -Density Residential
Land Use Designation for the property.
14. The expansion of the existing residential care facility is allowed use within the High-
Density Residential zone.
15. As conditioned, the project complies with all applicable provisions of the Zoning
Regulations other than the requested deviation from development standards to allow
a greater maximum height for the buildings in accordance with Zoning Regulations
§17.48.030.D that allows for deviations within PD-Overlay zoning where determined
necessary and justifiable to accommodate the development of the project.
16. As conditioned, the proposed modifications to the development standards of these
Zoning Regulations are necessary and appropriate to accommodate the superior
design of the proposed project, and the project design is compatibility with adjacent
land uses.
17. As conditioned, the project design complies with all applicable Community Design
Guidelines.
18. All affected public facilities, services, and utilities are adequate to serve the proposed
project site.
19. The location, size, site planning, building design features, and operating
characteristics of the project are highly suited to the characteristics of the site and
surrounding neighborhood, and is compatible with the character of the site for land
uses and development intended for the surrounding neighborhood by the General
Plan.
Page 24 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
55 Broad Street, ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-2021
Page 5
20. The site is adequate for the project in terms of size, configuration, topography, and
other applicable features.
21. The PD amendment provides a community benefit by providing senior housing for
citizens to age in place which directly implements objectives of the General Plan
Housing Element for special needs housing.
22. The community benefit of providing additional senior housing does not principally
benefit the project or occupants of the project, but rather p rovides a district or area-
wide benefit within San Luis Obispo.
23. The site has appropriate access to public streets with adequate capacity to
accommodate the quantity and type of traffic expected to be generated by the use .
24. The establishment, maintenance, or operation of the proposed project will not, in the
circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, or general
welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity of the proposed use, or
detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or to the
general welfare of the City.
Creek Setback Exception Findings
25. As conditioned, the location and design of Buildings A and B, and the proposed
parking areas receiving the creek setback exception will minimize impacts to scenic
resources, water quality, and riparian habitat, including opportunities for wildlife
habitation, rest, and movement, because the project includes the implementation of
Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-7 that requires a qualified biologist to ensure
no sensitive species are disturbed on the site prior to construction activities
associated with the project.
26. As conditioned, the exceptions for portions of Building A to reduce the upper story
setback requirement to 20 feet, and portions of Building B to reduce the upper story
setback requirement to 28 feet, where 30 feet is normally required, as well as the
proposed parking area within the creek setback will not limit the City’s design options
for providing flood control measures that are needed to achieve adopted City flood
policies.
27. The exceptions will not prevent the implementation of City-adopted plans, nor
increase the adverse environmental effects of implementing such plans because the
new structures exceed the minimum setback require ment of 20 feet from the top of
bank, and the exceptions are only for the third and fourth stories of the buildings, and
the proposed parking area is intended to replace an existing parking area within the
creek setback.
Page 25 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
55 Broad Street, ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-2021
Page 6
28. There are circumstances applying to the site, such as a greater setback requirement
than other properties in the vicinity due to multiple street frontages, that would deprive
the property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity with the same
zoning.
29. The exceptions will not constitute a grant of special privilege because the parking
area is to replace an existing parking area within the creek setback , and the upper
story setback exceptions for Buildings A and B are considered minor.
30. The exception will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other
property in the area of the project or downstream, because the project includes the
implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO -6 and BIO-7 that require training of
construction workers to avoid impacts to the creek corridor, riparian habitat, nesting
birds, or any other wildlife prior to initiating construction.
31. A larger creek setback within the project design is not possible without a substantial
project redesign that could adversely affect site circulation, safety, functionality, and
the provision of housing consistent with City goals.
Sign Program Findings
32. The project site provides unusual circumstances which make strict adherence to the
sign regulations impractical, as the project consists of an expansion of an existing
residential care facility within a residential zone with three street frontages. The
proposed sign program represents an innovative design consistent with the
architectural style of the project.
33. The sign program is consistent with the intent and purpose of the Sign Regulations
as each sign is consistent with all other limitations regarding number and size of signs
allowed for the specific sign types (monument signs). The architectural style of the
project has been designed to accommodate signage for the property that would
provide sufficient visibility to the public.
34. The proposed signs consist of a superior design that complies with the Design
Principles of the Sign Regulations that do not result in clutter or excessively sized
signage in comparison to the other structures in the vicinity. The proposed signs have
been reviewed by the Architectural Review Commission and found to be consistent
with the intent of the Sign Regulations and Community Design Guidelines.
SECTION 2. Environmental Review. An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration (IS/MND) has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) to evaluate the potential environmental effects of the proposed
project. Minor clarifications have been incorporated into the IS/MND following receipt of
comments on the publicly circulated draft, and these minor clarifications support the
impact determinations and conclusions of the Public Draft Initial Study, do not result in
any modification of mitigation measures, and do not warrant recirculation of the IS/MND.
Page 26 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
55 Broad Street, ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-2021
Page 7
The Planning Commission hereby adopts the IS/MND and associated Mitigation,
Monitoring, and Reporting Program, based on incorporation of the following mitigation
measures, which will reduce potential environmental impacts to less than significant.
Air Quality
AQ -1 During all construction activities and use of diesel vehicles, the Applicant shall
implement the following idling control techniques:
1. Idling Restrictions Near Sensitive Receptors for Both On- and Off-Road
Equipment
a. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of
sensitive receptors if feasible;
b. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors shall not be
permitted;
c. Use of alternative fueled equipment shall be used whenever
possible; and
d. Signs that specify the no idling requirements shall be posted and
enforced at the construction site.
2. California Diesel Idling Regulations. On-road diesel vehicles shall comply
with Section 2485 of Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations. This
regulation limits idling from diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicles with
gross vehicular weight ratings of more than 10,000 pounds and licensed for
operation on highways. It applies to California and non -California based
vehicles. In general, the regulation specifies that drivers of said vehicles:
a. Shall not idle the vehicle’s primary diesel engine for greater than 5
minutes at any location, except as noted in Subsection (d) of the
regulation; and
b. Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system (APS) to
power a heater, air conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on that
vehicle during sleeping or resting in a sleeper berth for greater than
5 minutes at any location when within 1,000 feet of a restricted area,
except as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation.
Signs must be posted in the designated queuing areas and job sites to
remind drivers of the 5-minute idling limit. The specific requirements and
exceptions in the regulation can be reviewed at the following website:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/truck-idling/2485.pdf.
AQ -2 During all construction and ground-disturbing activities, the Applicant shall
implement the following particulate matter control measures and detail each
measure on the project grading and building plans:
1. Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible.
2. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent
airborne dust from leaving the site and from exceeding the San Luis Obispo
Page 27 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
55 Broad Street, ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-2021
Page 8
County Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD) limit of 20% opacity for no
greater than 3 minutes in any 60-minute period. Increased watering
frequency shall be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 miles per
hour (mph) and cessation of grading activities during periods of winds over
25 mph. Reclaimed (non-potable) water is to be used in all construction and
dust-control work.
3. All dirt stockpile areas (if any) shall be sprayed daily and covered with tarps
or other dust barriers as needed.
4. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project
revegetation and landscape plans shall be implemented as soon as
possible, following completion of any soil-disturbing activities.
5. Exposed grounds that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than 1
month after initial grading shall be sown with a fast -germinating, non-
invasive, grass seed and watered until vegetation is established.
6. All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using
approved chemical binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in
advance by the SLOAPCD.
7. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved shall be completed as
soon as possible. In addition, building pads shall be laid as soon as possible
after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.
8. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any
unpaved surface at the construction site.
9. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered
or shall maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance
between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with California Vehicle
Code Section 23114.
10. Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto
streets or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site. Sweep streets at
the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved
roads.
11. Water sweepers shall be used with reclaimed water where feasible. Roads
shall be pre-wetted prior to sweeping when feasible.
12. All PM10 mitigation measures required shall be shown on grading and
building plans.
13. The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the
fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures
as necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below
the SLOAPCD limit of 20% opacity for no greater than 3 minutes in any 60 -
minute period. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods
when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of
such persons shall be provided to the SLOAPCD Compliance Division prior
to the start of any site preparation, grading, or earthwork.
Page 28 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
55 Broad Street, ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-2021
Page 9
14. All off-road construction equipment shall be Tier 3 or higher.
AQ -3 Prior to initiation of site preparation/construction activities, the Applicant shall retain
a registered geologist to conduct a geologic evaluation of the property including
sampling and testing for naturally occurring asbestos in full compliance with
California Air Resources Board (CARB) Air Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) for
Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations (CARB ATCM
Section 93105) and SLOAPCD requirements. This geologic evaluation shall be
submitted to the City Community Development Department upon completion. If the
geologic evaluation determines that the project would not have the potential to
disturb naturally occurring asbestos (NOA), the Applicant must file an Asbestos
ATCM exemption request with the SLOAPCD.
AQ -4 If NOA are determined to be present on-site, proposed earthwork and construction
activities shall be conducted in full compliance with the various regulatory
jurisdictions regarding NOA, including the CARB ATCM for Construction, Grading,
Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations (CARB ATCM Section 93105) and
requirements stipulated in the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants (NESHAP) (40 Code of Federal Regulations 61, Subpart M – Asbestos).
These requirements include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. Written notification, within at least 10 business days of activities
commencing, to the SLOAPCD;
2. Preparation of an asbestos survey conducted by a Certified Asbestos
Consultant; and
3. Implementation of applicable removal and disposal protocol and
requirements for identified NOA.
Monitoring Program: Measures AQ-1 through AQ-4 shall be incorporated into project
grading and building plans for review and approval by the City Community Development
Department. Compliance shall be verified by the City during regular inspections, in
coordination with the SLOAPCD, as necessary. The applicant shall submit the geologic
evaluation detailed in measure AQ-3 to the City Community Development Department
upon completion.
Biological Resources
BIO-1 Obscure Bumble Bee. Prior to any site disturbance and/or construction activities
associated with the proposed project, the Applicant shall retain a City -approved
qualified biologist to conduct preconstruction survey(s) for obscure bumble bee
within suitable habitat areas (e.g., small mammal burrows, thatched/bunch
grasses, upland scrubs, brush piles, unmowed/overgrown areas, dead trees,
hollow logs, etc.) on the project site and areas within 50 feet of the project site. At
a minimum, the survey effort shall include visual search methods targeting colonies
or individuals. Upon completion of the surveys, the biologist shall prepare a survey
report summarizing the findings and submit it to the City Community Development
Department.
Page 29 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
55 Broad Street, ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-2021
Page 10
If the survey(s) establish presence of obscure bumble bee within the areas of
disturbance, the Applicant shall retain a City-approved biologist to prepare a
Biological Resources Management Plan (Management Plan) subject to review and
approval of the City Community Development Department in coordination with the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). The Management Plan shall
include avoidance measures to conduct project activities in such a manner that
avoids physical disturbances to the colony/nest site, including a minimum 50 -foot
no disturbance buffer to avoid take and potentially significant impacts. Upon
approval by the City Community Development Department and prior to and during
construction, the Management Plan shall be implemented to ensure potentially
significant impacts to the obscure bumble bee are avoided. Following appro val,
avoidance measures included in the Management Plan shall be implemented at
appropriate times during construction activities.
BIO-2 Northern California Legless Lizard. Between 2 and 4 weeks prior to initiation of
construction activities, a City-approved biologist shall conduct surveys for northern
California legless lizards. The surveyor shall utilize hand search or cover board
methods in areas of disturbance where northern California legless lizards are
expected to be found (e.g., under shrubs, other vegetation, or debris within the
ornamental and riparian habitats on-site). If cover board methods are used, they
shall commence at least 30 days prior to the start of construction. Hand search
surveys shall be completed immediately prior to and during grad ing activities.
During grading activities, the City-approved biologist shall walk behind the grading
equipment to capture legless lizards that are unearthed by the equipment. The
surveyor shall capture and relocate any legless lizards or other reptiles obs erved
during the survey effort. The captured individuals shall be relocated from the
construction area and placed in suitable habitat on -site but outside of the work
area. Following the survey and monitoring efforts, the City-approved biologist shall
submit to the City a project completion report that documents the number of
northern California legless lizards and other reptiles captured and relocated, and
the number of legless lizards or other reptiles taken during grading activities.
Observations of these species or other special-status species shall be documented
on California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) forms and submitted to the
CDFW upon project completion.
BIO-3 Tree Replacement. In accordance with the City’s Municipal Code for Tree Removal
(12.24.090), trees that are removed with a minimum diameter at breast height
(dbh) of 3 inches shall be replaced at a 1:1 ratio on-site. A compensatory tree
planting program shall be developed and implemented and shall include areas
within the creek setback area. Additional tree planting shall take place within the
development as part of the landscaping effort to mitigate all tree removal on the
site. The Applicant shall meet the final specifications of the City’s municipal code
for tree protection and replacement to receive permit approval.
Page 30 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
55 Broad Street, ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-2021
Page 11
BIO-4 Migratory Birds. If any ground disturbance will occur during the nesting bird season
(February 1–September 15), prior to any ground-disturbing activity, a
preconstruction nesting bird survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist
within 1 week prior to the start of activities. If nesting birds are located on or near
the project site, they shall be avoided until they have successfully fledged, or the
nest is no longer deemed active. A non-disturbance buffer of 50 feet will be
implemented for non-listed, passerine species and a 250-foot buffer will be
implemented for raptor species. No construction activities will be permitted within
established nesting bird buffers until a qualified biologist has determined tha t the
young have fledged or that proposed construction activities would not cause
adverse impacts to the nest, adults, eggs, or young. If special-status avian species
are identified, no work shall be conducted until an appropriate buffer is determined
in consultation with the City and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and/or
CDFW.
BIO-5 Roosting Bat Surveys. Within 2 weeks prior to removal of any trees, a qualified
biologist shall survey the proposed trees to be removed to identify if roosting bats
are present. If bats are found to be roosting, tree removal will be postponed until
such time that roosting bats are no longer present. If postponement is not feasible,
a Bat Exclusion Plan shall be prepared by a qualified biologist and submitted to
the CDFW and the City for review and approval prior to construction. At a minimum,
the exclusion plan shall describe the proposed action, background on the surveys
conducted to date, installation and removal of exclusion materials, and the
reporting process.
BIO-6 Worker Environmental Awareness Program. As an additional protection measure
to avoid impacts to the creek corridor, riparian habitat, nesting birds, and other
wildlife, the project Applicant shall have a City-qualified biologist prepare a Worker
Environmental Awareness Program that will be presented to all project personnel
prior to the start of construction. This program shall detail measures to avoid
impacts on biological resources and shall include a description of special -status
species potentially occurring on the project site and their natural history, the status
of the species and their protection under environmental laws and regulations, and
the penalties for take. Review of the erosion and sediment control measures (see
Mitigation Measure BIO-7), as well as any other appropriate recommendations,
shall be given as actions to avoid impacts to all wildlife during construction. Other
aspects of the training shall include a description of general measures to protect
wildlife, including:
1. Delineation of the allowable work area, staging areas, access points, and
limits to vehicle access;
2. Storage of all pipes, metal tubing, or similar materials stored or stacked on
the project site for one or more overnight periods shall be either securely
capped before storage or thoroughly inspected for wildlife before the
materials are moved, buried, capped, or otherwise used.
Page 31 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
55 Broad Street, ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-2021
Page 12
3. Inspected of materials stored on-site, such as lumber, plywood, and rolls of
silt fence, for wildlife that may have sheltered under or within the materials;
4. Use of netting to exclude birds from nesting in construction materials;
5. Constructing escape ramps in all excavations and trenches more than 6 -
inches deep;
6. Contact information for the City-approved biologist and instructions should
any wildlife species be detected in the work site;
7. Dust suppression methods during construction activities when necessary to
meet air quality standards and protect biological resources; and
8. Methods for containment of food-related trash items (e.g., wrappers, cans,
bottles, food scraps), small construction debris (e.g., nails, bits of metal and
plastic), and other human-generated debris (e.g., cigarette butts) in animal-
proof containers and removal from the site on a weekly basis.
All project personnel who have attended t he training shall sign an attendance
sheet. The program shall be repeated for any new crews that arrive subsequently
on the site.
BIO-7 Riparian Area. Prior to ground disturbance or other construction activity, the
proposed 25- to 28-foot setback from the Old Garden Creek top of bank shall be
identified on all construction plans and shall be mapped on-site through installation
of protective fencing or other measures to demarcate the limits of construction in
proximity to Old Garden Creek.
Monitoring Program: The survey requirements of Mitigation Measures BIO -1, BIO-2,
BIO-4, and BIO-5 and delineation requirements of Mitigation Measure BIO-7 shall be
incorporated into the project grading and building plans for review and approval by the
City Community Development Department. Compliance shall be verified through
submittal of an obscure bumble bee survey report, a northern California legless lizard
survey report, a preconstruction nesting bird survey report, and a roosting bat survey
report to the City Community Development Department. Mitigation Measure BIO-6
requires construction personnel to participate in environmental awareness training and
sign a sign-in sheet following the training. The sign-in sheet shall be submitted to the City
Community Development Department to confirm that all construction personnel have
attended. Compliance shall be verified by the City prior to the start of construction and
during regular inspections, as necessary.
Cultural Resources
CR-1 Prior to construction activities, a City-qualified archaeologist shall conduct cultural
resource awareness training for all construction personnel, including the following:
1. Review the types of archaeological artifacts that may be uncovered;
2. Provide examples of common archaeological artifacts to examine;
3. Review what makes an archaeological resource significant to
archaeologists and local Native Americans;
Page 32 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
55 Broad Street, ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-2021
Page 13
4. Describe procedures for notifying involved or interested parties in case of a
new discovery;
5. Describe reporting requirements and responsibilities of construction
personnel;
6. Review procedures that shall be used to record, evaluate, and mitigate new
discoveries; and
7. Describe procedures that would be followed in the case of discovery of
disturbed as well as intact human burials and burial-associated artifacts.
CR-2 If cultural resources are encountered during subsurface earthwork activities, all
ground-disturbing activities within a 25-foot radius of the find shall cease and the
City shall be notified immediately. Work shall not continue until a City-qualified
archaeologist assesses the find and determines the need for further study. If the
find includes Native American-affiliated materials, a local Native American tribal
representative will be contacted to work in conjunction with the City-approved
archaeologist to determine the need for further study. A standard inadvertent
discovery clause shall be included in every grading and construction contract to
inform contractors of this requirement. Any previously unidentified resources found
during construction shall be recorded on appropriate California Department of
Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance in terms of
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) criteria by a qualified archaeologist.
If the resource is determined significant under CEQA, the qualified archaeologist
shall prepare and implement a research design and archaeological data recovery
plan, in conjunction with locally affiliated Native American representative(s) as
necessary, that will capture those categories of data for which the site is significant.
The archaeologist shall also perform appropriate technical analysis, prepare a
comprehensive report, and file it with the Central Coast Information Center (CCIC),
located at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and provide for the
permanent curation of the recovered materials.
CR-3 In the event that human remains are exposed during ground -disturbing activities
associated with the project, an immediate halt work order shall be issued, and the
City Community Development Director and locally affiliated Native American
representative(s) (as necessary) shall be notified. California Health and Safety
Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance of the site or an y nearby
area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains shall occur until the
County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition
pursuant to Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5097.98. If the remains are
determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner shall notify the Native
American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. These requirements shall be
printed on all building and grading plans.
Monitoring Program: The conditions in Mitigation Measures CR-1 through CR-3 shall
be noted on all grading and construction plans. The City shall review and approve the
City-qualified archaeologist consistent with the Archaeological Resource Preservation
Program Guidelines.
Page 33 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
55 Broad Street, ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-2021
Page 14
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Implement Mitigation Measures AQ-1.
GHG-1 A Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan (GGRP) shall be prepared for the proposed
project and shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to issuance
of grading or building permits. The GGRP shall require annual impacts to be
quantified over the life of the project to also account for reduction in project impacts
due to future emission reduction technology that is included in the California
Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) and shall reduce annual greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions from the development by a minimum of 276.08 metric tons of
carbon dioxide equivalence (MTCO2e) per year over the operational life of the
proposed project. GHG emissions may be reduced through the implementation of
on-site mitigation measures, off-site mitigation measures, or through the purchase
of carbon offsets. It is recommended that the GGRP incorporate GHG -reduction
measures identified in the City of San Luis Obispo’s CEQA GHG Emissions
Analysis Compliance Checklist, Climate Action Plan Consistency Chec klist for
New Development, as listed below. In the event that carbon offsets are required,
carbon offsets shall be purchased from a validated/verifiable source, such as the
California Climate Action Registry, and approved by City Planning staff prior to
purchase. Demonstrated reduction of 276.08 MTCO2e per year over the
operational life of the project could be achieved through a combination of the
following specific measures. All or some of these measures may be elected and
incorporated into the GGRP to provide the required reduction.
1. The project shall be provided electricity by 3CE.
2. The project could offset natural gas usage by building more efficient and
higher performing buildings and performing retrofits on existing
buildings.
3. The project shall be designed to minimize barriers to pedestrian access
and interconnectivity.
4. The project shall be designed to provide safe and convenient access to
public transit contiguous to the project site.
5. Additional Transportation Demand Management (TDM) reduction
measures could be included to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT),
which include but are not limited to:
a. Telecommuting;
b. Car sharing;
c. Shuttle service;
d. Carpools;
e. Vanpools;
f. Participation in the SLO Rideshare Back ‘N’ Forth Club;
g. Transit subsidies; and
h. Off-site sustainable transportation infrastructure improvements.
Page 34 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
55 Broad Street, ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-2021
Page 15
6. The project shall provide organic waste pick up and shall provide the
appropriate on-site enclosures consistent with the provisions of the
City’s Development Standards for Solid Waste Services.
7. Carbon offsets could be purchased from a validated/verifiable source,
such as the California Climate Action Registry, and approved by City
Planning staff prior to purchase.
Monitoring Program: Mitigation Measure AQ-1 shall be incorporated into project grading
and building plans for review and approval by the City Community Development
Department. Mitigation Measure GHG-1 shall be submitted to the City for review and
approval prior to issuance of grading or building permits. Compliance shall be verified by
the City during regular inspections, in coordination with the SLOAPCD, as necessary.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Implement Mitigation Measures AQ-3 and AQ-4.
HAZ-1 Prior to initiation of site preparation, vegetation removal, and earth -moving
activities, the project contractor shall prepare and implement a Hazardous
Materials Management Plan that details procedures that will be taken to ensure
proper transport, use, and storage of hazardous construction materials and the
appropriate handling, stockpiling, testing, and disposal of excavated materials to
prevent the inadvertent release of hazardous construction materials and/or
contaminated soil and demolished materials to the environment during
construction activities. Elements of the plan shall include, but would not be limited
to, the following:
Worker Health and Safety
1. Accident prevention measures.
2. Measures to address hazardous materials and other site-specific worker
health and safety issues during construction, including the specific level of
protection required for construction workers. This shall include preparation
of a site-specific health and safety plan in accordance with federal
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations (29
Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 1910.120) and California Division of
Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) regulations (8 California Code
of Regulations [CCR] 5192) to address worker health and safety issues
during construction.
3. The requirement that all construction crew members be trained regarding
best practices for the proper transport, use, and storage of hazardous
construction materials and the appropriate handling, stockpiling, testing,
and disposal of excavated materials prior to beginning work.
Soil Contamination
1. Procedures for the proper handling, stockpiling, testing, and disposal of
excavated materials in accordance with CCR Title 14 and Title 22.
Page 35 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
55 Broad Street, ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-2021
Page 16
2. Soil contamination evaluation and management procedures, including how
to properly identify potential contamination (e.g., soil staining, odors, o r
buried material), the requirement that construction activities within a 50 -
foot-radius of potentially contaminated soil be halted until the hazard has
been assessed and appropriately addressed, the requirement that access
to potentially contaminated areas be limited to properly trained personnel,
and procedures for notification and reporting, including internal
management and local agencies (e.g., fire department, City of San Luis
Obispo), as needed.
3. Monitoring of ground-disturbing activities for soil contamination may include
visual and organic vapor monitoring by personnel with appropriate
hazardous materials training, including 40 hours of Hazardous Waste
Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) training.
4. If visual and organic vapor monitoring indicates signs of suspected
contaminated soil, then soil samples shall be collected and analyzed to
characterize soil quality.
5. Evaluation of all potentially contaminated materials encountered during
project construction activities in accordance with applicable federal, State,
and local regulations and/or guidelines governing hazardous waste. All
materials deemed to be hazardous shall be remediated and/or disposed of
following applicable regulatory agency regulations and/or guidelines.
Disposal sites for both remediated and non-remediated soils shall be
identified prior to beginning construction. All evaluation, remediation,
treatment, and/or disposal of hazardous waste shall be supervised and
documented by qualified hazardous waste personnel.
Hazardous Construction Materials
1. Appropriate work practices necessary to effectively comply with applicable
environmental laws and regulations, including hazardous materials
management, handling, storage, disposal, and emergency response. These
work practices include the following: an on-site hazardous material spill kit
shall be provided for small spills; totally enclosed containment shall be
provided for all trash; and all construction waste, including trash, litter,
garbage, other solid waste, petroleum products, and othe r potentially
hazardous materials, shall be removed to an appropriate waste facility
permitted or otherwise authorized to treat, store, or dispose of such
materials.
2. The requirement that hazardous construction materials must be stored and
equipment must be refueled at least 50 feet from storm drain inlets, creeks,
and other drainage features and covered with tarps or stored inside
buildings to ensure that materials are not released to the air during windy
conditions or exposed to rain.
3. Procedures for proper containment of any spills or inadvertent releases of
hazardous materials.
Page 36 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
55 Broad Street, ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-2021
Page 17
4. Notification requirements in the event of an accidental release of hazardous
materials into the environment. Construction crew members shall
immediately notify a construction foreperson who shall then report the
release to the City of San Luis Obispo to ensure the release is remediated
in accordance with City requirements.
Monitoring Program: Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 shall be incorporated into project
grading and building plans for review and approval by the City Community Development
Department. Compliance shall be verified through submittal of a Hazardous Materials
Management Plan to the City Community Development Department. Mitigation Measures
AQ-3 and AQ-4 shall be incorporated into project grading and building plans for review
and approval by the City Community Development Department. Compliance shall be
verified by the City during regular inspections, in coordination with the SLOAPCD, as
necessary. The applicant shall submit the geologic evaluation detailed in measure AQ -3
to the City Community Development Department upon completion.
Hydrology and Water Quality
Implement Mitigation Measure BIO-7.
Monitoring Program: Delineation requirements of Mitigation Measure BIO-7 shall be
incorporated into the project grading and building plans for review and approval by the
City Community Development Department. Compliance shall be verified by the City prior
to the start of construction and during regular inspections, as necessary.
Land Use and Planning
Implement Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-7.
Monitoring Program: The survey requirements of Mitigation Measures BIO -1, BIO-2,
BIO-4, and BIO-5 and delineation requirements of Mitigation Measure BIO-7 shall be
incorporated into the project grading and building plans for review and approval by the
City Community Development Department. Compliance shall be verified through
submittal of an obscure bumble bee survey report, a northern California legles s lizard
survey report, a preconstruction nesting bird survey report, and a roosting bat survey
report to the City Community Development Department. Mitigation Measure BIO -6
requires construction personnel to participate in environmental awareness training and
sign a sign-in sheet following the training. The sign-in sheet shall be submitted to the City
Community Development Department to confirm that all construction personnel have
attended. Compliance shall be verified by the City prior to the start of con struction and
during regular inspections, as necessary.
Noise
N-1 For the entire duration of the construction phase of the project, the following Best
Management Practices (BMPs) shall be adhered to:
1. Stationary construction equipment that generates noise that exceeds 60
A-weighted decibels (dBA) at the project boundaries shall be shielded with
Page 37 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
55 Broad Street, ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-2021
Page 18
the most modern noise control devices (i.e., mufflers, lagging, and/or motor
enclosures).
2. Impact tools (e.g., jack hammers, pavement breakers, rock drills, etc.) used
for project construction shall be hydraulically or electrically powered
wherever possible to avoid noise associated with compressed air exhaust
from pneumatically powered tools.
3. Where use of pneumatic tools is unavoidable, an exhaust muffler on the
compressed air exhaust shall be used.
4. All construction equipment shall have the manufacturers’ recommended
noise abatement methods installed, such as mufflers, engine enclosures,
and engine vibration insulators, intact and operational.
5. All construction equipment shall undergo inspection at periodic intervals to
ensure proper maintenance and presence of noise control devices (e.g.,
mufflers, shrouding, etc.).
N-2 Construction plans shall note construction hours, truck routes, and all construction
noise BMPs, and shall be reviewed and approved by the City Community
Development Department prior to issuance of grading/building permits. The City
shall provide and post signs stating these restrictions at construction entry sites
prior to commencement of construction and maintained throughout the
construction phase of the project. All construction workers shall be briefed at a
preconstruction meeting on construction hour limitations and how, why, and where
BMP measures are to be implemented.
N-3 For all construction activity at the project site, additional noise attenuation
techniques shall be employed as needed to ensure that noise levels are
maintained within levels allowed by the City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code,
Title 9, Chapter 9.12 (Noise Control). Such techniques shall include, but are not
limited to:
Sound blankets shall be used on noise-generating equipment;
Stationary construction equipment that generates noise levels above 65
dBA at the project boundaries shall be shielded with a barrier that meets a
sound transmission class (a rating of how well noise barriers attenuate
sound) of 25;
All diesel equipment shall be operated with closed engine doors and shall
be equipped with factory-recommended mufflers;
The movement of construction-related vehicles, with the exception of
passenger vehicles, along roadways adjacent to sensitive receptors shall
be limited to the hours between 7:00 A.M. and 7:00 P.M., Monday through
Saturday. No movement of heavy equipment shall occur on Sundays or
official holidays (e.g., Thanksgiving, Labor Day); and
Temporary sound barriers shall be constructed between construction sites
and affected uses.
Page 38 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
55 Broad Street, ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-2021
Page 19
N-4 The project contractor shall inform residents and business operators at properties
within 300 feet of the project of proposed construction timelines and noise
compliant procedures to minimize potential annoyance related to construction
noise. Signs shall be in place prior to and throughout grading and construction
activities informing the public that noise-related complaints shall be directed to the
construction manager prior to the City’s Community Development Department.
Monitoring Program: Construction plans shall note construction hours, truck routes, and
all construction noise BMPs, and shall be reviewed and approved by the City Community
Development Department prior to issuance of grading/building permits. Compliance shall
be verified by the City prior to the start of construction and during regular inspections, as
necessary.
Tribal Cultural Resources
Implement Mitigation Measures CR-1 through CR-3.
Monitoring Program: These conditions shall be noted on all grading and construction
plans. The City shall review and approve the City-qualified archaeologist consistent with
the Archaeological Resource Preservation Program Guidelines.
Utilities and Service Systems
Implement Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-4, BIO-1 through BIO-7, CR-1 through
CR-3, HAZ-1, and N-1 through N-4.
Monitoring Program: Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-4 shall be incorporated into
project grading and building plans for review and approval by the City Community
Development Department. Compliance shall be verif ied by the City during regular
inspections, in coordination with the SLOAPCD, as necessary. The applicant shall submit
the geologic evaluation detailed in Mitigation Measure AQ-3 to the City Community
Development Department upon completion. The survey requ irements of Mitigation
Measures BIO-1, BIO-2, BIO-4, and BIO-5 and delineation requirements of Mitigation
Measure BIO-7 shall be incorporated into the project grading and building plans for review
and approval by the City Community Development Department. Compliance shall be
verified through submittal of an obscure bumble bee survey report, a northern California
legless lizard survey report, a preconstruction nesting bird survey report, and a roosting
bat survey report to the City Community Development Department. Mitigation Measure
BIO-6 requires construction personnel to participate in environmental awareness training
and sign a sign-in sheet following the training. The sign-in sheet shall be submitted to the
City Community Development Department to confirm that all construction personnel have
attended. Compliance shall be verified by the City prior to the start of construction and
during regular inspections, as necessary. The conditions of Mitigation Measures CR -1
through CR-3 shall be noted on all grading and construction plans. The City shall review
and approve the City-qualified archaeologist consistent with the Archaeological Resource
Preservation Program Guidelines. Mitigation Measure HAZ -1 shall be incorporated into
project grading and building plans for review and approval by the City Community
Development Department. Compliance shall be verified through submittal of a Hazardous
Page 39 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
55 Broad Street, ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-2021
Page 20
Materials Management Plan to the City Community Development Department.
Construction plans shall note construction hours, truck routes, and all construction noise
BMPs, and shall be reviewed and approved by the City Community Development
Department prior to issuance of grading/building permits. Compliance shall be verified by
the City prior to the start of construction and during regular inspections, as necessary.
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-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-
2021). A separate, full-size sheet shall be included in working drawings submitted for
a building permit that lists all mitigation measures, 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 demonstrate compliance with all mitigation measures and
conditions, applicable to the project site, established under the Planned Development
Overlay Ordinance and associated Mitigated Negative Declaration (PDEV-0001-
2021 & EID-0528-2021).
3. The Use Permit shall be reviewed by the Community Development Director for
compliance with conditions of approval, or to determine whether a modification of the
Use Permit is necessary upon significant change to the project description, approved
plans, and other supporting documentation submitted with this application or in the
event of a change in ownership which may result in deviation from the project
description or approved plans. Minor changes to the description may be approved by
the Community Development Director; substantial modifications shall require
modification of the Use Permit.
4. Plans submitted for a building permit shall include a sediment and erosion control
plan that protects the creek banks and channel from erosion and prevent
sedimentation of the creek near and downstream from the site. Current Best
Management Practices (BMP) should be utilized. Washing of concrete, paint, tools,
or equipment shall occur only in areas where polluted water and materials can be
contained and removed from the site.
Page 40 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
55 Broad Street, ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-2021
Page 21
5. Plans submitted for a building permit shall not include any improvements,
modifications, or grading within the top of bank of the creek channel.
6. Plans submitted for a building permit shall call out the colors and materials of all
proposed building surfaces and other improvements. Colors and materials shall be
consistent with the color and material board submitted with the Development Review
application.
7. Plans submitted for a building permit shall incorporate the design considerations as
described at the ARC hearing on November 1, 2021, the final designs of the proposed
project shall be modified to incorporate the following items, subject to the satisfacti on
of the Community Development Director:
a. Consider a material change to the wainscoting on the base of Building A -
veering and cap to add more authenticity.
b. Consider a plane change on Building A such as adding a smooth surface like
faux stone, cast concrete, or incorporate matching tile.
8. 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.
9. Plans submitted for a building permit shall clearly depict the location of all required
short and long-term bicycle parking for all intended uses, plans submitted for
construction permits shall include bicycle lockers or interior space or other area for
the storage of long-term bicycle spaces. Short-term bicycle racks such as “Peak
Racks” shall be installed in close proximity to, and visible from, the main entry into
the buildings (inverted “U” rack designs shall not be permitted). 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.
10. Plans submitted for a building permit shall clearly depict the location of all required
electric vehicle (EV) ready and EV capable parking required for non-residential uses.
Sufficient detail shall be provided about the placement and design of EV equipment
and raceway for future supply, to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official and the
Community Development Director.
11. 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
Page 41 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
55 Broad Street, ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-2021
Page 22
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.
12. Mechanical and electrical equipment shall be located internally to the building. With
submittal of working drawings, the applicant shall include sectional views of the
building, which clearly show the sizes of any proposed condensers and other
mechanical equipment. If any condensers or other mechani cal equipment is to be
placed on the roof, plans submitted for a building permit shall confirm that parapets
and other roof features will adequately screen them. 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.
13. 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. A landscape buffer
shall be provided between the fence screening the storage area and the back of
sidewalk. 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.
14. The applicant shall submit a landscaping plan containing an irrigation system plan
with submittal of working drawings for a building permit. 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. The surfaces and finishes of hardscapes shall be included on the
landscaping plan.
15. Plans submitted for a building permit, shall provide mature landscaping along t he
street frontage between the trash enclosure and the street, and between the parking
areas and the back of sidewalk, landscaping in these areas shall be of an evergreen
species and a minimum size of 5 gallons, that complements the buildings
architecture, subject to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director.
16. 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).
17. 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.
Page 42 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
55 Broad Street, ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-2021
Page 23
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.
18. Plans submitted for a sign permit shall be in substantial conformance with the sign
program submittal provided for this entitlement. Modifications to this sign program or
additional signage may require addition al review by the Architectural Review
Commission or the Community Development Director, as deemed appropriate.
Engineering Division – Public Works/Community Development
19. Any required off-site public improvements related to conditions of approval or
mitigation measures shall be completed under a separate public improvement plan
submittal. Improvements located within the public right-of-way will require a separate
encroachment permit an associated inspection fees. A separate plan review fee
payable to the Public Works Department will be required for the review of the
improvement plan submittal. Said review fee shall be in accordance with the
miscellaneous public improvement plan review fee resolution in effect at the time of
the permit application submittal.
20. Plans submitted for a building permit or public improvements shall include complete
frontage improvements or demonstrate that existing improvements are upgraded per
city standard (Municipal Code 12.16.05).
21. The building plan submittal shall show and label all property line dimensions and
bearings, and all existing and proposed public and private easements for reference.
22. Plans submitted for a building permit shall demonstrate compliance with Parking and
Driveway Standards for the driveway and parking areas 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.
23. Any sections of damaged or displaced curb, gutter & sidewalk or driveway approach
shall be repaired or replaced to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director.
Page 43 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
55 Broad Street, ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-2021
Page 24
24. Plans submitted for public improvements shall include a new street light at the
existing mid-block crosswalk on Ramona Drive adjacent to the existing shopping
center driveway entrance, subject to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director.
25. The building plan submittal shall include a complete site utility plan. All existing and
proposed utilities along with utility company meters shall be shown. Existing
underground and overhead services shall be shown along with any proposed
alterations or upgrades. Services to the new structures shall be underground. All
work in the public right-of-way shall be shown or noted.
26. The building plan submittal will clearly label all creeks, top of bank and creek
setbacks.
27. The building plan submittal shall include a complete grading and drainage plan for
this project. The plan shall show the existing and proposed contours and/or spot
elevations to clearly depict the proposed grading and drainage. Show and label the
high point elevation or grade break at the yard areas and drainage arrows to show
historic drainage. Include the finished floor elevation of the proposed structures.
Show all existing and proposed drainage courses, pipes and structures; indicate the
size, type and material.
28. Any proposed stormwater features or other improvements located within the Public
right-of-way shall be specifically reviewed and approved by the city. If approved,
improvements shall require the recordation of an encroachment agreement.
29. The building plan submittal shall include a complete drainage report and plans
prepared in accordance with the Waterway Management Plan, Volume III, Drainage
Design Manual, Floodplain Management Regulation, and the Post Construction
Stormwater Requirements as promulgated by the Regional Water Quality Control
Board.
30. Public improvement plans shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for the
relocation of the public storm drain. The public improvement plans shall be approved
prior to building permit issuance.
31. The final drainage strategy shall reduce and/or eliminate the number of new storm
drain outlet structures located within the creek channels, subject to the satisfaction
of the Public Works Director.
32. A new public storm drain easement shall be recorded prior to plan approval/permit
issuance. The portion of the existing easement that extends onto this parcel shall be
abandoned accordingly. Exhibits required for the easement and abandonment shall
be prepared by the owners’ engineer or surveyor to the satisfaction of the Public
Works Director.
Page 44 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
55 Broad Street, ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-2021
Page 25
33. This property is located within a designated flood zone as shown on the Flood
Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for the City of San Luis Obispo . As such, all new
structures shall comply with all Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
requirements and the city’s Flood Damage Prevention Regulations per Municipal
Code Chapter 17.78.
34. The building plan submittal shall include a copy of the most current drainage report.
The report and plans shall clarify that the building structure, building service
equipment, additional insurance benefits may be realized by providing a freeboard of
at least two feet.
35. The building plan submittal shall include a complete erosion control plan in
accordance with city standards and Best Management Practices (BMP).
36. Work adjacent to, over, or within a channel or creek may require the approvals of
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), The Army Corp of Engi neer’s,
and/or the Regional Water Quality Control Board. A copy of any required permits or
a written permit waiver or exemption for the same shall be provided to the City prior
to demolition, grading, and/or building permit issuance.
37. An operations and maintenance manual will be required for the post construction
stormwater improvements. The manual shall be provided at the time of building
permit application and shall be accepted by the City prior to building permit issuance.
A private stormwater conveyance agreement will be required and shall be recorded
prior to final inspection approvals.
38. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Requirement: General Construction Activity
Storm Water Permits are required for all storm water discharges associated with a
construction activity where clearing, grading or excavations result in land disturbance
of one or more acres. Storm water discharges of less than one acre, but which is
part of a larger common plan of development or sale, also requires a permit. Permits
are required until the construction is complete. To be covered by a General
Construction Activity Permit, the owner(s) of land where construction activity occurs
must submit a completed "Notice of Intent" (NOI) form, with the appropriate fee, to
the State Regional Water Quality Control Board. An application is required to the
State Board under their recently adopted Stormwater Multi -Application, Reporting,
and Tracking System (SMARTS).
39. The building plan submittal shall include a copy of the Storm Wate r Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for reference. Incorporate any erosion control measures
into the building plans as required by the Board, identified in the SWPPP, and in
accordance with Section 10 of the city’s Waterways Management Plan. The building
plan submittal shall include reference to the WDID number on the grading and erosion
control plans for reference.
Page 45 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
55 Broad Street, ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-2021
Page 26
40. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall record a common driveway
agreement and a shared parking agreement, subject to the satisfaction of the Public
Works Director.
41. The building plan submittal or improvement plan submittal shall show all existing
trees on the property with a trunk diameter of 3" or greater. Offsite trees along the
adjoining property lines with canopies and/ or root systems that extend onto the
property shall be shown for reference. The plan shall note which trees are to remain
and which trees are proposed for removal. Include the diameter and species of all
trees. Tree canopies should generally be shown to scale for reference. The City
Arborist supports the proposed tree removals with the compensatory tree plantings
shown on the landscape plan and identified in the mitigation measures of the initial
study.
42. Plans submitted for a building permit shall identify street tree planting at a rate of one
15-gallon street tree for each 35 linear feet of frontage. The plans shall show all
existing and proposed street trees. Tree species and planting requirements shall be
in accordance with City Engineering Standards.
43. Tree protection measures shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City
Arborist. The City Arborist shall review and approve the proposed tree protection
measures prior to commencing with any demolition, grading, or construction. The City
Arborist shall approve any safety pruning, the cutting of substantial roots, or grading
within the dripline of trees. A city -approved arborist shall complete safety pruning.
Any required tree protection measures shall be shown or noted on the building plans.
Transportation Division – Public Works
44. Project shall include installation of pedestrian improvements at Palomar/Ramona per
the Bishop Peak and Pacheco Safe Routes to School Plan, Project #6 Phase 2 which
includes a bulbout, raised crosswalk and relocation of their driveway from Ramona
to Palomar to reduce conflicts with pedestrians and the bus stop. Stop bar and legend
on Palomar shall be relocated in accordance with the new bulbout.
45. Project shall implement the following pedestrian improvements identified in the
Anholm Neighborhood Greenway: 1) ADA curb ramps and high visibility crosswalk
on the north side of the Broad and Meinecke intersection, and 2) ADA curb ramp and
bulbout on the southwest corner of Ramona and Broad Street. NOTE: The Anholm
Neighborhood Greenway is included in the TIF Program, therefore these
improvements are eligible for TIF credits.
46. Parking shall be restricted on either side of driveways to maintain adequate sight
distance for exiting vehicles.
Page 46 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
55 Broad Street, ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-2021
Page 27
Fire Department
47. Plans submitted for a building permit shall demonstrate that the project can meet
minimum required fire flow for fire sprinkler systems in each building, based on
proposed construction type. Fire flow data can be obtained from the Wallace Group.
48. Plans submitted for a building permit shall identify the construction type and
occupancy classification(s) for proposed buildings, subject to the satisfaction of the
Fire Marshal.
Utilities Department
49. 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.
50. 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.
51. The existing sewer lateral shall be inspected per Chapter 13.08.395 of the City’s
Municipal Code and the inspection shall be submitted with the building permit
submittal. Submit the inspection video to the Permit Technician in Community
Development, Engineering Development Review.
52. The sewer lateral serving the existing building located in the southwest portion of the
parcel (Building B) shall disconnect from the existing sewer along the creek and re-
route a new sewer lateral to the sewer main along Palomar Road.
53. The project is within a sewer capacity constrained area and shall replace 39 sewer
laterals within the same capacity constrained sewer basin to meet the was tewater
offset requirements of Municipal Code Ordinance 13.08.396 prior to building permit
issuance, to the satisfaction of the Utilities Director.
54. All utility easements dedicated to the City shall comply with the latest engineering
design standards and shall have reasonable alignments needed for maintenance of
public infrastructure.
55. The project will result in increased sewer generation at the project site and as
mitigation the project shall abandon the existing City main that runs near the creek
starting at Manhole I06-48 at the intersection of Palomar and Ramona to Manhole
I07-11 within the private cul-de-sac. This portion of sewer shall be re-routed along
the property frontage within Ramona Road, connecting at Manhole I06 -48 at the
intersection of Palomar and Ramona and terminating near Manhole I06-50
approximately 480-feet of 10” sewer main. Final alignment of the new 10” HDPE
Page 47 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
55 Broad Street, ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-2021
Page 28
sewer will need to be engineered to match the existing and downstream inverts and
shall be subject to the final approval by the Utilities Director.
56. 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 commercial facilities sha ll also provide an
area to wash floor mats, equipment, and trash cans. The wash area shall be inside,
drained to the sanitary sewer, and an environmental compliance permit shall be filed
prior to issuance of occupancy permit.
57. Water service meter(s) shall be adequately sized to serve the project’s proposed
units. The proposed housing units have a commercial use and shall be separately
metered by parcel boundary; service lines shall not cross parcel boundaries per MC
13.04.120.
58. A separate meter shall be provided for the non-residential landscape areas greater
than 1,000sf [2016 Green Building Code A5.304.2 Water Code Section 535 and City
Uniform Design Criteria] and shall comply with the requirements of Municipal Code
Section MC 17.87.020-C.2.
59. The project shall have a separate fire service connection, protected by a double
detector check valve per City standards.
60. The project will result in increased water usage on site and shall perform frontage
improvements along the norther property boundary. These improv ements include
replacing the existing 10” cast iron water main within Ramona with approximately
480-feet of new 12” C900 water main along the north frontage, and in accordance to
the City Standards. The existing water main shall be abandoned per City Stand ards.
61. The existing fire hydrants located on the Palomar, Ramona, and Broad Street
frontages shall be removed and replaced with hydrants that meet City Standards.
62. Potable city water shall not be used for major construction activities, such as grading
and dust control, as required under Prohibited Water Uses; Chapter 13.07.070.C of
the City’s Municipal Code. Recycled water is available through the City’s Construction
Water Permit program.
63. The building permit submittal shall include a completed Maximum Applied Water
Allowance (MAWA) form based on the final landscape design plan and a hydrozone
table with a summary of Estimated Total Water Use (ETWU) and the corresponding
irrigation window. The MAWA and ETWU calculator is available at:
www.slocity.org/government/department‐directory/utilities‐department/documents‐
and‐files.
Page 48 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
55 Broad Street, ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-2021
Page 29
64. The building permit submittal shall include a final landscape design plan that includes
all the criteria required in the City Engineering Standards Uniform Design Criteria for
Landscaping and Irrigation.
65. The building permit submittal shall include a final irrigation plan that includes all the
criteria required in the City Engineering Standards Uniform Design Criteria for
Landscaping and Irrigation.
66. The building permit submittal shall include a soils management report that includes
at a minimum the criteria required in the City Engineering Standards Uniform Design
Criteria for Landscaping and Irrigation.
67. 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.
68. A trash enclosure capable of storing the required bins for waste, recycling, and
organics shall be provided.
69. Please provide the Garbage Company's letter on the plans, which will need to confirm
truck access and clearances needed to reach the trash bins.
70. Trash enclosures shall drain to a vegetative swale and shall not drain to the sewer.
Indemnification
71. 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 Commissioner ___________, seconded by Commissioner
_____________, and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
REFRAIN:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 9th day of February, 2022.
_____________________________
Tyler Corey, Secretary
Planning Commission
Page 49 of 222
Page 50 of 222
Page 1 of 4
122 East Arrellaga Street ● Santa Barbara, CA 93101 ● 805.962.2746
www.HBArchitects.com
August 7, 2020
(Revised October 26, 2020)
Kyle Bell, Associate Planner
Community Development
City of San Luis Obispo
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Re: The Village at The Palms
55 Broad Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93405
Proposed expansion of existing Assisted Living Facility
Development review (major) application
Minor Use Permit
Architectural review (major)
Dear Kyle,
On behalf of our client, The Village at The Palms, Hochhauser Blatter Associates (HBA) submits this application for
development review for the proposed expansion of their existing Assisted Living facilities located at 55 Broad Street.
At this time, HBA is requesting the following approvals:
1. A Planned Development Amendment
2. A Minor Use Permit
3. Architectural Review Committee (ARC) review and approval
4. An exception to allow encroachment into the additional 10 ft. creek side setback at the upper stories, per
Section 17.70.030 E.3
5. An exception to allow a reduction in the side yard setback along Palomar Avenue to facilitate additional
building setback from the top of the bank of the creek, per Section 17.70.170 D.1.b
6. An exception to allow a small section of replacement parking incorporating impervious paving at the
southwest corner of the “Building A” site, per Section 17.70.030 G.1
7. An exception allow a section of replacement parking incorporating impervious paving within the 20 ft.
creek side setback on the east side of the “Building B” site, per Section 17.70.030 G.1
Page 51 of 222
Page 2 of 4
122 East Arrellaga Street ● Santa Barbara, CA 93101 ● 805.962.2746
www.HBArchitects.com
8. An exception to allow parking within the required side yard setback adjacent to Palomar Avenue and the
small section of “Building B” parking along Broad Street front yard setback
9. An exception to allow the building height to exceed 35 ft. in the existing R4-PD Zone
10. An exception to allow the trash / recycling enclosure for “Building B” to be located within the side yard
adjacent to Palomar Avenue, in accordance with the flexibility allowed per Section 17.70.170 D.1.b, to
facilitate increased setback from the creek
11. An exception to allow bicycle parking requirements to be consistent with the requirements for Medical
Clinics, which would be 1 bicycle per 7,500 SF (requirements based upon residential standards would be
excessive for an Assisted Living project). Based upon this, the following would be required:
Building A – 33,837 SF / 7,500 SF = 4.5 bicycles
8 bicycle spaces provided
Building B – 22,489 SF / 7,500 SF = 2.99 bicycles
8 bicycles spaces provided
The submitted plans include detailed development plans that are consistent with the City checklists and
address comments identified by the Community Development Department, Utilities Department, and Fire
Department during the December 19, 2019 Pre-Application meeting (PRE-0771-2019 (55 Broad Street)), as
well as subsequent meetings and discussion with the City of San Luis Obispo.
Project Description
The Village at The Palms is an existing Continuing Care Retirement Community (RCFE) that provides a range of
housing and services for the elderly population of San Luis Obispo, including Independent Senior Living, Assisted
Living (including Memory Care), and Skilled Nursing. The proposed project is intended to meet the growing need
within the community for additional Assisted Living housing and services.
The project will provide various amenities and programs intended to promote social interaction, wellness and fitness,
and group activities featuring art and music and access to the outdoors. In lieu of the current land use that is
predominantly paved parking adjacent to the existing creek, the proposed development consolidates parking and will
allow the new structures and associated outdoor patios and terraces meaningful visual access to the creek side
environment. Building A includes a kitchen that will provide residents with a variety of food and meal choices and
customized menus to meet specific nutritional needs of residents.
The individual studio, one-bedroom, and two-bedroom accommodations reflect the current expectations of assisted
living residents to live in a “residential setting” with nicely sized bedrooms, living spaces that allow for a variety of
furniture layouts, bathrooms that meet all current accessibility and licensing standards, as well as +9 ft. ceiling
heights which will allow windows with maximum natural daylight and opportunities for natural ventilation.
The building designs reflects a more traditional “Spanish style” architecture that includes clay tile roofs, smooth
plaster finish walls, decorative tile insets, ornamental wrought iron planters, and a variety of arched openings. The
buildings incorporate a significant number of horizontal breaks in the building plane which helps frame the
courtyards/patios and create a residential scale articulation.. In addition to the clay tile roofs, both buildings have
substantial recessed flat roof areas behind the mansard roofs for the location and visual concealment of mechanical
equipment, plumbing vents, exhaust fans, and potential solar panels. “Building A” incorporates an arrival porte-
couchere that provides a meaningful drop-off / arrival feature that also complies with Fire Department vertical
clearances.
Page 52 of 222
Page 3 of 4
122 East Arrellaga Street ● Santa Barbara, CA 93101 ● 805.962.2746
www.HBArchitects.com
The main lobby for “Building B” incorporates a pedestrian courtyard that provides access to both a permeable creek
side walkway and the existing pedestrian bridge. The pedestrian bridge will be modified to meet ADA standards, and
in doing so, will serve as a meaningful pedestrian connection between the two new buildings and the overall existing
campus. “Building B” also incorporates an automated parking system for a portion of the underbuilding parking,
which, by its very nature, allows less of the site to be totally dedicated to surface parking.
The landscape character will be consistent with the existing landscape at the Palms. Existing trees and palm trees,
and the riparian plants of the creek corridor, are preserved and enhanced. City of San Luis Obispo planning
documents, such as the “Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (WELO)” and “Street Tree Master List,” have been
consulted to meet city goals. Trees and shrubs are selected to highlight building entries, compliment building scale
and screen less interesting site features such as trash enclosures and utilities. Trees and shrubs are selected to
enhance microclimate conditions such as providing parking lot shade and shading outdoor gathering areas. Plants
are selected for drought-tolerance and to provide a variety of forms, leaf color and texture, and flower color to create
variety and interest throughout the year, especially where adjacent to pedestrian pathways and gathering areas.
Justification for Exceptions
3. An exception to allow encroachment into the additional 10 ft. creek side setback at the upper stories, per
Section 17.70.030 E.3
Justification: Based upon site walk conducted on May 23, 2020 with Hal Hannula from the City of San Luis Obispo
and Cristi Fry from Ashley & Vance Engineering, it was determined that the creek vegetation was a mix of very
mature native and non-native vegetation with no predominant pattern of riparian vegetation. In addition, the majority
of the upper story floor areas of “Building A” and “Building B” are not within the additional 10 ft. upper-story setback
(see existing floor plans with 10 ft. additional setback indicated on plan). Lastly, the height and width of the existing
trees within the creek boundaries are considerable which will already significantly impact the daylight within the
existing creek corridor.
4. An exception to allow a reduction in the side yard setback along Palomar Avenue to facilitate additional
building setback from the top of the bank of the creek, per Section 17.70.170 D.1.b
Justification: The Zoning Code Section 17.70.170 D.1.b is specifically intended to encourage enhanced setback from
the creek. This will also allow for the inclusion of a permeable pedestrian walkway along the creek.
5. An exception to allow a small section of replacement parking incorporating impervious paving at the
southwest corner of the “Building A” site, per Section 17.70.030 G.1
Justification: The requested area of parking is replacing existing parking and asphalt paving with permeable
pavement and will be incorporated with a more refined draining plan that will further benefit the creek environment.
6. An exception allow a section of replacement parking incorporating impervious paving within the 20 ft.
creek side setback on the east side of the “Building B” site, per Section 17.70.030 G.1
Justification: The requested area of parking is replacing existing parking and asphalt paving with permeable
pavement and will be incorporated with a more refined draining plan that will further benefit the creek environment.
7. An exception to allow parking within the required side yard setback adjacent to Palomar Avenue and the
small section of “Building B” parking along Broad Street front yard setback
Justification: This parking is generally located in the areas currently consisting of driveways and parking. The
parking in question will be visually screened by the existing and new site perimeter walls.
Page 53 of 222
Page 4 of 4
122 East Arrellaga Street ● Santa Barbara, CA 93101 ● 805.962.2746
www.HBArchitects.com
8. An exception to allow the building height to exceed 35 ft. in the existing R4-PD Zone
Justification: The additional height for “Building A” is primarily required in order to provide the Fire Department
clearances at the main entrance area and to allow more appropriate ceiling heights.
9. An exception to allow the trash / recycling enclosure for “Building B” to be located within the side yard
adjacent to Palomar Avenue, in accordance with the flexibility allowed per Section 17.70.170 D.1.b, to
facilitate increased setback from the creek
Justification: The proposed location of the trash enclosure will allow for landscaping to screen it from the street
elevation. It will not interfere with any driveway or vehicular access view lines. In addition, it is more desirable to
have it screened on the street side versus on the creek side.
10. An exception to allow bicycle parking requirements to be consistent with the requirements for Medical
Clinics, which would be 1 bicycle per 7,500 SF (requirements based upon residential standards would be
excessive for an Assisted Living project). Based upon this, the following would be required:
Building A – 33,837 SF / 7,500 SF = 4.5 bicycles
8 bicycle spaces provided
Building B – 22,489 SF / 7,500 SF = 2.99 bicycles
8 bicycles spaces provided
Justification: The existing parking requirements in the City of San Luis Obispo Zoning Code do not specifically
address an “Assisted Living” population. None of the residents will be “bicycle riders”, and therefore a ‘Medical Clinic’
use, and based upon HBA’s experience on similar projects, the proposed number of spaces will be sufficient.
In conclusion, HBA would like to express our sincere appreciation to City staff for the recommendations and
assistance provided to date, and we look forward to a successful review and approval of this much needed project.
Sincerely,
Jay I. Blatter, AIA, LEED AP
Principal
Page 54 of 222
PROJECT NO:SHEET CONTENTSDATE:08/05/2020 zoning submittalTHIS DRAWING IS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL UNDER THE SOLE OWNERSHIP OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING. ANY USE WITHOUT EXPRESSED WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER IS PROHIBITED.11/20/2020 zoning resubmittal01/05/2021 zoning resubmittal11/12/2021 ARC review response VILLAGE AT THE PALMSCONCEPT DESIGN55 BROAD ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.9923COVER SHEETCOVER SHEETVILLAGE AT THE PALMSPROPOSED ASSISTED LIVING55 BROAD ST. SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.VICINITY MAPPROJECT SITE55 BROAD ST. SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.NPROJECT STATISTICSSHEET INDEXPROJECT DIRECTORYZONING ANALYSISPROJECT: PROPOSED ASSISTED LIVING APPARTMENTS COMPLEXLOCATION: 55 BROAD ST. SAN LUIS OBISPO, CAAPN: APN 052-162-021PROPERTY OWNER: WESTPAC COMMUNITIES APPLICANT:APPLICANT CONTACT: 505 BATH ST. SANTA BARBARA CA. 93101 PROPOSED USE: ASSISTED LIVINGARCHITECT:HOCHHAUSER BLATTER ARCHITECTS122 E. ARRELLAGA STREETSANTA BARBARA, CA 93101T: (805) 962-2746 EXT. 101CONTACT: JAY BLATTER JAN HOCHHAUSERPROPERTY OWNER:WESTPAC COMMUNITIES 505 BATH ST.SANTA BARBARA CA. 93101PATRICK SMITH T. 1(805) 965 -2100psmith@westpacinv.comARCHITECTURALLANDSCAPE ARCHITECT:JBLA979 OSOS STREET, SUITE B6SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401T. ((805) 439-3209 jim@jbla-slo.comCONTACT: JIM BURROWSCIVIL ENGINEER:ASHLEY & VINCE ENGINEERING1413 Monterey St.San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 JUAN ALVAREZ: (805) 545-0010 x156STUDIO ONE BEDROOM TWO BEDROOM 2 4 1 7STUDIO ONE BEDROOM TWO BEDROOM 3 10 2 15STUDIO ONE BEDROOM TWO BEDROOM 3 10 2 15 37BUILDING A:1st FLOORTOTAL:2ND FLOORTOTAL:3RD FLOORTOTAL:BUILDING A TOTAL:STUDIO ONE BEDROOM TWO BEDROOM - - - PARKINGSTUDIO ONE BEDROOM TWO BEDROOM - - - PARKINGSTUDIO ONE BEDROOM TWO BEDROOM - 11 - 11BUILDING B:1st FLOORTOTAL:2ND FLOORTOTAL:3RD FLOORTOTAL:STUDIO ONE BEDROOM TWO BEDROOM - 11 - 11 224TH FLOORTOTAL:BUILDING TOTAL:UNIT COUNTPARKINGTHE VILLAGE AT THE PALMS IS A PROPOSED PROJECT TO ADD TWO NEW BUILDINGS TO THE EXISTING VILLAGE AT THE PALMS CONTINUING CARE RETIREMENT COMMUNITY CAMPUS. THE PROPOSED NEW STRUCTURES ARE LOCATED AT THE WESTERN END OF THE CAMPUS IN AREAS CURRENTLY OCCUPIED BY PARKING ON THE EAST AND WEST SIDE OF THE EXISTING CREEK.THE INTENTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS TO CREATE ADDITIONAL ASSISTED LIVING UNITS THAT WILL MEET WITH CURRENT STANDARDS IN TERMS OF BOTH LICENSING AND QUALITY OF LIFE FOR RESIDENTS. THE PRIMARY MARKET WILL BE ELDERLY ADULTS FROM WITHIN THE GREATER SAN LUIS OBISPO COMMUNITY. BUILDING A IS A NEW THREE-STORY STRUCTURE THAT INCLUDES 37 NEW UNITS PLUS AMENITIES, INCLUDING A COMMERCIAL KITCHEN, DINING, LIVING ROOM, MULTI-PURPOSE ACTIVITIES SPACE, ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES, AND A ROOFTOP TERRACE.BUILDING B IS A THREE-STORY BUILDING WHICH INCLUDES AN ADDITIONAL LEVEL OF NEW OFF-STREET PARKING, LOCATED ABOVE THE EXISTING PARKING LOT, AND 22 NEW UNITS.BOTH STRUCTURES WILL BE LICENSED BY THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES (DSS) COMMUNITY CARE LICENSING. ALL NEW STRUCTURES WILL BE FULLY SPRINKLERED PER NFPA13 REQUIREMENTS. ADDING NEW MONUMENT SIGNAGE INCORPORATING EXSITSTING PROJECT LOGO. LOCATED IN MUTIPLE LOCATIONS: 1)RAMONA DR. NEW ENTRY , 2) ON THE CORNER OF RAMONA DR. WITH PALOMAR AVE.3) AT THE PARKING ENTRY FROM PALOMAR AVE. NEW ENTRY, SEE SHEET A6.1 BUILDING A:FIRST FLOOR:9,293 SFSECOND FLOOR:13,293 SFTHIRD FLOOR:11,251 SFTOTAL: 33,837 SFTHIRD FLOOR TERRACE:1,054 SFBUILDING B:THIRD FLOOR:11,257 SFFOURTH FLOOR:11,232 SFTOTAL: 22,489 SF1ST FLOOR PARKING:11,583 SF2ND FLOOR PARKING:11,583 SF2nd floor, TERRACE 245 SF3rd floor, TERRACE 811 SF4th floor TERRACE 245 SFPARCEL 2 LOT AREA = 198,356 SF (SLO AL 20-0002 IN PROGRESS)EX BLDG COVERAGE = 43,966 SFPROPOSED LOT COVERAGE (43,966 + 9,293 + 11,583)/198,356 = 33%CURRENT ZONING = R-4 PDA0.1A0.1 COVER SHEETA1.0 MASTER SITE PLANA1.1 ENLARGED CONCEPT SITE PLANA1.2 EXHIBIT INDICATING EXCEPTIONA2.1 FIRST FLOOR PLAN -BUILDING AA2.2 SECOND FLOOR PLAN -BUILDING AA2.3 THIRD FLOOR PLAN -BUILDING AA2.4 ROOF PLAN AA2.5 ELEVATIONS AA2.6 ELEVATIONS AA2.6s SITE SECTION AA2.7 FIRST FLOOR PLAN -BUILDING BA2.8 SECOND FLOOR PLAN -BUILDING BA2.9 THIRD FLOOR PLAN -BUILDING BA2.10 FOURTH FLOOR PLAN -BUILDING BA3.0 ROOF PLAN BA3.1 ELEVATIONS BA3.2 ELEVATIONS BA3.2s SITE SECTION BA4.3 OVERAL SITE SECTIONSPROJECT SCOPEC-1.0 GRADING AND UTILITYL-1 CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLANL-2 WELO WORKSHEET ANDLANDSCAPE DESIGN NOTESCIVILLANDSCAPEBICYCLE PARKINGBUILDING A 33,837 SF ÷ 7,500 SF = 4.5 REQUIRED 8 PROVIDED(based on the medical clinic requirement)BUILDING B 22,489 SF ÷ 7,500 SF = 2.99 REQUIRED 8 PROVIDEDBUILDING B & B 107 SPACES ÷ 20 SPACES = 5.3 REQUIRED 8 PROVIDEDMOTORCYCLE PARKING 1. A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT2. A MINOR USE PERMIT3. AN EXCEPTION TO ALLOW ENCROACHMENT INTO THE ADDITIONAL 10 FT. CREEK SIDE SETBACK AT THE UPPER STORIES, PER SECTION 17.70.030 E.34. AN EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A REDUCTION IN THE SIDE YARD SETBACK ALONG PALOMAR AVENUE TO FACILITATE ADDITIONAL BUILDING SETBACK FROM THE TOP OF THE BANK OF THE CREEK, PER SECTION 17.70.170 D.1.B5. AN EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A SMALL SECTION OF REPLACEMENT PARKING INCORPORATING IMPERVIOUS PAVING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE “BUILDING A” SITE, PER SECTION 17.70.030 G.16. AN EXCEPTION ALLOW A SECTION OF REPLACEMENT PARKING INCORPORATING IMPERVIOUS PAVING WITHIN THE 20 FT. CREEK SIDE SETBACK ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE “BUILDING B” SITE, PER SECTION 17.70.030 G.17. AN EXCEPTION TO ALLOW PARKING WITHIN THE REQUIRED SIDE YARD SETBACK ADJACENT TO PALOMAR AVENUE AND THE SMALL SECTION OF “BUILDING B”PARKING ALONG BROAD STREET FRONT YARD SETBACK8. AN EXCEPTION TO ALLOW THE BUILDING HEIGHT TO EXCEED 35 FT. INTHE EXISTING R4-PD ZONE9. AN EXCEPTION TO ALLOW THE TRASH / RECYCLING ENCLOSURE FOR “BUILDING B”TO BE LOCATED WITHIN THE SIDE YARD ADJACENT TO PALOMAR AVENUE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FLEXIBILITY ALLOWED PER SECTION 17.70.170 D.1.B, TO FACILITATE INCREASED SETBACK FROM THE CREEK 10. WE SEEKING ARC REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE PROPERTY SIGNAGE, THAT IS IIDENTICAL TO EXISTING ONE.A4.4 OVERAL SITE SECTION RELETIVE TO THE NEXT DOOR BUILDINGA4.5 ILLUSTRATION -VIEW FROM RAMONA DRIVEA4.6 ILLUSTRATION -VIEW FROM RAMONA DRIVE ON SIGNAGEA4.6b ILLUSTRATION -VIEW ON BUILDING B FROM RAMONA ACROSS THE CREEK SIGNAGEA4.7 ILLUSTRATION -VIEW ON BUILDING A FROM SOUTH EASTA4.8 ILLUSTRATIVE -VIEW ON THE MAIN ENTRANCE ON BUILDING BA4.9 ILLUSTRATIVE -VIEW FROM PALOMAR AVENUE ON BUILDING BA4.10 ILLUSTRATIVE OVERALL VIEW ON THE PROPOSED PROJECTA4.11 VIEW FROM RAMONA DRIVE AND PALOMAR AVE CORNERA6.0 SITE DETAILS: TRASH ENCLOSURESA6.1 SITE DETAILSM-1 MATERIAL BOARDM-2 MATERIAL BOARD -WORK TILEM-3 MATERIAL BOARD -DOORSM-4 SIGNAGEE0.1 GENERAL NOTES, SYMBOLS AND DETAILSE0.2 SITE LIGHTING PLANE0.3 SITE LIGHTING PHOTOMETRIC PLANE0.4 EXTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURE CUT SHEETSELECTRICALC-1.1 PRELIMINARY SITE CIRCULATION PLANEXISTING CONDITIONSEXISTING NUMBER OF BEDS (242) = 48.4 PARKING SPACESPEAK NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES (67) = 67 PARKING SPACESPARKING REQUIRED = 115.4 SPACESEXISTING PARKING PROVIDED = 171 SPACESPROPOSED PROJECTADDITIONAL NUMBER OF BEDS (59) = 11.8 SPACESADDITIONAL ANTICIPATED EMPLOYEES (16) = 16 SPACESADDITIONAL PARKING REQUIRED = 27.8 SPACESEXISTING PARKING REMOVED = 128 SPACESADDITIONAL PARKING PROVIDED = 109 SPACESTOTAL PARKING REQUIRED = 143TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED = 152Zoning Regulations Section 17.72.030 Table 3-4 (Parking Requirements by Use): Residential Care Facility – 7 or more residents: 2 spaces for the owner-manager plus 1 for every 5 beds and 1 for each nonresident employee.ABC-0.0 PRELIMINARY TREE REMOVAL PLANPage 55 of 222
TERRACEEXISTINGBUILDINGEXISTINGBUILDINGRAMONA DRIVEPALOMAR AVEEXISTING BRIDGEBRIDGEWATERLINE EASEMENTTHE OAKSTHE PALMS61 BROAD ST.3-STORY BUILDINGAREA: 8,750 SFAPN: 052-162-018EXISTINGBUILDINGEXISTINGBUILDINGTRASH & RECYCLINGA1.11AC DRIVEWAYAC DRIVEWAYAC PARKINGGARDEN CREEKBROAD STREET22' - 2 3/4"21' - 0"6' - 11 1/2"37 UNITSBUILDING A13,293 SF22 UNITSBUILDING B12,068 SFPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEGARDENCREEK----APN 052-162-021PROPERTY SIGNAGEPROPERTYSIGNAGEPROPERTYSIGNAGETRASH & RECYCLINGNEW ENTRYBUS STOPPROJECT NO:SHEET CONTENTSDATE:08/05/2020 zoning submittalTHIS DRAWING IS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL UNDER THE SOLE OWNERSHIP OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING. ANY USE WITHOUT EXPRESSED WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER IS PROHIBITED.11/20/2020 zoning resubmittal01/05/2021 zoning resubmittal11/12/2021 ARC review response VILLAGE AT THE PALMSCONCEPT DESIGN55 BROAD ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.9923MASTER SITE PLANMASTER SITE PLANN0'16'32'64'SCALE 1/32" = 1'-0VILLAGE AT THE PALMSSTUDIO ONE BEDROOM TWO BEDROOM 2 4 1 7STUDIO ONE BEDROOM TWO BEDROOM 3 10 2 15STUDIO ONE BEDROOM TWO BEDROOM 3 10 2 15 37BUILDING A:1st FLOORTOTAL:2ND FLOORTOTAL:3RD FLOORTOTAL:BUILDING A TOTAL:STUDIO ONE BEDROOM TWO BEDROOM - - - PARKINGSTUDIO ONE BEDROOM TWO BEDROOM - - - PARKINGSTUDIO ONE BEDROOM TWO BEDROOM - 11 - 11BUILDING B:1st FLOORTOTAL:2ND FLOORTOTAL:3RD FLOORTOTAL:STUDIO ONE BEDROOM TWO BEDROOM - 11 - 11 224TH FLOORTOTAL:BUILDING TOTAL:PROJECT SITE55 BROAD ST. SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.VICINITY MAP.A1.0Page 56 of 222
7' - 0"SEATTINGAREATO P O F C R E E K20'FR O M C R E E K S E TB A C K
ADD TO UPPER FLOORS SET BACK10' - 0"OUTDOOR TERRACEFIREPLACEADD TO UPPER FLOORS SET BACK10' - 0"2 0 'F R O M C R E E K S E T B A C K
PALOMAR AVEBUILDING BBUILDING A-INDICATES AREAS WHEREEXCEPTION FOR THEADDITIONAL THIRD STORY SETBACK IS BEINGREQUESTEDRAMONA DRIVETO P O F C R E E K
SETBACK10' - 0"SETBACK20' - 0"10' setb ac k, m in.12' - 8 3/4"proposed setback7' - 0"PROJECT NO:SHEET CONTENTSDATE:08/05/2020 zoning submittalTHIS DRAWING IS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL UNDER THE SOLE OWNERSHIP OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING. ANY USE WITHOUT EXPRESSED WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER IS PROHIBITED.11/20/2020 zoning resubmittal01/05/2021 zoning resubmittal11/12/2021 ARC review response VILLAGE AT THE PALMSCONCEPT DESIGN55 BROAD ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.9923EXHIBIT INDICATING EXCEPTION FOR ADDITIONALTHIRD STORY SETBACKEXHIBIT INDICATING EXCEPTION FORADDITIONAL THIRD STORY SETBACKA1.2Page 57 of 222
OUTDOORPATIOEXISTINGBUILDINGEXISTINGBUILDINGCOVEREDDROP-OFFRAMONA DRIVEBUILDINGBPARKINGPALOMAR AVESOUTH BRIDGEEDGE OF EXISTING AC PAVING AND NEW FLOOD PLAIN LINE10'-0" WATER PIPELINE EASEMENTFLOOD PLAIN LINETHE OAKSCREEK SETBACK61 BROAD ST.3-STORY BUILDINGAREA: 8,750 SFAPN: 052-162-018WATERLINE EASEMENTTRASH & RECYCLINGE PARKINGAT GRADEEXIST. A.C. DRIVEWAYTHE PALMSN CONCRETE ACCESSIBLE RAMP14
17' - 0"2' - 0"A2.51A2.52A2.61A2.62A3.11A3.221 6 12
6' - 11 1/2"PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE2 WATERLINE EASEMENT 3793 FLATOR22 FTRRA1 FTAIR B22 FTAIR 1182326N CONCRETEACCESSIBLERAMPENTRY1
6
8
11
1 4
17
A U T O M A T E DPAR K L IF T
S Y S T E ME WALLTO REMAIN2A4.31A4.3SURVEYEDTOPOFCREEKBANKCREEK SETBACK20' MIN.20' MIN.PROPERTYSIGNAGEPROPERTYSIGNAGE24' - 0"EVCHARGING STATIONS2 AR ING AMOTORCYCLE PARKINGPROPOSED SITE 6' MAX. HIGH ALL TYP.SEE 4/A6.1 , ,TRASH & RECYCLINGA3.211' - 0"16' - 0"MOTORCYCLE PARKINGBICYCLESBICYCLES201A4.4 DDCV16' - 4"2' - 0"F & F 22' - 0"16' - 10 1/2"38' - 8"15 ' - 5 1/4 "147' - 1 1/4"60' - 9 1/2"144' - 5 1/2"87' - 1 3/4"PERMEABLEDECOMPOSED GRANITE WALKWAYF & F BICYCLESPERMEABLEDECOMPOSED GRANITE WALKWAYPERMEABLEDECOMPOSED GRANITE WALKWAY42" PATIOWALL, TYP.ONE WAYTOP OF CREEK BANKPER SURVEYTOP OF CREEK BANKPER SURVEYpro posed property line, 10' m in.12 ' - 8 3/4 " setback toSEWER EASEMENT4A6.1PERMEABLE PAVERS1A6.1A6.01A6.04PROPERTYSIGNAGE3A6.1MOTORCYCLE PARKINGPROPOSED SITE 6' MAX. HIGH ALL TYP.SEE 4/A6.126' - 0"26' - 0"5' - 6 3/4"20' - 0"EV CHARGINGSTATIONSEVCHARGING STATIONS1A6.1SPROPERTY LINEPROPERTYLINEDECOMPOSED GRANITESETBACK10' - 0"PAVERS5A6.1proposed setback7' - 0"MOTORCYCLEPARKINGMOTORCYCLEPARKING26' - 1"22' - 6 3/4"PROJECT NO:SHEET CONTENTSDATE:08/05/2020 zoning submittalTHIS DRAWING IS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL UNDER THE SOLE OWNERSHIP OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING. ANY USE WITHOUT EXPRESSED WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER IS PROHIBITED.11/20/2020 zoning resubmittal01/05/2021 zoning resubmittal11/12/2021 ARC review response VILLAGE AT THE PALMSCONCEPT DESIGN55 BROAD ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.9923ENLARGED CONCEPT SITE PLANENLARGED CONCEPT SITE PLANN0'8'16'32'SCALE 1/16" = 1'-0A1.1Page 58 of 222
1 FLAUNDR3 FATIITI2 FTAIR 212 FDININGROO43 FIT H N44 FLIN N4 FAN3 FRI ATDINING32 FDR TOR3 FFR32 FRF31 FTUDIO A4 F1BDROOA144 FORRIDOR F1BDROOA F1BDROOA4 F1BDROOA42 F1BDROOA1 FTAIR 1341 FRTION11 FAIL A AG12 FBU INOFFI1 FALON FONRR FN RR2 FL3 FTUDIO A7' - 0"4' - 9"DROOFF AR A2A2.61A2.616' - 0"TOPO FCREEK20'CREEKSETBACK26' - 0"26' - 0"50' - 10 1/4"8' - 0"1' - 0"EQ28' - 5 1/2"EQPROJECT NO:SHEET CONTENTSDATE:08/05/2020 zoning submittalTHIS DRAWING IS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL UNDER THE SOLE OWNERSHIP OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING. ANY USE WITHOUT EXPRESSED WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER IS PROHIBITED.11/20/2020 zoning resubmittal01/05/2021 zoning resubmittal11/12/2021 ARC review response VILLAGE AT THE PALMSCONCEPT DESIGN55 BROAD ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.9923FIRST FLOOR PLAN -BUILDING AFIRST FLOOR PLAN -BUILDING AN0'4'8'16'SCALE 1/8" = 1'-0A2.1Page 59 of 222
TAIR 2224 FDI ALTH2 FARTTUDIO1 FTAIR 1L2 FN RR2 FONRR1 FLIFNRI H NT12 FTORAG2 FULTIUR O11 FDOFFI3 F2BDROOA33 FTUDIO A32 FTUDIO A2 F1BDROOA31 FTUDIO A F1BDROOA42 F1BDROOA4 F1BDROOA4 F1BDROOA2 F1BDROOA2 F1BDROOA F1BDROOA F1BDROOA F2BDROOA13 FORRIDOR7' - 0"7' - 0"SEATINGAREA1A2.63 FTUDIO ATO P O F C R E E K
2 0 'FR O M C R E EK SE T BA C K PROJECT NO:SHEET CONTENTSDATE:08/05/2020 zoning submittalTHIS DRAWING IS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL UNDER THE SOLE OWNERSHIP OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING. ANY USE WITHOUT EXPRESSED WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER IS PROHIBITED.11/20/2020 zoning resubmittal01/05/2021 zoning resubmittal11/12/2021 ARC review response VILLAGE AT THE PALMSCONCEPT DESIGN55 BROAD ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.9923SECOND FLOOR PLAN -BUILDING ASECOND FLOOR PLAN -BUILDING AN0'4'8'16'SCALE 1/8" = 1'-0A2.2Page 60 of 222
DIAROO32 FN RR2 FONRR1 FTAFFBR AROO2 FTAIR 21 FTAIR 1L12 FIT H N3 FTORAG F1BDROOA2 F1BDROOA2 F1BDROOA3 F1BDROOA4 F1BDROOA42 F1BDROOA F2BDROOA F1BDROOA F1BDROOA32 FTUDIO A33 FTUDIO A3 FTUDIO A3 F2BDROOA2 F1BDROOA31 FTUDIO A113 FORRIDOR7' - 0"SEATINGAREA2A2.61A2.6TO P O F C R E E K
2 0 'FR O M C R E E K S E TB A C K
ADD TO UPPER FLOORS SET BACK10' - 0"OUTDOOR TERRACEFIREPLACEPROJECT NO:SHEET CONTENTSDATE:08/05/2020 zoning submittalTHIS DRAWING IS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL UNDER THE SOLE OWNERSHIP OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING. ANY USE WITHOUT EXPRESSED WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER IS PROHIBITED.11/20/2020 zoning resubmittal01/05/2021 zoning resubmittal11/12/2021 ARC review response VILLAGE AT THE PALMSCONCEPT DESIGN55 BROAD ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.9923THIRD FLOOR PLAN -BUILDING ATHIRD FLOOR PLAN -BUILDING AN0'4'8'16'SCALE 1/8" = 1'-0A2.3Page 61 of 222
2A2.61A2.6FLAT ROOF TO VISUALLY SCREENMECHANICAL E UIPMENTS
TO P O F C R E E K
2 0 'FR O M C R E E K S E TB A C K
ADD TO UPPER FLOORS SET BACK10' - 0"OUTDOOR TERRACEPROJECT NO:SHEET CONTENTSDATE:08/05/2020 zoning submittalTHIS DRAWING IS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL UNDER THE SOLE OWNERSHIP OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING. ANY USE WITHOUT EXPRESSED WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER IS PROHIBITED.11/20/2020 zoning resubmittal01/05/2021 zoning resubmittal11/12/2021 ARC review response VILLAGE AT THE PALMSCONCEPT DESIGN55 BROAD ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.9923ROOF PLAN AROOF PLAN AA2.4Page 62 of 222
1ST FLOOR (BUILDING A)0' -0"2ND FLOOR (BUILDING A)16' -4"3RD FLOOR (BUILDING A)27' -4"ROOF (BUILDING A)38' -4"TOP OF RIDGE A45' -3"9082B55D9082B719080A9482CC482EP1EP4EP4EP1EP4( or 235'-0" survey point)( or 280' -3" survey point)16' - 4"4' - 1"TO PROPERTY LINEN.T.S. 26'- 0"1ST FLOOR (BUILDING A)0' -0"2ND FLOOR (BUILDING A)16' -4"3RD FLOOR (BUILDING A)27' -4"ROOF (BUILDING A)38' -4"TOP OF RIDGE A45' -3"45' - 3"55D8294947055DC4EP4EP4EP8EP3EP313' - 6"21' - 2"PROJECT NO:SHEET CONTENTSDATE:08/05/2020 zoning submittalTHIS DRAWING IS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL UNDER THE SOLE OWNERSHIP OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING. ANY USE WITHOUT EXPRESSED WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER IS PROHIBITED.11/20/2020 zoning resubmittal01/05/2021 zoning resubmittal11/12/2021 ARC review response VILLAGE AT THE PALMSCONCEPT DESIGN55 BROAD ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.9923ELEVATIONS AELEVATIONS A1-EAST ELEVATION BUILDING A2-NORTH ELEVATION BUILDING AA2.5Keynote LegendKey Value Keynote Text55D DECORATIVE WROUGHT RAIL: TOP RAIL 34" AFF.70 SPANISH "S" TILE ROOF71 THERMOPLASTIC MEMBRANE ROOFING: 60 MIL.MECHANICALLY ATTACHED TO SUBSTRATE.FIRESTONE ULTRAPLY TPO XR WHITE, CRRC:0608-0016, SRI 84 , SOLAR REFLECTANCE 0.70,THERMAL EMITANCE 0.8180A ALUMINUM STOREFRONT WINDOW AND DOORSYSTEM (SEE SCHEDULE). DUAL PANE/LOW EGLAZING- TEMPERED WHERE REQUIRED BY CODE.OBSCURE (TRANSLUCENT OR SPANDREL) WHEREINDICATED BY SCHEDULE: WINDOWMANUFACTURER/INSTALLER SHALL DESIGN SYSTEMAND PROVIDE STRUCTRAL FRAME MEMBERS ASNECESSARY TO RESIST APPLIED WIND LOADS.82 VINYL CASEMENT WINDOW SYSTEM WITHHERMETICALLY SEALED LOW-E DUAL INSULATINGGLASS: JELD-WEN PREMIUM VINYL 'DARKCHOCOLATE', WITH SIMULATED DIVIDED LITES ANDINSECT SCREENS. SIZE PER WINDOW SCHEDULE82B VINYL FIXED WINDOW SYSTEM: JELD-WEN PREMIUMVINYL 'DARK BROWN'. SIZE PER WINDOW SCHEDULE82C VINYL CASEMENT WINDOW SYSTEM WITHHERMETICALLY SEALED LOW-E DUAL INSULATINGGLASS: JELD-WEN PREMIUM VINYL 'DARKCHOCOLATE', WITH SIMULATED DIVIDED LITES ANDINSECT SCREENS. SIZE PER WINDOW SCHEDULE90 3-COAT CEMENT PLASTER SYSTEM (20/30 FINISH)(PAINT FINISH) APPLIED OVER PLYWOOD SUBSTRATEAND MANUFACTURERS RECOMMENDED BUILDINGPAPER94 3-COAT CEMENT PLASTER SYSTEM (20/30 FINISH)APPLIEDOVER METAL LATH OVER 2 LAYERS OF GARDE-D, 60MIN. BUILDING PAPER OVER EXTERIOR PLYWOODSHEATHING.C4 DECORATIVE CERAMIC TILEEXTERIOR FINISHES LEGENDKey Value Keynote TextEP1 ACCENT MOSAIC CERAMIC TILE, WALLINSETSEP3 (DE-6139 SUMMERVILLE BROWN)EXTERIOR COLOR OFTRELLIS, WINDOW TRIM, BALCONIES,BEAMSEP4 SHERWIN WILLIAMS MORNING SUN SW6672 PLASTER BODY, SMOOTH HANDTHROWELED FINISH EXTERIOR COLOR OFPRIMARY STUCCOEP8 (TUSCANY BLEND) 1 PIECE S STYLE CLAYTILE - BORAL ROOFINGAVERAGE GRADE 233.6AVERAGE GRADE 233.6(235'-0" SURVEY POINT)Page 63 of 222
1ST FLOOR BUILDING A0' -0"2ND FLOOR BUILDING A16' -4"3RD FLOOR BUILDING A27' -4"ROOF BUILDING A38' -4"TOP OF RIDGE A45' -3"94708294C2TO PROPERTY LINE22' - 8 3/4"EP1EP8EP4from the lowest survey point (building A @233.6')46' - 7" 235'-0" 280' -3" 4' - 0"1ST FLOOR BUILDING A0' -0"2ND FLOOR BUILDING A16' -4"3RD FLOOR BUILDING A27' -4"ROOF BUILDING A38' -4"TOP OF RIDGE A45' -3"94709481829455DEP4EP8EP1EP4EP1 235'-0" PROJECT NO:SHEET CONTENTSDATE:08/05/2020 zoning submittalTHIS DRAWING IS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL UNDER THE SOLE OWNERSHIP OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING. ANY USE WITHOUT EXPRESSED WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER IS PROHIBITED.11/20/2020 zoning resubmittal01/05/2021 zoning resubmittal11/12/2021 ARC review response VILLAGE AT THE PALMSCONCEPT DESIGN55 BROAD ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.9923ELEVATIONS AELEVATIONS A1-WEST ELEVATION BUILDING A2-SOUTH ELEVATION BUILDING AA2.6K LK V K T55D DECORATIVE WROUGHT RAIL: TOP RAIL 34" AFF.70 SPANISH "S" TILE ROOF81 ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD FRENCH DOORS: JELD-WEN'EPIC SERIES' OUTSWING DOORS 'DARK CHOCOLATE',WITH SIMULATED DIVIDED LITES PERMANUFACTURER.82 VINYL CASEMENT WINDOW SYSTEM WITHHERMETICALLY SEALED LOW-E DUAL INSULATINGGLASS: JELD-WEN PREMIUM VINYL 'DARKCHOCOLATE', WITH SIMULATED DIVIDED LITES ANDINSECT SCREENS. SI E PER WINDOW SCHEDULE94 3-COAT CEMENT PLASTER SYSTEM 20/30 FINISHAPPLIEDOVER METAL LATH OVER 2 LAYERS OF GARDE-D, 60MIN. BUILDING PAPER OVER EXTERIOR PLYWOODSHEATHING.C2 PRE-CAST CONCRETE "S" TILE, INSTALLED PERMANUFACTURER SPECIFICATIONSEXTERIOR FINISHES LEGENDK V K TEP1 ACCENT MOSAIC CERAMIC TILE, WALLINSETSEP4 SHERWIN WILLIAMS MORNING SUN SW6672 PLASTER BODY, SMOOTH HANDTHROWELED FINISH EXTERIOR COLOR OFPRIMARY STUCCOEP8 TUSCANY BLEND 1 PIECE S STYLE CLAYTILE - BORAL ROOFINGAVERAGE GRADE 233.6AVERAGE GRADE 233.6Page 64 of 222
1ST FLOOR BUILDING A0' -0"2ND FLOOR BUILDING A16' -4"3RD FLOOR BUILDING A27' -4"ROOF BUILDING A38' -4"1BDROOA1BDROOAATIITIORRIDORORRIDORORRIDORONRRTAFFBR AROO2BDROOA2BDROOALIFNRI H NTONRRRTIONDROP OFF AREA11' - 0"11' - 0"16' - 4"TOP OF RIDGE A45' -3"1ST FLOOR BUILDING A0' -0"2ND FLOOR BUILDING A16' -4"3RD FLOOR BUILDING A27' -4"ROOF BUILDING A38' -4"1BDROOA1BDROOA1BDROOADIAROOORRIDOR2BDROOA2BDROOAORRIDORDI ALTH1BDROOA1BDROOA1BDROOA1BDROOA1BDROOAOUTDOORTRRAARTTUDIOIT H N1BDROOATOP OF RIDGE A45' -3"PROJECT NO:SHEET CONTENTSDATE:08/05/2020 zoning submittalTHIS DRAWING IS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL UNDER THE SOLE OWNERSHIP OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING. ANY USE WITHOUT EXPRESSED WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER IS PROHIBITED.11/20/2020 zoning resubmittal01/05/2021 zoning resubmittal11/12/2021 ARC review response VILLAGE AT THE PALMSCONCEPT DESIGN55 BROAD ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.9923SITE SECTION ASITE SECTION A0'8'16'32'SCALE 1/16" = 1'-0RO TION 1 BUILDING ARO TION 2 BUILDING AA2.6sPage 65 of 222
13 FTAIR B FBI ANDGNRALTORAG3 FLATOR2 FLOBBARLIFTAUTOATDT 2s13412112223341T LLGARAG34A2A3.2EV CHARGINGPARKING STATION0'4'8'16'SCALE1/8"=1'-020'FROMCREEKSETBACKSETBACKPROPERTYLINETOP OF CREEKA D D T O U P P E R F LO O R S S E T B A C K10' - 0"F & F EV CHARGINGPARKING STATIONMOTORCYCLEPARKINGPROJECT NO:SHEET CONTENTSDATE:08/05/2020 zoning submittalTHIS DRAWING IS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL UNDER THE SOLE OWNERSHIP OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING. ANY USE WITHOUT EXPRESSED WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER IS PROHIBITED.11/20/2020 zoning resubmittal01/05/2021 zoning resubmittal11/12/2021 ARC review response VILLAGE AT THE PALMSCONCEPT DESIGN55 BROAD ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.9923FIRST FLOOR PLAN -BUILDING BFIRST FLOOR PLAN -BUILDING BNA2.7Page 66 of 222
22 FTAIR 11 FTAIR BLATOR22 FTRRA FBI ANDGNRALTORAG AR INGAT GRAD1A3.22A3.2111141AUTO AT D AR LIFTT14' - 0"14' - 0"0'4'8'16'SCALE 1/8" =1'-0ADD TO UPPER FLOORS SET BACK10' - 0"20'FROMCREEKSETBACKSETBACKPROPERTYLINEEVCHARGING STATIONSEVCHARGING STATIONSPROJECT NO:SHEET CONTENTSDATE:08/05/2020 zoning submittalTHIS DRAWING IS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL UNDER THE SOLE OWNERSHIP OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING. ANY USE WITHOUT EXPRESSED WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER IS PROHIBITED.11/20/2020 zoning resubmittal01/05/2021 zoning resubmittal11/12/2021 ARC review response VILLAGE AT THE PALMSCONCEPT DESIGN55 BROAD ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.9923SECOND FLOOR PLAN -BUILDING BSECOND FLOOR PLAN -BUILDING BNA2.8Page 67 of 222
13 FTRRATAIR B2 F1BDROOB3 F1BDROOB2 F1BDROOB2 F1BDROOB23 F1BDROOB14 F1BDROOB14 F1BDROOB14 F1BDROOB13 F1BDROOB12 F1BDROOB4 F1BDROOB3 FLATOR23 FTAIR B 14 FTORAG FTORAG FTORAG23 FTORAG21 4 FLOUNG1A3.22A3.2229 SFTRRA0'4'8'16'SCALE1/8"=1'-0ADD TO UPPER FLOORS SET BACK10' - 0"20'FROMCREEKSETBACKSETBACKPROPERTYLINE10' - 0"25' - 7"25' - 7"7' - 1 1/2"7' - 7"2' - 6 1/4"2' - 0"PROJECT NO:SHEET CONTENTSDATE:08/05/2020 zoning submittalTHIS DRAWING IS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL UNDER THE SOLE OWNERSHIP OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING. ANY USE WITHOUT EXPRESSED WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER IS PROHIBITED.11/20/2020 zoning resubmittal01/05/2021 zoning resubmittal11/12/2021 ARC review response VILLAGE AT THE PALMSCONCEPT DESIGN55 BROAD ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.9923THIRD FLOOR PLAN -BUILDING BTHIRD FLOOR PLAN -BUILDING BNA2.9Page 68 of 222
22 FTAIR B2 F1BDROOB3 F1BDROOB2 F1BDROOB2 F1BDROOB23 F1BDROOB12 F1BDROOB13 F1BDROOB14 F1BDROOB14 F1BDROOB14 F1BDROOB4 F1BDROOB4 FBAL ON FBAL ON FTAIR B 13 FBAL ON3 FBAL ON4 FTORAG FTORAG FTORAG23 FTORAG4 FLOUNG1A3.22A3.2LATOR4 FBAL ON1A4.4ADD TO UPPER FLOORS SET BACK10' - 0"20'FROMCREEKSETBACKSETBACKPROPERTYLINE0'4'8'16'SCALE1/8"=1'-010' - 0"4' - 9"PROJECT NO:SHEET CONTENTSDATE:08/05/2020 zoning submittalTHIS DRAWING IS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL UNDER THE SOLE OWNERSHIP OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING. ANY USE WITHOUT EXPRESSED WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER IS PROHIBITED.11/20/2020 zoning resubmittal01/05/2021 zoning resubmittal11/12/2021 ARC review response VILLAGE AT THE PALMSCONCEPT DESIGN55 BROAD ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.9923FOURTH FLOOR PLAN -BUILDING BFOURTH FLOOR PLAN -BUILDING BNA2.10Page 69 of 222
1A3.22A3.2ADD TO UPPER FLOORS SET BACK10' - 0"20' FROM CREEK SET BACKSETBACKFLAT ROOF TO VISUALLY SCREENMECHANICAL E UIPMENTSPROPERTYLINEPROJECT NO:SHEET CONTENTSDATE:08/05/2020 zoning submittalTHIS DRAWING IS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL UNDER THE SOLE OWNERSHIP OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING. ANY USE WITHOUT EXPRESSED WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER IS PROHIBITED.11/20/2020 zoning resubmittal01/05/2021 zoning resubmittal11/12/2021 ARC review response VILLAGE AT THE PALMSCONCEPT DESIGN55 BROAD ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.9923ROOF PLAN BROOF PLAN BROOF BUILDING BA3.0Page 70 of 222
1ST FLOOR BUILDING B5' -0"2ND FLOOR BUILDING B17' -0"3RD FLOOR BUILDING B29' -0"4TH FLOOR BUILDING B41' -0"ROOF BUILDING B53' -0"12' - 0"12' - 0"12' - 0"TOP OF RIDGE B58' -4"from the building B avarge low point @240.3'55' - 10 1/2"EP1D5059480A80A80A80A55DEP19494949494TO PROPERTY LINE17' - 1" TO PALOMAREP4EP1EP5EP4 240'-0" 293' -4" C4C42ND FLOOR BUILDING B17' -0"3RD FLOOR BUILDING B29' -0"4TH FLOOR BUILDING B41' -0"ROOF BUILDING B53' -0" TOP OF RIDGE B58' -4"94949482707082EP4EP7EP5EP855DPROJECT NO:SHEET CONTENTSDATE:08/05/2020 zoning submittalTHIS DRAWING IS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL UNDER THE SOLE OWNERSHIP OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING. ANY USE WITHOUT EXPRESSED WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER IS PROHIBITED.11/20/2020 zoning resubmittal01/05/2021 zoning resubmittal11/12/2021 ARC review response VILLAGE AT THE PALMSCONCEPT DESIGN55 BROAD ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.9923ELEVATIONS BELEVATIONS B1-SOUTH MAIN ENTRY B2-WEST ELEVATION BA3.1K LK V K T55D DECORATIVE WROUGHT RAIL: TOP RAIL 34" AFF.70 SPANISH "S" TILE ROOF80A ALUMINUM STOREFRONT WINDOW AND DOORSYSTEM SEE SCHEDULE . DUAL PANE/LOW EGLA ING- TEMPERED WHERE RE UIRED BY CODE.OBSCURE TRANSLUCENT OR SPANDREL WHEREINDICATED BY SCHEDULE: WINDOWMANUFACTURER/INSTALLER SHALL DESIGN SYSTEMAND PROVIDE STRUCTRAL FRAME MEMBERS ASNECESSARY TO RESIST APPLIED WIND LOADS.82 VINYL CASEMENT WINDOW SYSTEM WITHHERMETICALLY SEALED LOW-E DUAL INSULATINGGLASS: JELD-WEN PREMIUM VINYL 'DARKCHOCOLATE', WITH SIMULATED DIVIDED LITES ANDINSECT SCREENS. SI E PER WINDOW SCHEDULE94 3-COAT CEMENT PLASTER SYSTEM 20/30 FINISHAPPLIEDOVER METAL LATH OVER 2 LAYERS OF GARDE-D, 60MIN. BUILDING PAPER OVER EXTERIOR PLYWOODSHEATHING.D505 SIM METAL ROOFINGEXTERIOR FINISHES LEGENDK V K TEP1 ACCENT MOSAIC CERAMIC TILE, WALLINSETSEP4 SHERWIN WILLIAMS MORNING SUN SW6672 PLASTER BODY, SMOOTH HANDTHROWELED FINISH EXTERIOR COLOR OFPRIMARY STUCCOEP5 SHERWIN WILLIAMSMEDICI IVORY 7558 PLASTER BODY,SMOOTH HAND THROWELED FINISHEP7 SHERWIN WILLIAMSBILTMORE BUFF SW 7691 PLASTER BODY,FINE SAND FINISHEP8 TUSCANY BLEND 1 PIECE S STYLE CLAYTILE - BORAL ROOFINGAVERAGE GRADE 240.3PALOMAR AVEPLANTS AND VEGETATIONSEE LANDSCAPE L-1PLANTS AND VEGETATIONSEE LANDSCAPE L-1AVERAGE GRADE 240.3Page 71 of 222
1ST FLOOR BUILDING B5' -0"2ND FLOOR BUILDING B17' -0"3RD FLOOR BUILDING B29' -0"4TH FLOOR BUILDING B41' -0"ROOF BUILDING B53' -0"TOP OF RIDGE B58' -4"70C49455D949470TO PROPERTY LINE7' - 3 1/2"EP5EP4EP7EP7EP1EP11ST FLOOR BUILDING B5' -0"2ND FLOOR BUILDING B17' -0"3RD FLOOR BUILDING B29' -0"4TH FLOOR BUILDING B41' -0"ROOF BUILDING B53' -0"TOP OF RIDGE B58' -4"828194D5058255D55D7070EP8EP4EP712' - 4"PROPERTY LINE TO OAK BUILDINGPROJECT NO:SHEET CONTENTSDATE:08/05/2020 zoning submittalTHIS DRAWING IS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL UNDER THE SOLE OWNERSHIP OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING. ANY USE WITHOUT EXPRESSED WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER IS PROHIBITED.11/20/2020 zoning resubmittal01/05/2021 zoning resubmittal11/12/2021 ARC review response VILLAGE AT THE PALMSCONCEPT DESIGN55 BROAD ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.9923ELEVATIONS BELEVATIONS B2-NORTH PARKING ENTRYA3.21-EAST ELEVATIONK LK V K T25 SITE FURNISHINGS BENCHES AND TRASH PERSCOPE AND SPECIFICATION DESCRIBED ON THELANDSCAPE DRAWINGS55D DECORATIVE WROUGHT RAIL: TOP RAIL 34" AFF.70 SPANISH "S" TILE ROOF81 ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD FRENCH DOORS: JELD-WEN'EPIC SERIES' OUTSWING DOORS 'DARK CHOCOLATE',WITH SIMULATED DIVIDED LITES PERMANUFACTURER.82 VINYL CASEMENT WINDOW SYSTEM WITHHERMETICALLY SEALED LOW-E DUAL INSULATINGGLASS: JELD-WEN PREMIUM VINYL 'DARKCHOCOLATE', WITH SIMULATED DIVIDED LITES ANDINSECT SCREENS. SI E PER WINDOW SCHEDULE94 3-COAT CEMENT PLASTER SYSTEM 20/30 FINISHAPPLIEDOVER METAL LATH OVER 2 LAYERS OF GARDE-D, 60MIN. BUILDING PAPER OVER EXTERIOR PLYWOODSHEATHING.C4 DECORATIVE CERAMIC TILED505 SIM METAL ROOFINGEXTERIOR FINISHES LEGENDK V K TEP1 ACCENT MOSAIC CERAMIC TILE, WALLINSETSEP4 SHERWIN WILLIAMS MORNING SUN SW6672 PLASTER BODY, SMOOTH HANDTHROWELED FINISH EXTERIOR COLOR OFPRIMARY STUCCOEP5 SHERWIN WILLIAMSMEDICI IVORY 7558 PLASTER BODY,SMOOTH HAND THROWELED FINISHEP7 SHERWIN WILLIAMSBILTMORE BUFF SW 7691 PLASTER BODY,FINE SAND FINISHEP8 TUSCANY BLEND 1 PIECE S STYLE CLAYTILE - BORAL ROOFINGAVERAGE GRADE 240.3AVERAGE GRADE 240.3Page 72 of 222
1ST FLOOR BUILDING B5' -0"2ND FLOOR BUILDING B17' -0"3RD FLOOR BUILDING B29' -0"4TH FLOOR BUILDING B41' -0"ROOF BUILDING B53' -0"AR LIFT AUTO AT DT 2 sNTRAR ING L LR D NTIAL L LR D NTIAL L LAR ING L LTOP OF RIDGE B58' -4"1ST FLOOR BUILDING B5' -0"2ND FLOOR BUILDING B17' -0"3RD FLOOR BUILDING B29' -0"4TH FLOOR BUILDING B41' -0"ROOF BUILDING B53' -0"1BDROOBBAL ON1BDROOBORRIDORTORAGTORAG1BDROOB1BDROOBPARKING LEVELPARKING LEVELTOP OF RIDGE B58' -4"PROJECT NO:SHEET CONTENTSDATE:08/05/2020 zoning submittalTHIS DRAWING IS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL UNDER THE SOLE OWNERSHIP OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING. ANY USE WITHOUT EXPRESSED WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER IS PROHIBITED.11/20/2020 zoning resubmittal01/05/2021 zoning resubmittal11/12/2021 ARC review response VILLAGE AT THE PALMSCONCEPT DESIGN55 BROAD ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.9923SITE SECTION BSITE SECTION BRO TION 1 BUILDING BRO TION 2 BUILDING BA3.2sPage 73 of 222
1ST FLOOR BUILDING A0' -0"ROOF BUILDING A38' -4"1ST FLOOR BUILDING B5' -0"ROOF BUILDING B53' -0" R ID NTIAL LI INGBUILDING BA ITD LIINGBUILDING APALOMARAVESOUTH BRIDGE OVER OLD GARDEN CREEKDRI AAR INGDRO OFF48' - 0"UR DTO OF R BAN2 INRTBA2 INRTBATOP OF RIDGE A45' -3"TOP OF RIDGE B58' -4"6' - 11"1ST FLOOR BUILDING A0' -0"ROOF BUILDING A38' -4"1ST FLOOR BUILDING B5' -0"ROOF BUILDING B53' -0"1BDROOB1BDROOB1BDROOB1BDROOB1BDROOAORRIDORONRRTAFFBR AROO2BDROOA2BDROOALIFNRI H NTONRRORRIDOR1BDROOADININGROOATIITI ORRIDORRTIONDRI AAR INGAR INGDRIA R ID NTIAL LI INGBUILDING BA I T D LI INGBUILDING AUR DTO OF R BANAR ING48' - 0"OLD GARD NR2 INRTBA2 INRTBATOP OF RIDGE A45' -3"TOP OF RIDGE B58' -4"5' - 7 3/4"PROJECT NO:SHEET CONTENTSDATE:08/05/2020 zoning submittalTHIS DRAWING IS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL UNDER THE SOLE OWNERSHIP OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING. ANY USE WITHOUT EXPRESSED WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER IS PROHIBITED.11/20/2020 zoning resubmittal01/05/2021 zoning resubmittal11/12/2021 ARC review response VILLAGE AT THE PALMSCONCEPT DESIGN55 BROAD ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.9923OVERALL SITE SECTIONSOVERALL SITE SECTIONSSECTION A NORTH OF THE BRIDGESCALE 3/32" = 1'-0"SCALE 3/32" = 1'-0"A4.3TION B L ATION OUTH OF TH BRIDGPage 74 of 222
1BDROOBORRIDOR1BDROOB1BDROOB1BDROOB1BDROOAORRIDORONRR2BDROOA2BDROOALIFNRI H NTONRRORRIDOR1BDROOA RESIDENTIAL LIVINGBUILDING "B"ASSISTED LIVINGBUILDING "A"ALO AR AAPPROVEDSTUDENT HOUSINGBUILDINGEXISTING TREESEXISTINGBUILDINGPROJECT NO:SHEET CONTENTSDATE:08/05/2020 zoning submittalTHIS DRAWING IS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL UNDER THE SOLE OWNERSHIP OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING. ANY USE WITHOUT EXPRESSED WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER IS PROHIBITED.11/20/2020 zoning resubmittal01/05/2021 zoning resubmittal11/12/2021 ARC review response VILLAGE AT THE PALMSCONCEPT DESIGN55 BROAD ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.9923OVERALL SITE SECTION RELETIVE TO THE NEXTDOOR BUILDINGOVERALL SITE SECTION RELETIVE TOTHE NEXT DOOR BUILDINGA4.4OVERALL SITE CROSS SECTIONPage 75 of 222
PROJECT NO:SHEET CONTENTSDATE:08/05/2020 zoning submittalTHIS DRAWING IS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL UNDER THE SOLE OWNERSHIP OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING. ANY USE WITHOUT EXPRESSED WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER IS PROHIBITED.11/20/2020 zoning resubmittal01/05/2021 zoning resubmittal11/12/2021 ARC review response VILLAGE AT THE PALMSCONCEPT DESIGN55 BROAD ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.9923ILLUSTRATION -VIEW FROM RAMONA DRIVEILLUSTRATION -VIEW FROM RAMONADRIVEA4.5VIEW FROM RAMONA DRIVEPage 76 of 222
PROJECT NO:SHEET CONTENTSDATE:08/05/2020 zoning submittalTHIS DRAWING IS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL UNDER THE SOLE OWNERSHIP OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING. ANY USE WITHOUT EXPRESSED WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER IS PROHIBITED.11/20/2020 zoning resubmittal01/05/2021 zoning resubmittal11/12/2021 ARC review response VILLAGE AT THE PALMSCONCEPT DESIGN55 BROAD ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.9923ILLUSTRATION -VIEW FROM RAMONA DRIVE ONSIGNAGEILLUSTRATION -VIEW FROM RAMONADRIVE ON SIGNAGEA4.6VIEW FROM RAMONA DRIVE AND I NA EPage 77 of 222
8:72-+<67"6+((7&217(176,)<-"]RQLQJVXEPLWWDO7+,6'5$:,1*,6&23<5,*+7('0$7(5,$/81'(57+(62/(2:1(56+,32)+2&++$86(5%/$77(5$5&+,7(&785( 3/$11,1*$1<86(:,7+287(;35(66(':5,77(1&216(172)+2&++$86(5%/$77(5,6352+,%,7('9,//$*($77+(3$/06&21&(37'(6,*1%52$'676$1/8,62%,632&$9,(:21%8,/',1*%)5205$021$$&52667+(&5((.9,(:21%8,/',1*%)5205$021$$&52667+(&5((.$%Page 78 of 222
PROJECT NO:SHEET CONTENTSDATE:08/05/2020 zoning submittalTHIS DRAWING IS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL UNDER THE SOLE OWNERSHIP OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING. ANY USE WITHOUT EXPRESSED WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER IS PROHIBITED.11/20/2020 zoning resubmittal01/05/2021 zoning resubmittal11/12/2021 ARC review response VILLAGE AT THE PALMSCONCEPT DESIGN55 BROAD ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.9923ILLUSTRATION -VIEW ON BUILDING A FROM SOUTHEASTILLUSTRATION -VIEW ON BUILDING AFROM SOUTH EASTA4.7VIEW ON I DIN A FROM O EAPage 79 of 222
PROJECT NO:SHEET CONTENTSDATE:08/05/2020 zoning submittalTHIS DRAWING IS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL UNDER THE SOLE OWNERSHIP OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING. ANY USE WITHOUT EXPRESSED WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER IS PROHIBITED.11/20/2020 zoning resubmittal01/05/2021 zoning resubmittal11/12/2021 ARC review response VILLAGE AT THE PALMSCONCEPT DESIGN55 BROAD ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.9923ILLUSTRATIVE -VIEW ON THE MAIN ENTRANCE ONBUILDING BILLUSTRATIVE -VIEW ON THE MAINENTRANCE ON BUILDING BA4.8VIEW ON E MAIN EN RAN E ON I DIN Page 80 of 222
PROJECT NO:SHEET CONTENTSDATE:08/05/2020 zoning submittalTHIS DRAWING IS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL UNDER THE SOLE OWNERSHIP OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING. ANY USE WITHOUT EXPRESSED WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER IS PROHIBITED.11/20/2020 zoning resubmittal01/05/2021 zoning resubmittal11/12/2021 ARC review response VILLAGE AT THE PALMSCONCEPT DESIGN55 BROAD ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.9923ILLUSTRATIVE -VIEW FROM PALOMAR AVENUE ONBUILDING BILLUSTRATIVE -VIEW FROMPALOMAR AVENUE ON BUILDING BA4.9VIEW FROM A OMAR AVEN E ON I DIN Page 81 of 222
PROJECT NO:SHEET CONTENTSDATE:08/05/2020 zoning submittalTHIS DRAWING IS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL UNDER THE SOLE OWNERSHIP OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING. ANY USE WITHOUT EXPRESSED WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER IS PROHIBITED.11/20/2020 zoning resubmittal01/05/2021 zoning resubmittal11/12/2021 ARC review response VILLAGE AT THE PALMSCONCEPT DESIGN55 BROAD ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.9923ILLUSTRATIVE OVERALL VIEW ON THE PROPOSEDPROJECTILLUSTRATIVE OVERALL VIEW ONTHE PROPOSED PROJECTA4.10OVERA VIEW OF E RO O ED RO EPage 82 of 222
PROJECT NO:SHEET CONTENTSDATE:08/05/2020 zoning submittalTHIS DRAWING IS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL UNDER THE SOLE OWNERSHIP OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING. ANY USE WITHOUT EXPRESSED WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOCHHAUSER BLATTER IS PROHIBITED.11/20/2020 zoning resubmittal01/05/2021 zoning resubmittal11/12/2021 ARC review response VILLAGE AT THE PALMSCONCEPT DESIGN55 BROAD ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA.9923ILLUSTRATIVE OVERALL VIEW ON THE PROPOSEDPROJECT FROM RAMONA DR AND PALOMAR AVE.ILLUSTRATIVE OVERALL VIEW ONTHE PROPOSED PROJECT FROMRAMONA DR AND PALOMAR AVE.A4.11OVERA VIEW ON E RO O ED RO E FROM RAMONA DR AND A OMAR AVEPage 83 of 222
:22'*$7($1',17(50(',$7(;3732676
<$5''80367(57<3)((7+,*+63/,7)$&(&08:$//&85%
67)/225%8,/',1*%
67)/225%8,/',1*%
+,*+63/,7)$&(&08:$//
+,*+63/,7)$&(&08:$//&21&5(7(&85%)2*<$5''80367(57<3
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
6&$/(
6&$/(
6&$/(
6&$/(
6&$/(
:22'(175(//,66<67(0Page 84 of 222
7+.&2$763257/$1'&(0(173/$67(520(7$//$7+2/$<(652)*5$'('0,1%8,/',1*3$3(53$,17('720$7&+(;,67,1*),1,6+&2$7235(&2$7(')2$002/',1*,167$//('2678&&27(;76,=(35(&2$7(')2$002/',1*,167$//('29(5;678&&2%2$5'02180(173523(57<6,*1,167$//('720$7&+(;,67,1*6,1*$*(217+(3523(57<
02180(173523(57<6,*1,167$//('720$7&+(;,67,1*6,1*$*(217+(3523(57<1(:6,7(:$//$5281'7+(3523(57<$7+.&2$763257/$1'&(0(173/$67(520(7$//$7+2/$<(652)*5$'('0,1%8,/',1*3$3(53$,17('720$7&+(;,67,1*),1,6+&2$7235(&2$7(')2$002/',1*,167$//('2678&&27(;76,=(35(&2$7(')2$002/',1*,167$//('29(5;678&&2%2$5'[$''5(666,*13(56758&785$/)/225),1,6+3(5),1,6+6&+('8/(0,16/23(
,167$//3(50$18)$&785(563(&,),&$7,216
(;7(5,25:$//$66(0%/<)$&(2)&087<3,&$/&086,7(:$//6/$%3(56758&785$/
3523(57<3$5.,1*%3$/20$5$9(
&(0(170257$5&$38:72-+<67"6+((7&217(176,)<-"]RQLQJVXEPLWWDO7+,6'5$:,1*,6&23<5,*+7('0$7(5,$/81'(57+(62/(2:1(56+,32)+2&++$86(5%/$77(5$5&+,7(&785( 3/$11,1*$1<86(:,7+287(;35(66(':5,77(1&216(172)+2&++$86(5%/$77(5,6352+,%,7('9,//$*($77+(3$/06&21&(37'(6,*1%52$'676$1/8,62%,632&$6LWHGHWDLOV6LWHGHWDLOV$6&$/(
6&$/(
6&$/(
6&$/(
6&$/(
6&$/(
3523(57<6,*1$*((/(9$7,217<33523(57<6,*1$*((/(9$7,211(:6,7(:$//2))3$/20$53$5.,1*(175<Page 85 of 222
Villages at Palms, San Luis Obispo, CA - Material BoardPlaster Body, fine sand finishPaint: Sherwin Williams Creamy 7102Wood BeamsCabot Semi-Solid StainSlate GrayWood T&G Ceilings Cabot Semi-Tranparent StainNewburyport BlueWood Doors and Jambs Paint: Sherwin Williams Surf Green 6473Vinyl windows & Exterior doorsJeld - Wen - BronzeOrnamental Wrought IronBASIS FOR DESIGN0Page 86 of 222
Villages at Palms, San Luis Obispo, CA - Material Board030303 0303 0303 03DECORATIVE ACCENT TILES0Page 87 of 222
DSAP Series -pledTypestreet lightWidth25"Height18.5"Barcelona Type Wall Bracketarm mountWidth9"Height22"Sizes7" x 17" 12" x 29"Weight12 lbs.Canopy Size5.5" x 12"Projection12"Alcazar Star TypeHangingWidth16"Height16"Weight18 lbs.Canopy Size5.5" diameterVillages at Palms, San Luis Obispo, CA - Material BoardBASIS FOR DESIGN0Page 88 of 222
Villages at Palms, San Luis Obispo, CA - Signage0Page 89 of 222
Project:Revisions:Proj. Engr.:Proj. Mngr.:Date:A&V Job No.:Scale:PER PLANABCDEFGHIABCDEFGHI1234567C:\Egnyte\Shared\Sun\All Jobs\2018 All Jobs\181183 - Village at Palms 24 Unit (Civil) - Smith\02_Working Drawings\Preliminary\02_ONSITE\PRELIM TREE REMOVAL SHEET.dwg, C-0.0, Nov 15, 2021 11:42am, SarahPhone Ext.:Phone Ext.:Plan Prepared By:The use of these plans and specifications shall berestricted to the original site for which they wereprepared and publication thereof is expressly limited tosuch use. Reproduction or publication by any method, inwhole or in part, is prohibited. Title to these plans andspecifications remain with Ashley & Vance Engineering,Inc. without prejudice. Visual contact with these plansand specifications shall constitute prima facie evidenceof the acceptance of these restrictions.Ashley&VanceG, C1413 Monterey StreetSan Luis Obispo, CA 93401 (805) 545-0010 (323) 744-0010www.ashleyvance.comC I V I L S T R U C T U R A LSheet Size:24 x 36THE VILLAGE AT THE PALMS55 BROAD STSAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93405JMACEF11.20.2020181183PRELIMINARY TREEREMOVAL PLANC-0.0110/12/2021211/12/20213.4.5.156149N010 10 20HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1" = 10' RAMONA DRIVEPALOMAR AVENUEBROAD STREETLUNETA DRIVE(E) BUILDINGTHE PALMS(E) BUILDINGTHE OAKS(E) BUILDINGGARDEN CREEKEX. 6'-8' PALM TREETO BE RELOCATEDOUT OF PROPOSEDWALKWAYTOP OF CREEK BANKNOTES:1. NO TREES BELOW THE TOP OF CREEK BANK WILL BE REMOVED WITH THISPROJECT.2. ANY EXISTING "STREET TREES" THAT ARE REMOVED WITH THIS PROJECTWILL BE REPLACED TO SATISFACTION OF THE CITY.3. THE FOUR EXISTING, VERY TALL, PALM TREES, IN THE EASTERLY PARKINGARE WILL BE RELOCATED.4. SEE LANDSCAPING PLAN FOR ALL PROPOSED NEW PROJECT PLANTINGS ANDADDITIONAL STREET TREES IN FRONTAGE.TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION DISCLAIMER:INDIVIDUAL TREE TRUNK LOCATIONS AND SIZES ARE FROM WALLACE GROUP SURVEY DRAWINGS AND ENTITLEMENT DOCUMENTS DATED BETWEEN1996 AND 2002. THE "CLOUD" TREE LINE INFORMATION WAS SUPPLEMENTED FROM GOOGLE EARTH AREAL IMAGERY. GOOGLE EARTH STREET VIEW.PHOTOS FROM 3 SEPARATE SITE VISITS WERE ALSO UTILIZED TO COMPILE THE INFORMATION SHOWN HEREON. ALL INFORMATION SHOULD BEVERIFIED BY THE CITY ARBORIST AND ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS MADE DURING REVIEW OF FINAL CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS.NESTING BIRDS NOTE:TO AVOID DIRECT IMPACT TO NESTING BIRDS, ANY PROPOSED TREE REMOVALOCCURRING BETWEEN FEB 1 AND SEPT 15 SHALL REQUIRE A PRE-ACTIVITYSURVEY FOR ACTIVE NESTS BY A CITY APPROVED QUALIFIED BIOLOGIST.EX. 24" PINE TREE TO BEPROTECTED IN PLACETREE PRESERVATION NOTE:THE CITY ARBORIST SHALL BE CONTACTED TO REVIEW THE PROPOSED TREEREMOVALS. A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMITISSUANCE FOR ALL TREE REMOVALS OR A DEMOLITION PLAN SHALL BE PREPAREDSHOWING TREE PRESERVATION MEASURES ON THE PERMIT DRAWINGS.SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS FORADDITIONAL STREET TREESTO BE PLANTED IN STREETYARD SETBACK AREA (TYP)SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS FORADDITIONAL STREET TREESTO BE PLANTED IN STREETYARD SETBACK AREA (TYP)EX. STREET TREES TO BEREMOVED AND REPLACEDEX. 50' PALM TREESTO BE REMOVED2-14" PALMSEX. 50' PALM TREESTO BE REMOVED2-14" PALMSEX. 6-9"BRISBANEBOX TREESTO BEREMOVEDLEGEND: TREES TO BE REMOVED, REPLACED WITH COASTLIVE OAK TREES AROUND SITE, SEE LANDSCAPEPLAN SHEET L-1 (6 TOTAL) TREES TO BE REMOVED AND REPLACED WITHEVERGREEN PEAR TREES, SEE LANDSCAPE PLANSHEET L-1 (3 TOTAL)Page 90 of 222
66666666666666
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
66666
::::::::::::::::::::66::::::::
:
:::
:
:66:::::::::::::::66666666 5,0,1960+,1960+,19)*,193URMHFW5HYLVLRQV3URM(QJU3URM0QJU'DWH$ 9-RE1R6FDOH3(53/$1$%&'()*+,$%&'()*+,&?(JQ\WH?6KDUHG?6XQ?$OO-REV?$OO-REV?9LOODJHDW3DOPV8QLW&LYLO6PLWK?B:RUNLQJ'UDZLQJV?3UHOLPLQDU\?B216,7(?*5$',1*6+((7GZJ&-DQSP6DUDK3KRQH([W3KRQH([W3ODQ3UHSDUHG%\7KHXVHRIWKHVHSODQVDQGVSHFLILFDWLRQVVKDOOEHUHVWULFWHGWRWKHRULJLQDOVLWHIRUZKLFKWKH\ZHUHSUHSDUHGDQGSXEOLFDWLRQWKHUHRILVH[SUHVVO\OLPLWHGWRVXFKXVH5HSURGXFWLRQRUSXEOLFDWLRQE\DQ\PHWKRGLQZKROHRULQSDUWLVSURKLELWHG7LWOHWRWKHVHSODQVDQGVSHFLILFDWLRQVUHPDLQZLWK$VKOH\ 9DQFH(QJLQHHULQJ,QFZLWKRXWSUHMXGLFH9LVXDOFRQWDFWZLWKWKHVHSODQVDQGVSHFLILFDWLRQVVKDOOFRQVWLWXWHSULPDIDFLHHYLGHQFHRIWKHDFFHSWDQFHRIWKHVHUHVWULFWLRQV$VKOH\ 9DQFH*&0RQWHUH\6WUHHW6DQ/XLV2ELVSR&$ZZZDVKOH\YDQFHFRP&,9,/6758&785$/6KHHW6L]H[7+(9,//$*($77+(3$/06%52$'676$1/8,62%,632&$-0$&()*5$',1*$1'87,/,7<6+((7&1 +25,=217$/6&$/(
6)',6785%('$5($6:3335(48,5('($57+:25.&<&87&<),//
0$;&87
0$;),///,'67250:$7(55(48,5(0(1767,(5352-(&787,/,=(6x',6&211(&7(''2:1632876x3(59,2863$9,1*%8,/',1*%
))1'/(9(/
))67/(9(/6,7(&216758&7,21127(66,'(:$/.81'(5'5$,13(5&,7<2)6$1/8,62%,63267$1'$5''5,9(:$<3(56$1/8,62%,632&,7<67$1'$5'$1'352326('
0$;6($7:$//(;,67,1*
678&&26,7(:$//725(0$,1352326('
0$;5(7$,1,1*:$//(;,67,1*'5,9(:$<72%(5(029('(;,67,1*32:(532/(725(0$,1(;,67,1*$&3$9(0(17$1'$&',.((;,67,1*3$5.,1*/2772%(5(029('(;,67,1*75((6725(0$,16((6+((7&(;,67,1*75((672%(5(/2&$7('6((6+((7&352326(''20(67,&:$7(5/,1(352326('),5(/,1(:,7+'&'$352326('6(:(5/,1(352326('6,*13(5$5&+$1'/$1'6&$3(3/$167<3+(,*+7$1'6(7%$&.$61(('(')256,*+7',67$1&(352326('5$03352326(3(59,2863$9(5685)$&((;,67,1*%5,'*(72%(3527(&7('352326('67$,56352326('75$6+(1&/2685(:,7+'5$,172/$1'6&$3($5($(;,67,1*),5(/,1(:,7+%3)72)+21%8,/',1*$6,7($1'(;,67,1*),5(/,1(:,7+'&'$722$.65(029($1'5(3/$&((;,67,1*$'$&85%5$03352326('%8/%287:,7+&225',1$7,21:,7+&,7<75$)),&(1*,1((5,1*352326('6,'(:$/.3(5&,7<67$1'$5'65(029($1'5(3/$&(&5266:$/.)/$6+(56(;,67,1*75((72%(5(029('6((6+((7&352326('3(59,2863$7+3(5/$1'6&$3,1*352326('&21&5(7(:$/.:$<352326('&85%352326('*5($6(,17(5&(3725352326(')2*$5($'5$,1726(:(5127($5($72+$9(62/,'522),1*352326('
6,7(:$//3(5$5&+,7(&73/$16(;,67,1*($6(0(17652$'$1'87,/,7<($6(0(173(525
6(:(5($6(0(173(525
:$7(53,3(/,1(($6(0(173(525$5($68%-(&772,181'$7,21$1'38%/,&'5$,1$*($1'0$,17(1$1&(($6(0(173(530:$7(5/,1(($6(0(173(5,16730
%5,'*(($6(0(173(5
6(:(5($6(0(173(525
6(:(5($6(0(173(525
75((($6(0(173(56/
38%/,&87,/,7<($6(0(173(56/3$5.,1*$*5((0(173(572%($'-867('$3352;&/(;67250'5$,1$1'&/($6(0(173(5305$021$'5,9(3$/20$5$9(18((%8,/',1*7+(2$.6(%8,/',1*7+(3$/06(($
6
7
*
$
5
'
(
1
&
5
(
(
.7<33('(675,$1,03529(0(17127(352-(&7:,//%(5(48,5('72,03/(0(177+(3('(675,$1,03529(0(176,'(17,),(',17+($1+2/01(,*+%25+22'*5((1:$<7+(6(,03529(0(176$5((/,*,%/()257,)&5(',76$31$313523(57</,1(127(/27/,1(66+2:1+(5(213(56/2$/$31(;&21&3$7+35(/,0,1$5<$5&+86(3'(9
<$5'6(7%$&./,1(()+&/&/3523(57</,1(3523(57</,1(&/(%866+(/7(5(;67250'5$,1287/(7(;67250'5$,1287/(7(;67250'5$,1287/(7(&8/9(5781'(55$021$'5,9((&,3(9&3(9&366(&,3366(9&3(&,3(%86672302%,/,7</$1',1*$5($3/3/3/3/
&5((.6(7%$&.
&5((.6(7%$&.,1960+,1966,19,191*0$;1*0,11*0,11*0$;6((/$1'6&$3(3/$1('*(2)&29(5(''5232))
,17(5,256,'($1'5($56(7%$&.
6,'(<$5'6(7%$&./,1(,19,19'(9(/230(17(19(/23(7<3(
:22')(1&(725(0$,16(:(5*(1(5$7,217$%/($9(5$*('5<:($7+(5)/2:$':)JSG3($.,1*)$&7253(5&,7<2)6/2'(6,*167$1'$5'3($.'5<:($7+(5)/2:3':)JSG%8,/',1*$08/7,)$0,/<5(6,'(17,$/81,76 &200(5&,$/63$&($5($VTIW 727$/ %8,/',1*%08/7,)$0,/<5(6,'(17,$/81,76 &200(5&,$/63$&($5($VTIW 727$/ 352-(&7727$/ 3'$127($//6(7%$&./,1(66+2:1$5(3(55=21(3(5&,7<2)6/2=21,1*25',1$1&(02',),&$7,216)25352326('121&21)250,1*%8,/',1*$1'6,7(,03529(0(176$5(5(48(67('9,$3/$11(''(9(/230(17$0(1'0(173'(9Page 91 of 222
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW37.969.1319.58Fire TruckOverall Length 37.960ftOverall Width 8.170ftOverall Body Height 10.432ftMin Body Ground Clearance 0.862ftTrack Width 8.000ftLock-to-lock time 4.00sMax Wheel Angle 45.00°360.110.5204.2GarbageOverall Length 36.100ftOverall Width 8.000ftOverall Body Height 12.272ftMin Body Ground Clearance 0.961ftTrack Width 8.000ftLock-to-lock time 4.00sWall to Wall Turning Radius 46.500ftWWWWWProject:Revisions:Proj. Engr.:Proj. Mngr.:Date:A&V Job No.:Scale:PER PLANABCDEFGHIABCDEFGHI1234567C:\Egnyte\Shared\Sun\All Jobs\2018 All Jobs\181183 - Village at Palms 24 Unit (Civil) - Smith\02_Working Drawings\Preliminary\02_ONSITE\CIRCULATION SHEET.dwg, C-1.1, Nov 15, 2021 9:55am, SarahPhone Ext.:Phone Ext.:Plan Prepared By:The use of these plans and specifications shall berestricted to the original site for which they wereprepared and publication thereof is expressly limited tosuch use. Reproduction or publication by any method, inwhole or in part, is prohibited. Title to these plans andspecifications remain with Ashley & Vance Engineering,Inc. without prejudice. Visual contact with these plansand specifications shall constitute prima facie evidenceof the acceptance of these restrictions.Ashley&VanceG, C1413 Monterey StreetSan Luis Obispo, CA 93401 (805) 545-0010 (323) 744-0010www.ashleyvance.comC I V I L S T R U C T U R A LSheet Size:24 x 36THE VILLAGE AT THE PALMS55 BROAD STSAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93405JMACEF8/7/2020181183PRELIMINARY SITECIRCULATION PLANC-1.1111/23/2020211/12/20213.4.5.156149TRUCK DIMENSIONSNTSSITE PLAN - FIRE TRUCK CIRCULATIONTRUCK DIMENSIONSNTSSITE PLAN - GARBAGE TRUCK CIRCULATIONN040 40 80HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1" = 40' RAMONA DRIVEPALOMAR AVENUEBROAD STREETRAMONA DRIVEPALOMAR AVENUEBROAD STREETMEINECKE AVEMEINECKEAVE(E) FH(E) FH(E) FH26'COVERED DROP OFF AREA14' x 26' CLEAR PROVIDEDEXISTING FIRE LANE(NO PARKING)CURBS PAINTED RED(E) FH AND FDC TOBE RELOCATED TOSOUTHEAST(E) FH(E) FH(E) FDC AND BFP(E) FHFIRE ACCESS NOTES:1. ADDRESS NUMBERS (BY OTHERS) - (MIN 8” HIGH BY 1” STROKE WIDTH ON CONTRASTING BACKGROUND).2. FINAL DESIGN FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 5 ANDAPPENDIX D OF THE 2016 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE (CFC). ACCESS ROADS SHALL BE ALL WEATHER ANDSUPPORT A 60,000 POUND FIRE APPARATUS. THE MAXIMUM ANGLE OF APPROACH AND ANGLE OFDEPARTURE SHALL BE LESS THAN 10%. THE MAXIMUM ROAD GRADES AND CROSS SLOPES SHALL BE LESSTHAN 15% AND 5% RESPECTIVELY.3. FINAL DESIGN FOR WATER SUPPLIES (BY OTHERS) SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 507 OF THECFC AND PROVIDE THE REQUIRED FIRE FLOW DETERMINED BY USING APPENDIX B OF THE CFC. EXISTINGPUBLIC HYDRANTS, PRIVATE HYDRANTS, DOUBLE DETECTOR CHECK VALVES, AND FIRE DEPARTMENTCONNECTIONS, TO THE EXTENT KNOWN, ARE SHOWN HEREON.4. FINAL DESIGN FOR FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS (BY OTHERS) SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CFCAND THE CBC AND SHALL INCLUDE AN APPROVED NFPA 13 FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM, AND NFPA 24 FIREMAIN, IF APPLICABLE. BUILDINGS UNDERGOING CONSTRUCTION, ALTERATION OR DEMOLITION SHALL BE INACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 34 OF THE CFC.5. FINAL DESIGN FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS TO EQUIPMENT (BY OTHERS) SHALL SHOW CONTROLSFOR AIR-HANDLING SYSTEMS, AUTOMATIC FIRE-PROTECTION SYSTEMS, OR OTHER DICTION, SUPPRESSIONOR CONTROL ELEMENTS ARE IDENTIFIED FOR USE BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AND ARE LOCATED IN THESAME AREA WITH THE APPROPRIATE SIGNAGE STATING “FIRE SPRINKLER RISER” AND “FIRE ALARMCONTROL PANEL”. FIRE SPRINKLER RISERS SHALL BE LOCATED IN A ROOM WITH EXTERIOR DOOR ACCESSAND NEAR ELECTRICAL ROOM WITH A KNOX BOX ON THE OUTSIDE AND KEY TO THE ROOM.PROPOSED BLDGFIRE RISERPROPOSED BLDGFIRE RISERMAX15%249.5 FS(E) FH(E) FHONE WAYBUILDING BBUILDING ABUILDING BBUILDING A12'
MIN.(P) 30' WIDE X 10' DEEP(3 BIN) CITY STD TRASHENCLOSURE (TYPE 1)(E) 11' WIDE X 6' DEEP(2 BIN) TRASHENCLOSURE WITHRECYCLE & F.O.G. (TOBE DEMOLISHED)(P) 34' WIDE X 10' DEEP(3 BIN) CITY STDTRASH ENCLOSUREWITH F.O.G. (TYPE 3)(E) GREASE INTERCEPTOR(E) GREASE INTERCEPTOR(E) 7' WIDE X 6' DEEP CMUTRASH ENCLOSURE WITHMETAL GATES(E) GREASE INTERCEPTOR(E) 6' WIDE X 8'DEEP "FENCED"TRASH BIN AREACOVERED DRIVE AISLE14' x 26' CLEAR PROVIDEDKETYPE V-A CONSTRUCTION46'7" TALL3-STORY55'10" TALLROOF RIDGE ELEV. = 296.5'±4-STORY240.9 FSFIRE RISER ANDFIRE RISERACCESS PANELADDRESS SIGN FOR BUILDING AADDRESS SIGN FOR BUILDING APRELIMINARY #:ARCH-0386-2020243.4 FS256.1 FS(E) FIRE LINEBFP (TYP)THE OAKS61 BROAD STREETTHE PALMS55 BROAD STREETTHE OAKS61 BROAD STREETTHE PALMS55 BROAD STREETNOTE: ADDRESSSIGN LOCATIONFOR BLDG B TBDBY CITYEXISTING OR PROPOSED "RED"CURB OR STRIPING (TYP)KITCHENKITCHENNO KITCHEN(P) GREASE INTERCEPTORGARDEN CREEK73 BROAD STREETOLD G
A
R
D
E
N
C
R
E
E
K
OLD G
A
R
D
E
N
C
R
E
E
K
(E) DRIVEWAY TO BEABANDONED AND PROPOSEDTO AN UPGRADED BUS STOP(E) DRIVEWAY TO BEABANDONED AND PROPOSEDTO AN UPGRADED BUS STOPPage 92 of 222
" 57i
fYRC¦I;bCEV¦AbEEQ¦H¦ S;¦HRYYC¦sYVE¦-">
EqMdfuVI¦bYdE¦I;GO¦fY¦?EtbEdEbnEC¦
¦
%(¦bElA;fEC¦ ¦ )#¦AbEEQ¦dEf?;AQ¦
bERYA=gE¦)¦EqMdfMVI¦.2¦`mEEV¦\;RTd¦fY¦fKMd¦RYA=gMYV¦
1+(,1-*!!-1."-!11'1."+1"+)(111
1 01 ///#$+%( (&&&"&&"*$*&¦m|¦¦<cB¦~¡
&$"&&"*$*&¦m|¦¦¦|¦|¦|D<hF5¦#&"*1"*#*&¦P@R<*#¦
11
1ei
EqMdfMVI¦H;V¦\;RTd¦fY¦bET;MV¦fr\MA;R¦1
!jRR¦dKbm?d¦')¦T;qMTmT¦KEMIKf¦;RYVI¦EqMdfMVI¦?mMRCMVI¦¢11g
/¦ £vv¦:97¤¦
iihi¥¦ ¦wxxxx{xzxyx¦x1
....
..1GWi M]biTHi6BSi+^M\i/CM\UTi6]WGG]i8WGG
,BNTWi6]WGG]\i+M\]i6]BSFBWFi![Ji
,&./+(i&3.!(i$+/3i,)#68( i#;8@ i,)#68( i#;8@i,&./+(i ,1+8.;6i #3($/+(i+//!&//! i+/.!/.i1+.#i83##i ,1@3;6i ++#3@i.i3(68/ 38ii3(68/ 38i1#3i ,,!)")!!'.# !.)!!*.3;8;6i;.#!/ii683=#33@i83##i,&./+(i&3.!(i$+/3i+(88+#i&#,i+(88+#i&#,i,&./+(2;#3 ;6i&3($/+(ii /68i+(<#i/*i%&.)!!*.6@&3;6i3/,.A/$$(.ii2;##.i1+,i=6'(.&8/.(i3/;68 i,#?( .i$.i1+, !$ +(+*. # !. )!!*.+๣/#,(i(.!( i9;6 3/3ii 31#i,@38+#i /3+i1(.*
1(68 (i '(.#.6(6ii '(.#6#i1(68 '#i1@3;6i ++#3@.i3(68/ 38 i3(68/ 38i1#3]cZ]ZeFC¦ fcFFe¦ C¦W¦3;8;6i;.#!/i683=#33@i83##'GMJL]i
i6UWGBFi
iGWGD]iTWi\UWGBFMSJiDBSTUbi,TFGWB]GiJWT`]LiWB]Gi
iUGWibGBW
iWBSDLi\]WGSJ]Li\]WTSJi!WT^JL]i]TPGWBS]&TTFiUBWOMSJiPT]i]WGGiWTT]iMS]W^\MTSiPT`
i 3G\M\]\iTBOiWTT]iWT]i+i,i<++++i+i,..+#_GWJWGGSi $PT`GX\i\LT`bi`LM]Gi$BPP
=MS]GW
i BWOi6]WMOMSJi3GFiWT`Si#aHTPMB]MSJiTWi6RTT]LMTJGSMDi<TPB]MPGi/XJBSMDi TRUT^SF\iGRM\\MTS\i</
i+T`i+๣/#,(i9;6 3/3i8;6 3/3i'@3(!i 31#i,@38+#+'GMJL]i
i6UWGBFi
i^UWMJL]iHTWRi !WT^JL]i]TPGWBS]i,TFGWB]GiJWT`]LiWB]GiiUGWibGBW
i 1T`FGWbiRMPFG`iWG\M\]BS]i&TTFiUBWOMSJiPT]i]WGGiWTT]iMS]W^\MTSiPT`
iWBSDLi\]WGSJ]LiRGFM^Ri!GDMF^T^\i $PT`GW\iiDP^\]GW\iTHi\LT`biUMSOiTWiWT\GiHPT`GW\i\^RRGW
i+M]]GWiM\\^GiFWbiHW^M]MTJGSMDi<TPB]MPGi/YJBSMDi TRUT^SF\iGRM\\MTS\i</
i+T`i,&./+(i&3.!(i$+/3i+(88+#i&#,i +(88+#i&#,i,&./+(i'GMJL]ii6UWGBFiiT_BPiHTWRiB]]WBD]M_GiPBYJGi`LM]GiHWBJWBS]iHPT`GW\i,TFGWB]GiJWT`]LiWB]GiiUGWibGBW
i&TTFiUBWOMSJiPT]i]WGGiWTT]iMS]W^\MTSiPT`
i 3G\M\]\iTBOiZTT]iWT]#_GWJWGGSi!ZT^JL]i]TPGWBS]i,&./+(i&3.!(i$+/3i,)#68( i#;8@i ,)#68( i#;8@i,&./+('GMJL]i
i6UWGBFi
iT_BPiTWiDTSMDBPiHTWRi &PT\\biPBZJGiPGB]LGWbiPGB_G\i]]WBE]M_GiPBWJGi`LM]GiHWBJWBS]iHPT`GW\iCPTTR\iB]ibT^SJiBJGi WBSDLi\]WGSJ]LiRGFM^Ri$B\]iJWT`]Li
iUGWibGBW
i&TTFiUBWOMSJiPT]i]WGGiZTT]iMS]W^\MTSiPT`
i 6^\DGU]MCPGi]TiZTT]iH^SJ^\#_GWJWGGSi+M]]GWiM\\^Gi+GB_G\iiFWbiHW^M]iUTF\i ]]WBD]\iCMZF\,,1Qi6: (i '(.#.6(6i '(.#6#i1(68 '#i+'GMJL]i
iWBWGPbiiPTDBPPb
i6UWGBFi
i&TTFiUBWOMSJiPT]i]WGGiWTT]iMS]W^\MTSiPT`
6PT`i]TiRTFGWB]GiJWT`]Li 3G\M\]\iTBOiWTT]iWT]i!GDMF^T^\i $BPPiDTPTWiCWMPPMBS]iTWBSJGi]TiWGFiWGPMBCPGiHBPPiDTPTWi!WT^JL]i]TPGWBS]1+8.;6i #3($/+(i +/.!/.i1+.#i83##i ,'GMJL]i
i6UWGBFi
i$B\]
JWT`MSJi 3G\M\]\iTBOiZTT]iWT]i]TPGWB]G\iBSbi\TMPi]bUGiDBSiLB_GiBJJWG\\M_GiWTT]\iWTT]iMS]W^\MTSiLMJL
!GDMF^T^\i 'BSF\TRGiPBZJGiPGB_G\iBSFiB]]WBD]M_GiCBWOiBSFiCWBSDLMSJiLBCM]i 'BZFbi1@3;6i ++#3@.i3(68/ 48i3(68/ 48i1#3'GMJL]i
i6UWGBFiiGWGD]iTWi\UWGBFMSJi`M]LiLMJLiDBSTUbi$B\]iJXT`]Li
iUGWibGBW
i WBSDLi\]WGSJ]LiRGFM^Ri ]]WBD]M_Gi^UWMJL]iCWBSDLMSJi\]W^D]^WG!GDMF^T^\i $PT`GW\i\LT`bi`LM]Gi6UWMSJiBSFi=MS]GW
i 3TT]iMS]W^\MTSiRTFGWB]GiMTJGSMDi<TPB]MPGi/XJBSMDi TRUT^SF\iGRM\\MTSi</
i+T`,2;#3 ;6i&3($/+(i /68i+(<#i/*i<+'GMJL]i
i6UWGBFi
i!GS\GiWT^SFiDWT`Si6PT`i]TiRTFGWB]GiJWT`]Li 6^CNGD]i]TiTBOiWTT]iWT]iDBSiLB_GiBJJWG\\M_GiWTT]\iWTT]iMS]W^\MTSiLMJL
i#_GWJWGGSi !GS\GiHTPMBJGi#a]WGRGPbiFWT^JL]i]TPGWBS]i BPMHTWSMBiSB]M_Gi +M]]GWiM\\^GiFWbiPGB_G\iiBDTWS\-..0%i..=8#3i;6#i/$i13/1/6#!i1+.86i'<#i##.i#<+;8#!i;6(.&i8'#i=8#3i;6#i +66($( 8(/./$i+.!6 1#i61# (#6i=; /+6i(<i;.(<#36(8@i/$i +($/3.(i //1#38(<#i#?8#.6(/.
..
.
...MTJGSMDi<TPB]MPGi/YJBSMDi TRUT^SF\i</ \
iGRM\\MTS\iPGBFi]TiHMSGiUBW]MD^PB]GiRB]]GWiBSFiJWT^SF
PG_GPiTdTSGUTPP^]MTSiBSFiRBbiCGiLBWRH^Pi]TiL^RBSiLGBP]Li</ \iBWGiGRM\\MTS\iHWTRiSB]^WBPi\T^WDG\i\^DLiB\iUPBS]\iBSFi]WGG\i </ \iGRM]]GFiHWTRiUPBS]\iBWGi]LGiFTRMSBS]i\T^WDGiTHiWGF^DGFiDBWCTSiDLGRMDBP\i]Ti]LGiB]RT\ULGWGiBSFBWGiMRUTW]BS]iUWGD^W\TZ\i]Ti]LGiULT]TDLGRMDBPiUWTF^D]MTSiTHiTdTSGiBSFi\GDTSFBWbiTWJBSMDiBGWT\TP\i8LGi BPMHTWSMBiMWi3G\T^WDG\iTBWFi 3
iG\]MRB]G\iGRM\\MTS\iTHi</ \iHWTRi_GJG]B]MTSi FTU]MSJiUWTBD]M_GiRBSBJGRGS]iGJiBFN^\]MSJi]WGGi\UGDMG\iDTRUT\M]MTS
iDBSiWGF^DGiiiTHi]LGi</ \iGRM\\MTS\iBSFiiTHi]LGLGBP]LiFBRBJGiWGPB]GFi]Ti</ \iGRM\\MTS\iCbii3GHGWGSDG\iL]]V\ii\GPGD]WGGDBPiVTPciGFi^iL]]V\```BWCDBKT_GMCMTKGSMDGML]RiL]]V\```SW\I\HGF^\^SM]\^WCBSPTDBP
WG\T^WDG\FT`SPTBF\_TDWB]G\VFH
c||¦D6¦*--¦¦|¦
¦+-¦¦8¦1¦¦¦¦[¦¦¦¦1¦¦¦8¦1¦¦¦|¦]||¦<6¦+**¦¦|
¦+-¦¦8¦4¦e¦¦¦3¦¦¦¦+¦¦¦8¦&&¦¦¦|¦
ehcFFh¦hcFFe&&¦¦|¦1¦¦¦¦8¦&3¦¦¦|&0¦¦¦¦~|~|¦|} cFRZB<iFD¦^<RU¦hcFFe*¦a¦]|¦¦}¦~|¦8¦*¦ ~|¦|¦ XFp¦_<RU¦hcFFe&,¦¦|¦ XFp¦eL<DF¦hcFFe&-¦¦ |¦hZkR¦hcFFe¦cFUZoFD0¦¦¦}¦¦¦h¦c|¦]|¦e ¦B$$¦hZh<R¦hcFFe¦cFUZoFD¦¦cF]R<BFD+¦¦¦}¦¦|¦|~¦ ¦E¦\|¦hZkR¦XFp¦hcFFe,,¦i|¦¦ cF]R<XhNXJ¦c>gNZ8¦ ,46&
Page 93 of 222
Page 94 of 222
($55(//$*$6$17$%$5%$5$&$/,)251,$6+((78:72-+<67"7+,6'5$:,1*,6&23<5,*+7('0$7(5,$/81'(57+(62/(2:1(56+,32)+2&++$86(5%/$77(5$5&+,7(&785( 3/$11,1*$1<86(:,7+287(;35(66(':5,77(1&216(172)+2&++$86(5%/$77(5,6352+,%,7('6+((7&217(176,668$1&(255(9,6,21'$7(9,//$*($77+(3$/06%52$'675((76$1/8,62%,632&$/,)251,$(*(1(5$/127(66<0%2/6 '(7$,/6^^//>/dzEKd^/ŶƐƚĂůůĂƚŝŽŶŽĨƐǁŝƚĐŚĞƐ͕ŽƵƚůĞƚƐĂŶĚĐŽŶƚƌŽůƐƚŽƌĞĨůĞĐƚƚŚĞĂĐĐĞƐƐŝďŝůŝƚLJƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐŽĨƚŚĞϮϬϭϲĂĐĐĞƐƐŝďŝůŝƚLJĐŽĚĞƐϭ͘ϭϭͲϯϬϴ͘ϭ͘ϭůĞĐƚƌŝĐĂůĐŽŶƚƌŽůƐĂŶĚƐǁŝƚĐŚĞƐŝŶƚĞŶĚĞĚƚŽďĞƵƐĞĚďLJƚŚĞŽĐĐƵƉĂŶƚŽĨĂƌŽŽŵŽƌĂƌĞĂƐŚĂůůďĞůŽĐĂƚĞĚǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞĂůůŽǁĂďůĞƌĞĂĐŚƌĂŶŐĞƐ͘>ŽǁƌĞĂĐŚƐŚĂůůďĞŵĞĂƐƵƌĞĚĨƌŽŵƚŚĞďŽƚƚŽŵŽĨƚŚĞŽƵƚůĞƚďŽdžĂŶĚŚŝŐŚƌĞĂĐŚŝƐŵĞĂƐƵƌĞĚƚŽƚŚĞƚŽƉŽĨƚŚĞŽƵƚůĞƚďŽdž͘Ϯ͘ϭϭͲϯϬϴ͘ϭ͘ϮůĞĐƚƌŝĐĂůƌĞĐĞƉƚĂĐůĞŽƵƚůĞƚƐŽŶďƌĂŶĐŚĐŝƌĐƵŝƚƐŽĨϯϬĂŵƉĞƌĞƐŽƌůĞƐƐĂŶĚĐŽŵŵƵŶŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐLJƐƚĞŵƌĞĐĞƉƚĂĐůĞƐƐŚĂůůďĞůŽĐĂƚĞĚŝŶƚŚĞĂůůŽǁĂďůĞƌĞĂĐŚƌĂŶŐĞ͘>ŽǁƌĞĂĐŚƐŚĂůůďĞŵĞĂƐƵƌĞĚĨƌŽŵƚŚĞďŽƚƚŽŵŽĨƚŚĞŽƵƚůĞƚďŽdžĂŶĚŚŝŐŚƌĞĂĐŚŝƐŵĞĂƐƵƌĞĚƚŽƚŚĞƚŽƉŽĨƚŚĞŽƵƚůĞƚďŽdž͘ϯ͘ϭϭͲϯϬϴ͘Ϯ͘ϭ,ŝŐŚĨŽƌǁĂƌĚƌĞĂĐŚƚŚĂƚŝƐƵŶŽďƐƚƌƵĐƚĞĚƐŚĂůůďĞϰϴŝŶĐŚĞƐŵĂdžŝŵƵŵĂŶĚƚŚĞůŽǁĨŽƌǁĂƌĚƌĞĂĐŚƐŚĂůůďĞϭϱŝŶĐŚĞƐŵŝŶŝŵƵŵĂďŽǀĞĨŝŶŝƐŚĨůŽŽƌŽƌŐƌŽƵŶĚ͘ϰ͘ϭϭͲϯϬϴ͘Ϯ&ŽƌǁĂƌĚZĞĂĐŚKďƐƚƌƵĐƚĞĚͲůĞĐƚƌŝĐĂůƌĞĐĞƉƚĂĐůĞŽƵƚůĞƚƐƐŚĂůůďĞůŽĐĂƚĞĚŶŽŵŽƌĞƚŚĂŶϰϰŝŶĐŚĞƐŵĞĂƐƵƌĞĚĨƌŽŵƚŚĞƚŽƉŽĨƚŚĞƌĞĐĞƉƚĂĐůĞŽƵƚůĞƚďŽdžǁŚĞŶƚŚĞŽďƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶŝƐŽǀĞƌϮϬ͟ĂŶĚĚŽĞƐŶŽƚĞdžĐĞĞĚϮϱ͘͟tŚĞŶƚŚĞĚĞƉƚŚŝƐůĞƐƐƚŚĂŶϮϬ͟ŚĞŝŐŚƚĐĂŶďĞŝŶĐƌĞĂƐĞĚƚŽϰϴ͘͟;ĚĞƐŬĐŽƵŶƚĞƌƐͿϱ͘ϭϭͲϯϬϴ͘ϯ^ŝĚĞZĞĂĐŚKďƐƚƌƵĐƚĞĚͲůĞĐƚƌŝĐĂůƌĞĐĞƉƚĂĐůĞŽƵƚůĞƚƐƐŚĂůůďĞůŽĐĂƚĞĚŶŽŵŽƌĞƚŚĂŶϰϲŝŶĐŚĞƐŵĞĂƐƵƌĞĚĨƌŽŵƚŚĞƚŽƉŽĨƚŚĞƌĞĐĞƉƚĂĐůĞŽƵƚůĞƚďŽdžǁŚĞŶƚŚĞŽďƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶŝƐŽǀĞƌϭϬ͟ĂŶĚĚŽĞƐŶŽƚĞdžĐĞĞĚϮϰ͘͟tŚĞŶƚŚĞĚĞƉƚŚŝƐůĞƐƐƚŚĂŶϭϬ͟ŚĞŝŐŚƚĐĂŶďĞŝŶĐƌĞĂƐĞĚƚŽϰϴ͘͟ϲ͘KǀĞƌŚĂŶŐůŝŐŚƚĨŝdžƚƵƌĞƐŽƌǁĂůůĨŝdžƚƵƌĞƐƉƌŽũĞĐƚŝŶŐŵŽƌĞƚŚĂŶϰ͟ĨƌŽŵƚŚĞǁĂůůƐƵƌĨĂĐĞƐŚĂůůďĞĂŵŝŶŝŵƵŵŽĨϴϬ͟ĂďŽǀĞƚŚĞǁĂůŬŝŶŐƐƵƌĨĂĐĞ͘Page 95 of 222
287'2253$7,2(;,67,1*%8,/',1*(;,67,1*%8,/',1*&29(5(''5232))5$021$'5,9(%8,/',1*%3$5.,1*3$/20$5$9(6287+%5,'*(('*(2)(;,67,1*$&3$9,1*$1'1(:)/22'3/$,1/,1(%5,'*(
:$7(53,3(/,1(($6(0(17)/22'3/$,1/,1(6(:(5($6(0(177+(2$.6&5((.6(7%$&.%52$'676725<%8,/',1*$5($6)$31:$7(5/,1(($6(0(1775$6+ 5(&<&/,1*(3$5.,1*$7*5$'((;,67$&'5,9(:$<7+(3$/061&21&5(7($&&(6$%/(5$033523(57</,1(3523(57</,1(SURSRVHGHQWU\WRQGIORRUQHZHQWU\:$7(5/,1(($6(0(17QHZHQWU\6)(/(9$7256)7(55$&(6)67$,56%6)67$,5 1&21&5(7($&&(6$%/(5$03(175<
$8720
$
7
(
'
3
$
5
.
/,
)
7
6<67(
0(:$//725(0$,16859(<('7232)&5((.%$1.&5((.6(7%$&.
0,1
0,13523(57<6,*1$*(3523(57<6,*1$*((9&+$5*,1*67$7,2163$5.,1*63$&(6FFFFFFFFF
F
F
F
F
FF
F
F
F
02725&<&/(3$5.,1*02725&<&/(3$5.,1*352326('6,7(:$//7<3352326('6,7(:$//7<3HQWLUHDUHDWRQRUWKRIUHGOLQHUHPRYHGSDYHPHQWDQGUHSODFHGZLWKSDYHUVFRQFUHWHZKHUHFRYHUHGUHPRYHGSDYHPHQWDQGUHSODFHGZLWKSDYHUV75$6+ 5(&<&/,1*02725&<&/(3$5.,1*FF
F
%,&<&/(6%,&<&/(6RXWGRRUEHQFKRXWGRRUEHQFKW\SRXWGRRUEHQFKUHPRYHGSDYHPHQWDQGUHSODFHGZLWKSDYHUV($55(//$*$6$17$%$5%$5$&$/,)251,$6+((78:72-+<67"7+,6'5$:,1*,6&23<5,*+7('0$7(5,$/81'(57+(62/(2:1(56+,32)+2&++$86(5%/$77(5$5&+,7(&785( 3/$11,1*$1<86(:,7+287(;35(66(':5,77(1&216(172)+2&++$86(5%/$77(5,6352+,%,7('6+((7&217(176,668$1&(255(9,6,21'$7(9,//$*($77+(3$/06%52$'675((76$1/8,62%,632&$/,)251,$(6,7(/,*+7,1*3/$1EXTERIOR LIGHT POLLUTION MUST COMPLY WITHCGC SECTION 5.106.8ALL LIGHT FIXTURES ARE DARK SKY COMPLIANTPage 96 of 222
6)(/(9$7256)7(55$&(6)67$,56%6)67$,5($55(//$*$6$17$%$5%$5$&$/,)251,$6+((78:72-+<67"7+,6'5$:,1*,6&23<5,*+7('0$7(5,$/81'(57+(62/(2:1(56+,32)+2&++$86(5%/$77(5$5&+,7(&785( 3/$11,1*$1<86(:,7+287(;35(66(':5,77(1&216(172)+2&++$86(5%/$77(5,6352+,%,7('6+((7&217(176,668$1&(255(9,6,21'$7(9,//$*($77+(3$/06%52$'675((76$1/8,62%,632&$/,)251,$(6,7(/,*+7,1*3+2720(75,&3/$1Page 97 of 222
($55(//$*$6$17$%$5%$5$&$/,)251,$6+((78:72-+<67"7+,6'5$:,1*,6&23<5,*+7('0$7(5,$/81'(57+(62/(2:1(56+,32)+2&++$86(5%/$77(5$5&+,7(&785( 3/$11,1*$1<86(:,7+287(;35(66(':5,77(1&216(172)+2&++$86(5%/$77(5,6352+,%,7('6+((7&217(176,668$1&(255(9,6,21'$7(9,//$*($77+(3$/06%52$'675((76$1/8,62%,632&$/,)251,$((;7(5,25/,*+7),;785(&876+((76Page 98 of 222
5$021$'5,9(3$/20$5$9(2/'*
$
5
'
(
1
&
5
(
(
.(3$/06%8,/',1*(2$.6%8,/',1*(%5,'*(0$7&+32,176
)
6)(6,'(:$/.
(81&29(5('75$6+(1&/2685(72%('(02/,6+('(3$9('3$5.,1*/27(3$9('3$5.,1*/27&5((.6(7%$&./,1(66((127(7<3&5((.6(7%$&./,1(66((127(7<3723
2)
%
$
1
.
3
(
5
:
$//
$
&
(
*52
8
3
$
6
&
2
1),
5
0
(
'
3
(
5-+/6
6
8
5
9
(
<6)6)5$021$'5,9(3$/20$5$9(2/'*
$
5
'
(
1
&
5
(
(
.(3$/06%8,/',1*(2$.6%8,/',1*(%5,'*(6)6)6)
6)
6)6)
6
)
(6,'(:$/.6)3&29(5('75$6+(1&/2685(:,7+$5($'5$,1287/(772/$1'6&$3($5($3&29(5('75$6+(1&/2685(:,7+$5($'5$,1287/(772$'-$&(17/$1'6&$3($5($3%8,/',1*$3%8,/',1*%723
2)
%
$
1
.
3
(
5
:
$//
$
&
(
*52
8
3
$
6
&
2
1),
5
0
(
'
3
(
5-+/6
6
8
5
9
(
<
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
35(352-(&7&21',7,2163267352-(&7&21',7,2162)&5((.6(7%$&.(;&(37,21(;+,%,76&:&()7+(9,//$*($77+(3$/06%52$'675((76$1/8,62%,632&$(;3$16,21$5&+127(6 2/'*$5'(1&5((.+$6%((1:,7+,1&,7</,0,766,1&(35,2572-8/<&5((.6(7%$&.6$5(
:,7+$1$'',7,21$/
6(7%$&.5(48,5(')253257,212)%8,/',1*)/22566725,(6$1'+,*+(5( ( $6,7(9,6,7:$60$'(:,7+1$785$/5(6285&(60$1$*(552%(57+,//21$1',7:$6'(7(50,1('7+$77+(5(:$61235('20,1$173$77(512)5,3$5,$19(*(7$7,21$%29(7+(&5((.%$1.& &5((.6(7%$&.,60($685(')5207232)&5((.%$1.,1$&&25'$1&(:,7+&'(9(/230(17(19(/23($5($6727$/$5($6)DdZ/>^>'E͗^/dDdZ/>^t/d,/Es>KWDEdEs>KW;^ͿdKd>;ͿZ^͘&͘цWKZ͘K&;ͿZt/d,/EϮϬΖZ<^d<^͘&͘цdKd>;WͿZ^͘&͘цWKZ͘K&;WͿZt/d,/EϮϬΖZ<^d<^͘&͘цWKZ͘K&;WͿZt/d,/EϯϬΖZ<^d<^͘&͘ц/DWZs/Kh^ZϭͲ>'&KKdWZ/Edͬ^d/Zt>>^ͬdZZ^ϬϬϮϬ͕ϴϳϲϮϳϭ͕ϱϳϮ/DWZs/Kh^ZϮͲKZKE͘WZ</E'ͬZ/stz^ͬZ/s/^>ͬdZ^,Z^ϱϬ͕ϱϱϮ ϱ͕ϵϮϴ Ϯ͕ϲϵϱϰϰϱEͬ/DWZs/Kh^ZϯͲKZKE͘t><tz^ͬWd/K^ϭ͕ϭϮϳϮϳϬϮ͕ϴϴϴϱϮϱEͬWZs/Kh^ZϭͲ>E^W/E'ͬhEs>KWϭϯ͕ϳϯϰ ϰ͕ϭϮϬ ϮϬ͕ϱϵϲ ϱ͕ϲϳϱEͬWZs/Kh^ZϮͲWsZKZ'WZ</E'ͬZ/stz^ͬZ/s/^>^ϬϬϭϯ͕ϰϯϭ ϭ͕ϵϮϯEͬWZs/Kh^ZϯͲWsZKZ't><tz^ͬWd/K^ϬϬϰ͕ϲϱϳ ϭ͕ϱϮϬEͬs>KWDEdEs>KWϲϱ͕ϰϭϯEͬϲϱ͕ϰϭϯEͬϭ͕ϱϳϮ86( 3'(9Page 99 of 222
Page 100 of 222
INITIAL STUDY
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
For ER 0528-2021
1. Project Title:
The Villages at the Palms Expansion (ARCH-0386-2020, USE-0387-2020, PDEV-0001-2021, & EID-0528-2021)
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of San Luis Obispo
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
3. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Kyle Bell, Associate Planner
(805) 781-7524
4. Project Location:
55 Broad Street (Assessor’s Parcel Numbers [APNs] 052-162-021, 052-162-018, 052-162-022),
San Luis Obispo, CA (project site)
5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address:
Morrison I, LP
55 Broad Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Contact: Patrick Smith
6. General Plan Designations:
High Density Residential
7. Zoning:
High Density Residential Planned Development (R-4-PD)
8. Description of the Project:
The Villages at the Palms (project) includes the expansion of an existing residential care facility for the elderly
(RCFE; assisted living facility). The project is located with a Planned Development (PD) Overlay that was
originally established at this site to allow a student housing projec t. In 1997 the PD was amended to allow the
senior housing project that exists today. The project includes an amendment to the existing PD Precise Plan to
address the two new structures and a deviation from development standards to allow the maximum height of
Building A to be 45 feet and 3 inches, and the maximum height of Building B to be 58 feet and 4 inches, where the
maximum height is normally 35 feet. The Village at the Palms Planned Development consists of three existing
buildings, each on a separate parcel. The existing building located on APN 052-162-022 is known as “Garden
Creek” and consists of an assisted living facility with 64 rooms; no changes are proposed to this parcel. The
remaining two parcels were recently adjusted on October 16, 2020, under the lot line adjustment application SBDV-
0246-2020 (SLO AL 20-0002). The existing building located on APN 052-162-018 (1.4 acres) is known as “The
Oaks” and consists of a 50-unit senior living facility; no changes are proposed to this parcel. The existing building
Page 101 of 222
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 2 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
located on APN-052-162-021 (4.6 acres) is known as “The Palms” and consists of a 127-unit senior living facility;
the proposed project and associated site improvements would be located within this parcel (henceforth referred to
as Parcel 2 SLOAL 20-0002). In addition to Broad Street located along the project’s frontage, the project site is
bound by Palomar Avenue to the west and Ramona Drive to the north (Figure 1). The proposed project would be
directly accessed from an existing driveway off Broad Street or from the improved driveways located off Palomar
Avenue and Ramona Drive.
An existing commercial center (Foothill Plaza Shopping Center) is north of the project site, low -density residential
development is south and east of the project site and planned and existing apartment complexes are west of the
project site. The property is zoned for High Density Residential within a Planned Development (PD) Overlay zone
(R-4-PD).
The project site is characterized by generally flat topography and consists of three habitat types, including
ruderal/disturbed, riparian, and ornamental landscaping. The project includes the removal of 6 ornamental trees
along the western portion of the p roperty, including 2 Brisbane Box trees (6-9 inches), 1 Mondell Pine tree (14
inches), and 3 Evergreen Pear trees (4 inches). Removed trees would be replanted at minimum 1:1 ratio, the project
proposes to plant 40 new trees. The project site is located within the San Luis Obispo Creek watershed. Old Garden
Creek, which runs through the project site, is a tributary to Stenner Creek, which is a tributary to San Luis Obispo
Creek. The project site is in Watershed Management Zone 1 (WMZ1), and therefore would be required to meet
Performance Requirements 1–4 of the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Post-
Construction Stormwater Requirements for development projects. Applicant-proposed stormwater reduction
measures include installation of additional landscaping and using existing pavers to construct the proposed surface
parking lot located to the north of Building B.
The expanded residential care facility would consist of two new buildings (Building A and Building B) located to
the east and west of Old Garden Creek, which runs through the central portion of the project site (Figures 2 and 3).
As proposed, Building A includes a three-story building with 37 new units (eight studio units, 24 one-bedroom
units, and five two-bedroom units) and amenities, such as a commercial kitchen, dining room, living room, multi-
purpose activities space, administrative offices, and a rooftop terrace. Building B includes a total of four floors ,
with the first two floors providing a parking garage and the upper two floors providing additional residential units
(22 one-bedroom units).
Building A would be approximately 13,293 square feet with a maximum height of 45 feet and 3 inches. Building B
would be approximately 12,068 square feet with a maximum heig ht of 58 feet 4 inches. The Applicant (Morrison
I, LP) is requesting a deviation from development standards associated with the PD amendment to exceed the 35-
foot height standard within the R-4-PD zone (17.22.020) and other exceptions (see Table 2). Signage is proposed
along Ramona Drive and at the corner of Ramona Drive and Palomar Avenue. The project would result in various
amenities and programs that are intended to promote social interaction, wellness, fitness, art, music, and outdoor
access.
Visual simulations have been prepared by the Applicant for the proposed project and are shown on Figures 4a
through 4c. Building design of the proposed RCFE expansion would reflect a Spanish -style design, including clay
tile roofs, smooth plaster finish walls, decorative tile insets, ornamental wrought iron planters, and a variety of
arched openings. Building design would also include horizontal breaks in the building plane to create a residential -
scale articulation. Additionally, both buildings would include recessed flat roof areas behind slightly sloping
rooftops to conceal mechanical equipment, plumbing vents, exhaust fans, and potential solar panels. The project
includes landscaping along the property line and throughout the developed areas. A mix of trees, bushes, and
groundcover varying in textures, colors, form, and height would be provided within the developed patio and
surrounding outdoor areas. The proposed development program details for the R-4-PD zone are summarized in
Table 1.
Page 102 of 222
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 3 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Table 1. Project Development Program
Site Details Proposed Allowed/Required
Setbacks
Front (Broad Street) N/A 10 feet
Corner Lot – Street Side (Ramona Drive) 23 feet 3 inches 10 feet
Corner Lot- Street Side (Palomar Avenue) 7 feet 10 feet
Interior, Side, and Rear1 12 feet 9 inches 10 feet
Creek Setback (first and second stories) Building A: 20 feet
Building B: 25 feet 20 feet
Creek Setback (third story) Building A: 20 feet
Building B: 25 feet (Floors 1–3)
Building B: 28 feet (Floor 4)
30 feet
Maximum Height of Structures Building A: 45 feet, 3 inches
Building B: 58 feet, 4 inches 35 feet
Maximum Lot Coverage 33% 60%
Minimum Lot Area 198,356 square feet 5,000 square feet
Total No. Parking Spaces 152 143
Bicycle Parking 8 7
The project includes modifications to the building and design features identified in the City’s Municipal Code
(Table 2). The project is within a PD Overlay, which provides for deviations from development standards of
Municipal Code Title 17, such as maximum height, where determined necessary and justifiable to accommodate
the development of the project (17.48.030.D).
Table 2. Project Development Program
Municipal Code Section Proposed Exceptions and Deviations from Development Standards
17.22.020 Exceed the 35-foot height standard within the R-4-PD zone.
17.70.170 D.1.B Reduce the side yard setback along Palomar Avenue to facilitate an additional
building setback from the top of the bank of the creek.
Provide parking within the required side yard setback adjacent to Palomar
Avenue and the small section of Building B parking along Palomar Avenue
front yard setback.
Place trash/recycling enclosure for Building B within the side yard adjacent to
Palomar Avenue to facilitate increased setback from the creek.
Section 17.70.030 G.1 Provide replacement parking to incorporate impervious paving at the
southwestern corner of Building A.
Provide replacement parking incorporating impervious paving within the
20-foot creek-side setback on the east side of Building B.
Section 17.70.030 E.3 Encroachment into the additional 10-foot creek-side setback at the upper
stories.
Page 103 of 222
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 4 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Water service for the proposed project would be provided by the City ’s Utilities Department, and the project would
require an additional water demand of approximately 6 acre-feet per year (AFY). The project would be served by
the City’s sewer system and would generate approximately 2 million gallons annually. Electricity for the project
would be provided by Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E). The project site includes existing utility infrastructure
within easements along Ramona Drive and Palomar Avenue, including sewer lines, water lines, and power poles.
The project would include the installment of expanded infrastructure to connect the new buildings to existing City
facilities. Access to the project site would be provided via two new 20-foot-wide entries off Palomar Avenue and
improvements to the existing 22-foot-wide driveway off Ramona Drive, as well as access from the existing
driveway along Broad Street. Building A would incorporate an arrival/drop-off porte-cochere that is compliant
with the City Fire Department’s vertical clearance regulations. The existing peak number of employe es is 67 and
implementation of the project is anticipated to require 16 additional employees. The estimated average daily trip
(ADT) for the project is 148. There are currently 171 vehicle parking spaces for the Village at the Palms assisted
living facility. Implementation of the project would remove 128 existing vehicle parking spaces. The project would
provide 109 new vehicle parking spaces and the development would provide a total of 152 vehicle parking spaces,
including 11 accessible parking spaces, eight Electric Vehicle (EV) charging parking stations, eight motorcycle
parking spaces, eight bicycle parking spaces, and an Automated Parklift System with 29 vehicle spots.
Project construction would require approximately 1,575 cubic yards (cy) of cut and 62 0 cy of fill for a total of
2,195 cy of earthwork. Construction is anticipated to last approximately 14 months and is anticipated to begin in
April 2022. Construction would result in approximately 57,000 square feet (1.31 acres) of ground disturbance and
would replace approximately 22,000 square feet of surface parking with new buildings, hardscapes, and parking
lots on pervious pavers. Construction would require the use of typical construction equipment, including, but not
limited to, dozers, loaders, and excavators.
9. Project Entitlements:
Planned Development Amendment, Minor Use Permit, Development Review (Major)
10. Surrounding Land Uses and Settings:
Northeast: commercial center (Foothill Plaza Shopping Center) and single-family residential development
Northwest: commercial center (Foothill Plaza Shopping Center), Church of Jesus Christ Latter -Day Saints, and
apartment complex (Valencia Apartments)
Southwest: planned apartment complex (The Academy Palomar) and low-density residential development
Southeast: low-density residential development
11. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area
requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1? If so, is t here a plan for
consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural
resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.?
Native American Tribes were notified on August 6, 2021, about the project consistent with City and State of
California regulations, including, but not limited to, Assembly Bill 52 . As of September 28, 2021, responses have
been received from two tribes, including the yak titʸu titʸu yak tiłhini Northern Chumash Tribe of San Luis Obispo
County and Region and the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians.
12. Other public agencies whose approval is required:
San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
Regional Water Quality Control Board (Central Coast)
1 Based on Table 2-11: R-4 Zone Minimum Interior Side and Rear Setbacks (Municipal Code 17.22.020).
Page 104 of 222
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 5 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Figure 1. Project Location Map
Page 105 of 222
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 6 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Figure 2. Conceptual Site Plan.
Page 106 of 222
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 7 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Figure 3. Conceptual Site Plan
Page 107 of 222
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 8 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Figure 4a. Visual Simulation – View From Ramona Drive
Page 108 of 222
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 9 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Figure 4b. Visual Simulation – View From Palomar Avenue
Page 109 of 222
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 10 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Figure 4c. Visual Simulation – View from the Corner of Ramona Drive and Palomar Avenue
Page 110 of 222
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a
“Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
☐ Aesthetics ☒ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ☐ Public Services
☐ Agriculture and Forestry
Resources ☒ Hazards and Hazardous Materials ☐ Recreation
☒ Air Quality ☒ Hydrology and Water Quality ☐ Transportation
☒ Biological Resources ☒ Land Use and Planning ☒ Tribal Cultural Resources
☒ Cultural Resources ☐ Mineral Resources ☒ Utilities and Service Systems
☐ Energy ☒ Noise ☐ Wildfire
☐ Geology and Soils ☐ Population and Housing ☒ Mandatory Findings of
Significance
FISH AND WILDLIFE FEES
☐
The Department of Fish and Wildlife has reviewed the CEQA document and written no effect determination
request and has determined that the project will not have a potential effect on fish, wildlife, or habitat (see
attached determination).
☒
The project has potential to impact fish and wildlife resources and shall be subject to the payment of Fish and
Game fees pursuant to Section 711.4 of the California Fish and Game Code. This initial study has been
circulated to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife for review and comment.
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
☒ This environmental document must be submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review by one or more State
agencies (e.g., Cal Trans, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Department of Housing and Community
Development). The public review period shall not be less than 30 days (CEQA Guidelines 15073(a)).
Page 111 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 12 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency):
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared. ☐
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a
significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made, by or agreed to b y the project
proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
☒
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required. ☐
I find that the proposed project MAY ha ve a “potentially significant” impact(s) or “potentially significant unless
mitigated” impact(s) on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier
document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the
earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it
must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed
☐
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially
significant effects (1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant
to applicable standards, and (2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing
further is required.
☐
Signature Date
For: Michael Codron,
Printed Name Community Development Director
Page 112 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 13 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the
information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately
supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved
(e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-
specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a
project-specific screening analysis).
2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as
project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate
whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially
Significant Impact’ is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more
“Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4. “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation
measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less than Significant Impact.” The lead agency
must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level
(mitigation measures from Section 19, “Earlier Analysis,” as described in (5) below, may be cross-referenced).
5. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration (Section 15063 (c) (3) (D)). In this case, a brief discussion
should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects
were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” describe
the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which
they addressed site-specific conditions for the project.
6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g.,
general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate,
include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should
be cited in the discussion.
8. The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each q uestion; and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance
Page 113 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 14 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
1. AESTHETICS
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would
the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 1, 2, 3 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not
limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, open space, and historic
buildings within a local or state scenic highway?
2, 4 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing
visual character or quality of public views of the site and its
surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced
from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an
urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable
zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
1, 2, 3,
4, 5 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would
adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? 1, 5 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
The proposed project site is located at the corner of Palomar Avenue and Ramona Drive in the northcentral portion of San Luis
Obispo. The site is surrounded by existing buildings associated with the Village at the Palms assisted living facility to the east,
an existing commercial center (Foothill Plaza Shopping Center) and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints to the north,
apartment complexes to the west, and apartment and low -density residential units to the south. Broad Street is located 465 feet
east of the project site, beyond the existing Village at the Palms assisted living facility, and Foothill Boulevard is located
approximately 480 feet north of the project site , beyond Foothill Plaza Shopping Center and the Church of Jesus Christ Latter-
Day Saints. The project site consists of a surface parking lot located on the east and west sides of Old Garden Creek, which runs
through the central portion of th e site. Ornamental landscaping is present throughout the project site, and the Old Garden Creek
bed supports natural riparian vegetation.
The topography of the city is generally defined by several low hills and ridges , such as Righetti Hill, Bishop Peak, and Cerro
San Luis. These are three of the nine peaks known as the Morros and provide scenic focal points for much of the city. The project
vicinity exhibits intermittent views of nearby natural landmarks, including Cerro San Luis and Bishop Peak. The project area
and surrounding areas are characterized by relatively flat to slightly sloping topography. Elevation at the project site is
approximately 235 to 240 feet above mean sea level.
Based on the City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element (COSE) map of scenic roadways
and vistas, Broad Street, located east of the project site, and Foothill Boulevard, located north of the project site, are designated
as having moderate scenic value. The project site is in the High Density Residential land use designation. The site is also within
a High Density Residential zone with a PD Overlay (R-4-PD). The project is within a PD Overlay, which provides for deviations
from development standards of Municipal Code Title 17, such as maximum height, where determined necessary and justifiable
to accommodate the development of the project (17.48.030.D). The project’s consistency with the applicable development
standards is evaluated in Table 1 in the Project Description.
A scenic vista is generally defined as a high-quality view displaying good aesthetic and compositional values that can be seen
from public viewpoints. A substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista would occur if the proposed project would significantl y
degrade the scenic landscape as viewed from public roads or other public areas. The project area consists of distant views of
Cerro San Luis to the southwest and Bishop Peak to the northwest. Based on the City’s COSE, the portion of Foothill Boulevard
located approximately 480 feet north of the project site is considered a roadway with moderate scenic value; however, the project
site is not within the viewshed of a designated scenic vista .
Page 114 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 15 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
a) The City’s COSE designates the portion of Foothill Boulevard located approximately 480 feet north of the project site as
a roadway with moderate scenic value. Views from Foothill Boulevard traveling north at the project site include
commercial and residential development and distant views of Bishop Peak. Views from Foothill Boulevard traveling south
at the project site include commercial and residential development and distant views of the Alex G. Spanos Stadium and
the California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo (Cal Poly) “P.”
Intervening commercial development and associated vegetation along Foothill Boulevard would block construction -
related views associated with the project from travelers along Foothill Boulevard. Implementation of the project would
result in the construction and operation of two new buildings similar in style and density to surrounding development,
ranging from 45 feet 3 inches to 58 feet 4 inches in height. As evaluated in threshold c) below, the Applicant is requesting
a modification to allowable building height within the R-4 zone. Implementation of the project would not block any scenic
views from Foothill Boulevard, including Bishop Peak, Cerro San Luis, or the Cal Poly “P.” In addition, the City’s COSE
does not designate the project area as a scenic vista; therefore, the project would not result in an adverse change to a scenic
vista. The project would not block any scenic views and would generally be consistent with the level of surrounding
commercial and residential development in the project area. The project would not result in significant adverse change in
a scenic vista; therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant.
b) The project site is located approximately 0.66 mile northwest of U.S. Highway 101 (US 101). Based on the California
Department of Transportation (Caltrans) California Scenic Highways online mapping tool, this section of US 101 is
eligible for State of California (State) scenic highway designation but is not officially designated. The City’s COSE also
identifies Foothill Boulevard (approximately 480 feet north of the project site) as having moderate scenic value, which is
evaluated in threshold (a) above. The project site would not be visible to viewers traveling along US 101 due to the distance
between US 101 and the project site, as well as the presence of intervening topography and development. Further, there
are no scenic resources in the project area that would be damaged because of the proposed project. For these reasons, the
project would not substantially damage any of these resources and there would be no impact.
c) The project is in the R-4 land use designation and has a PD Overlay (R-4-PD). The project would be subject to the R-4
zone design standards identified in City Municipal Code 17.22.020. The project would also be subject to other applicable
building standards identified in City Municipal Code 17.70 and with COSE Policy 9.1.2, which outlines view guidelines
regarding urban development. The COSE states that urban development should reflect its architectural context. This does
not necessarily prescribe a specific style, but requires deliberate design choices that acknowledge human scale, natural site
features, and neighboring urban development, and that are compatible with historical an d architectural resources. The
Applicant is requesting exceptions and deviations to design features and building design standards, including building
height, creek setbacks, side yard setbacks, and a front yard setback (see Table 2 in the Project Description). The project
site’s PD Overlay provides for deviations from development standards of Municipal Code Title 17, such as maximum
height, as determined necessary and justifiable for the project by the City.
Construction views associated with the project would be temporary in nature and similar to other projects within the city.
Additionally, construction-related views would be blocked from Foothill Boulevard and Broad Street by intervening
development and vegetation. Project construction requires the removal of non -native vegetation; however, none of the
trees that would be removed have unusual or historical value. Additionally, any trees that are removed during
implementation of the project would be replanted at a 1:1 ratio, the project proposes a replanting plan ratio of 6.7:1 which
exceeds the minimum compensatory planting requirements.
Implementation of the project would result in the construction of two new buildings ranging from 45 feet 3 inches to
58 feet 4 inches in height. The maximum standard building height for the R-4 zone is 35 feet. Although the proposed
project would be taller than surrounding development, it would not impede any scenic views in the area, including Bishop
Peak to the northwest, Cerro San Luis to the southwest, or the Cal Poly “P” to the northeast. The proposed project would
also be similar in nature to the density and style of surrounding high-density residential development. Additionally, views
of the project would be mostly blocked along Foothill Boulevard, which has a moderate scenic value per the City’s COSE,
due to intervening commercial development and associated vegetation along Foothill Boulevard. The project also includes
a vegetative screen along Ramona Drive and Palomar Avenue, which would conceal lower portion s of the buildings from
travelers along those roads. For these reasons, the project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of public views of the site, nor would the project conflict with regulations that have been established for the purpose
Page 115 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 16 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
of preserving scenic quality or resources. Thus, the impacts to visual character and scenic quality would be less than
significant.
d) Existing sources of nighttime lighting in the vicinity of the project site include residential street lighting, spillover parking
lot lighting from nearby commercial centers and apartments, and intermittent vehicle lighting from vehicles traveling along
Ramona Drive and/or Palomar Avenue. Construction activities would only occur during daylight hours and would not
require nighttime lighting. Operational nighttime lighting would include outdoor lighting for safety and illumination
purposes and may include vehicle headlights. However, the project is required to comply with the Lighting and Night Sky
Preservation Ordinance (17.70.100) standards for outdoor lighting and new development, which include, but are not
limited to, requirements for new outdoor light sources to be shielded and directed away from adjacent properties and public
rights-of-way, requirements for minimum levels of lighting consistent with public safety standards, and limits to hours of
lighting operation. Therefore, impacts from new sources of light or glare would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation measures are not required.
Conclusion
The project is not located within a scenic vista or within the viewshed of a designated scenic highway and would not be highly
visible from nearby public roadways designated as having high scenic value. The project does not conflict with City of San Luis
Obispo regulations that have been established for the purpose of preserving scenic quality or resources and would not result in a
significant source of additional nighttime lighting. No potentially significant impacts associated with aesthetic resources would
occur and mitigation measures are not required.
2. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are
significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the
California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model
(1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an
optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and
farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources,
including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead
agencies may refer to information compiled by the California
Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s
inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment
Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon
measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by
the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps
prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use?
6 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract? 7 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest
land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)),
timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section
4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined
by Government Code section 51104(g))?
7 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Page 116 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 17 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to
non-forest use? 1, 7 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due
to their location or nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land
to non-forest use?
7 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Evaluation
The California Department of Conservation (DOC) classifies and maps agricultural lands in the state in the Farmland Mapping
and Monitoring Program (FMMP). The FMMP identifies five farmland categories: Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide
Importance, Unique Farmland, Farmland of Local Importance, and Fa rmland of Local Potential. The project site is designated
as Urban and Built-Up Land by the FMMP (DOC 2016). The project site is not located on local Prime Farmland, Farmland of
Local Importance, Farmland of Local Potential, Farmland of Statewide Importanc e, or Unique Farmland according to Figure 10
of the City’s COSE.
The project site is zoned as R-4-PD within the northcentral portion of the city. The project site is not located within or
immediately adjacent to land zoned for agricultural uses, land under an active Williamson Act contract, or land currently
supporting agricultural uses.
According to California Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 12220(g), forest land is defined as land that can support 10 %
native tree cover of any species, including hardwoods, under natural conditions, and that allows for management of one or mor e
forest resources, including timber, aesthetics, fish and wildlife, biodiversity, water quality, recreation, and other public benefits.
Timberland is defined as land, other than land owned by the federal government and land designated by the State Board of
Forestry and Fire Protection as experimental forest land, which is available for, and capable of, growing a crop of trees of a
commercial species used to produce lumber and other forest products, including Christmas trees. The project site does not supp ort
any forest land or timberland and is not surrounded by forest land or timberland.
a) According to the FMMP, the project site and surrounding land uses are designated as Urban and Built-Up Land. Since the
project site is not located on or adjacent to designated Prime Farmland, the project would not result in the conversion of
Prime or other Farmland to non-agricultural use, and no impacts would occur.
b) The project site is not located within or adjacent to land zoned for agriculture or under an active Williamson Act contract.
Therefore, the project would not conflict with existing agricultural zoning or a Williamson Act contract, and no impacts
would occur.
c) The project site does not include land designated or zoning for forest land or timberland. Additionally, the project site does
not contain 10% tree cover that would classify the site as forest land. Therefore, the project would not conflict with zoning
for, result in the loss of, or result in the conversion of forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production ,
and no impacts would occur.
d) The project site does not include land designated for forest land and does not support 10% tree cover that would classify
the project site as forest land. Therefore, the project would not result in the conversion of forest land to non-forest use and
impacts, and no impacts would occur.
e) The project includes expansion of an existing assisted living facility and is surrounded by urbanized high-density
residential and other residential uses. The nearest agricultural uses are approximately 1.4 miles south of the project site.
The proposed project would be consistent with surrounding uses and with existing zoning designated for the project site
and would not adversely affect agricultural water supplies or other agricultural support facilities. Therefore, the project
would not result in substantial changes in the environment that could result in conversion of nearby agricultural land or
forest land to non-agricultural or non-forest use, and no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation measures are not required.
Page 117 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 18 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Conclusion
The project site is in an urbanized area and is not within or adjacent to Farmland, land zoned for agricultural or forest land use,
or land under a Williamson Act contract. No potentially significant impacts to agriculture or forest land would occur, and
mitigation measures are not required.
3. AIR QUALITY
Where available, the significance criteria established by the
applicable air quality management district or air pollution control
district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.
Would the project: Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air
quality plan?
1, 8, 9,
10, 11 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria
pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
1, 8,
10, 13 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
1, 10,
13, 14 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors)
adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
1, 10,
14 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Evaluation
The city of San Luis Obispo is located within the South Central Coast Air Basin (SCCAB), which also includes Santa Barbara
and Ventura Counties. Air quality within the SCCAB is regulated by several jurisdictions , including the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (USEPA), California Air Resources Board (CARB), and San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control
District (SLOAPCD).
San Luis Obispo County is currently designated as “nonattainment” for the State standards for ozone, partial nonattainment for
federal ambient standards for ozone (in eastern San Luis Obispo County, outside of the project area), and nonattainment for the
State standards for particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter (PM10). The City’s COSE identifies goals and policies to
achieve and maintain air quality that supports health and enjoyment for those who live in, work in, and visit the city. These goals
and policies include meeting federal and State air quality standards, reducing dependency on gasoline- or diesel-powered motor
vehicles and to encourage walking, biking, and public transit use.
The SLOAPCD has developed a CEQA Air Quality Handbook (most recently updated with a November 2017 Clarification
Memorandum) to evaluate project-specific impacts and determine if potentially significant impacts could result from a project.
To evaluate long-term emissions, cumulative effects, and establish countywide programs to reach acceptable air quality levels,
the 2001 San Luis Obispo County Clean Air Plan (2001 Clean Air Plan) was prepared and adopted (SLOAPCD 2002).
Some land uses are considered more sensitive to changes in air quality than others, depending on the population groups and the
activities involved. The CARB has identified the following groups who are most likely to be affected by air pollution (i.e.,
sensitive receptors): children under 14, the elderly over 65 years of age, athletes, and people with cardiovascular and chronic
respiratory diseases. The project site is in a residential area with sensitive receptor locations located in all directions. On-site,
sensitive receptors currently live within the existing housing at the Villages at the Palms. Off-site sensitive receptors are also
present as close at 50 feet west in high-density residential apartment complexes.
Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA) has be en identified as a toxic air contaminant by the CARB. Any ground disturbance
proposed in an area identified as having the potential to contain NOA must comply with the CARB Airborne Toxics Control
Measure (ATCM) for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Su rface Mining Operations. The SLOAPCD NOA Map indicates
that the project site is in an area identified as having a potential for NOA to occur.
Page 118 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 19 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
a) To be considered consistent with the 2001 Clean Air Plan, a project must be consistent with the land use planning and
transportation control measures and strategies outlined in the Clean Air Plan. The project includes the expansion of the
Village at the Palms assisted living facility within the R-4-PD zone. The project site is located approximately 60 feet south
of a commercial center with restaurants, a market, and other commercial development. The project site is in an area that
would facilitate pedestrian and bicycle travel. The project would be easily accessible by Class II bicycle lanes located on
Foothill Boulevard that connect to existing bicycle lanes on Broad Street, which connects to Ramona Drive. The project
site is located adjacent to a transit stop on Ramona Drive, which would likely facilitate the use of public transportation.
According to the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition, a continuing care
retirement community generates 2.5 Average Daily Trips (ADT) per occupied unit. The project would create 59 new
continuing care retirement units, estimated to generate 148 ADT. Although operation of the project would create more
than 110 trips per day, based on the City’s Residential Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening Map, the project site is
in an area of the city that would result in average VMT less than or equal to 85% of the regional average, meaning a project
in this area would result in VMT generation below the City’s adopted thresholds. Further, the project would be consistent
with VMT reduction measures identified in the 2001 Clean Air Plan. Because the project would be consistent with the
City’s land use planning and transportation control measures and with the 2001 Clean Air Plan, the project would be
consistent with applicable air quality plans. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
b) San Luis Obispo County is currently designated as non -attainment for ozone and PM10 under State ambient air quality
standards. Construction of the project would result in short-term emissions of ozone precursors including reactive organic
gasses (ROG), nitrous oxides (NOx), and fugitive dust emissions (PM10). During operation, the project would result in
emissions of ozone precursors associated with mobile source emissions and other stationary sources.
Construction Emissions
The project would result in approximately 57,000 square feet (1.31 acres) of ground disturban ce, including 1,575 cy of cut
and 620 cy of fill (2,195 cy of total cut/fill). Construction of the proposed project has the potential to result in a short-term
increase in dust and vehicle emissions, including diesel particulate matter (DPM), ROGs, NO x, and particulate matter.
Estimated construction emissions from the project were calculated using the California Emission Estimator Model
(CalEEMod), version 2020.4.0 (CalEEMod 2021). Emissions were quantified based on the default construction schedules,
equipment use, and construction vehicle trips contained in the model. Fugitive dust control measures were not included in
the modeling assumptions. Construction emissions modeling assumptions are summarized in Attachment 5. Estimated
short-term construction emissions are shown in Table 3 below.
Table 3. Project Construction Emissions
Criteria Pollutant Highest Emissions SLOAPCD Screening
Threshold Exceeds Threshold?
Uncontrolled Daily Construction Emissions – Summer Conditions
Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) +
Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) 64.3 lbs/day 137 lbs/day No
Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) 1.6 lbs/day 7 lbs/day No
Uncontrolled Daily Construction Emissions – Winter Conditions
Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) +
Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) 64.3 lbs/day 137 lbs/day No
Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) 1.6 lbs/day 7 lbs/day No
Uncontrolled Annual Construction Emissions
Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) +
Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) 0.60 tons/year 2.5 tons/quarter No
Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) 0.07 tons/year 0.13 tons/quarter No
Fugitive Dust (PM10) 0.11 tons/year 2.5 tons/quarter No
Source: CalEEMod 2021 (v. 2020.4.0); SLOAPCD 2012
Page 119 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 20 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
As shown in Table 3, short-term construction emissions are not anticipated to exceed established thresholds. Although the
project would not result in significant construction -related emissions, SLOAPCD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook
recognizes special conditions, such as proximity to sensitive receptors, that require implementation of standard
construction mitigation measures to reduce diesel idling (DPM) and fugitive dust. Due to the project ’s proximity to
surrounding residential areas, both within the existing housing complex on the property and immediately surrounding the
property, standard measures for reducing DPM and fugitive dust are required and have been included as Mitigation
Measures AQ-1 and AQ-2. Therefore, potential air quality impacts associated with project construction would be less than
significant with mitigation.
Operational Impacts
Implementation of the project would result in the operation of 59 new assisted living dwelling units. Long-term operational
emissions were also calculated using the CalEEMod computer program (CalEEMod 2021). Operational emissions
modeling assumptions are summarized in Attachment 5. Estimated operational emissions are shown in Table 4 below.
Table 4. Operational Emissions Summary
Criteria Pollutant Highest Daily/Annual
Emissions
SLOAPCD Screening
Threshold Exceeds Threshold?
Daily Operational Emissions – Summer Conditions
Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) +
Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) 2.3 lbs/day 25 lbs/day No
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 9.0 lbs/day 550 lbs/day No
Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) 0.05 lbs/day 1.25 lbs/day No
Fugitive Dust (PM10) 0.79 lbs/day 25 lbs/day No
Daily Operational Emissions – Winter Conditions
Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) +
Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) 2.3 lbs/day 25 lbs/day No
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 9.2 lbs/day 550 lbs/day No
Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) 0.05 lbs/day 1.25 lbs/day No
Fugitive Dust (PM10) 0.7 lbs/day 25 lbs/day No
Annual Operational Emissions – Year 2023
Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) +
Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) 0.40 tons/year 25 tons/year No
Fugitive Dust (PM10) 0.13 tons/year 25 tons/year No
Source: CalEEMod 2021 (v. 2020.4.0); SLOAPCD 2012
As shown in Table 4, operational emissions of criteria air pollutants would not exceed SLOAPCD’s recommended
thresholds of significance; therefore, impacts from criteria pollutants during project operation would be less than
significant.
c) The project site is in a residential area and the nearest sensitive receptor location is an apartment complex located 50 feet
west of the project site, across Palomar Avenue. Construction activities, such as excavation, grading, vegetation removal,
staging, and building construction, would result in temporary construction vehicle emissions and fugitive dust that may
affect surrounding sensitive receptors. Based on the SLOAPCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, construction activities
within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors require standard dust and DPM reduction measures. Mitigation Measures AQ-1
and AQ-2 have been identified to reduce exposure of sensitive receptors to adverse construction vehicle emissions and
fugitive dust; therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
d) Construction of the proposed project would generate odors associated with construction smoke , dust, and equipment
exhaust and fumes. Proposed construction activities would not differ significantly from those resulting from any other type
of construction project. Any effects would be temporary and limited to the construction phase of the proposed project. The
Page 120 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 21 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
SLOAPCD NOA Map indicates the project site is located within an area identified as having potential for NOA to be
present. The project would include approximately 2,195 cy of total earthwork, removal of ornamental trees and vegetation
along the western property boundary, and construction of the proposed development. Pursuant to SLOAPCD requirements
and the CARB ATCM for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations (CARB ATCM Section
93105), the Applicant is required to provide geologic evaluation prior to any construction activities and comply with
existing regulations regarding NOA, if present. Mitigation Measures AQ-3 and AQ-4 have been identified to require the
Applicant to complete a geologic evaluation and follow all applicable protocol and procedures if NOA is determined to be
present on-site. Based on compliance with identified mitigation and existing regulations, potential impacts associated with
other emissions would be less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measures
AQ-1 During all construction activities and use of diesel vehicles, the Applicant shall implement the following idling control
techniques:
1. Idling Restrictions Near Sensitive Receptors for Both On- and Off-Road Equipment
a. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors if feasible;
b. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors shall not be permitted;
c. Use of alternative fueled equipment shall be used whenever possible; and
d. Signs that specify the no idling requirements shall be posted and enforced at the construction site.
2. California Diesel Idling Regulations. On-road diesel vehicles shall comply with Section 2485 of Title 13 of
the California Code of Regulations. This regulation limits idling from diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicles
with gross vehicular weight ratings of more than 10,000 pounds and licensed for operation on highways. It
applies to California and non-California based vehicles. In general, the regulation specifies that drivers of said
vehicles:
a. Shall not idle the vehicle’s primary diesel engine for greater than 5 minutes at any location, except as
noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation; and
b. Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system (APS) to power a heater, air conditioner, or
any ancillary equipment on that vehicle during sleeping or resting in a sleeper berth for greater than
5 minutes at any location when within 1,000 feet of a restricted area, except as noted in Subsection
(d) of the regulation.
Signs must be posted in the designated queuing areas and job sites to remind drivers of the 5-minute idling
limit. The specific requirements and exceptions in the regulation can be reviewed at the following website:
www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/truck-idling/2485.pdf.
AQ-2 During all construction and ground-disturbing activities, the Applicant shall implement the following particulate matter
control measures and detail each measure on the project grading and building plans:
1. Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible.
2. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site and
from exceeding the San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD) limit of 20% opacity
for no greater than 3 minutes in any 60-minute period. Increased watering frequency shall be required whenever
wind speeds exceed 15 miles per hour (mph) and cessation of grading activities during periods of winds over
25 mph. Reclaimed (non-potable) water is to be used in all construction and dust-control work.
3. All dirt stockpile areas (if any) shall be sprayed daily and covered with tarps or other dust barriers as needed.
4. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans shall be
implemented as soon as possible, following completion of any soil-disturbing activities.
5. Exposed grounds that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than 1 month after initial grading shall be
sown with a fast-germinating, non-invasive, grass seed and watered until vegetation is established.
Page 121 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 22 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
6. All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using approved chemical binders, jute
netting, or other methods approved in advance by the SLOAPCD.
7. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. In addition,
building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.
8. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction
site.
9. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or shall maintain at least 2 feet of
freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load an d top of trailer) in accordance with California
Vehicle Code Section 23114.
10. Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets or wash off trucks and
equipment leaving the site. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible so il material is carried onto adjacent
paved roads.
11. Water sweepers shall be used with reclaimed water where feasible. Roads shall be pre-wetted prior to sweeping
when feasible.
12. All PM10 mitigation measures required shall be shown on grading and building pla ns.
13. The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive dust emissions and enhance
the implementation of the measures as necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below
the SLOAPCD limit of 20% opacity for no greater than 3 minutes in any 60 -minute period. Their duties shall
include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of
such persons shall be provided to the SLOAPCD Compliance Division prior to the start of any site preparation,
grading, or earthwork.
14. All off-road construction equipment shall be Tier 3 or higher.
AQ-3 Prior to initiation of site preparation/construction activities, the Applicant shall retain a registered geologist to conduct
a geologic evaluation of the property including sampling and testing for naturally occurring asbestos in full compliance
with California Air Resources Board (CARB) Air Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) for Construction, Grading,
Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations (CARB ATCM Section 93105) and SLOAPCD requirements. This geologic
evaluation shall be submitted to the City Community Development Department upon completion. If the geologic
evaluation determines that the project would not have the potential to dis turb naturally occurring asbestos (NOA), the
Applicant must file an Asbestos ATCM exemption request with the SLOAPCD.
AQ-4 If NOA are determined to be present on-site, proposed earthwork and construction activities shall be conducted in full
compliance with the various regulatory jurisdictions regarding NOA, including the CARB ATCM for Construction,
Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations (CARB ATCM Section 93105) and requirements stipulated in the
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) (40 Code of Federal Regulations 61, Subpart M
– Asbestos). These requirements include, but are not limited to , the following:
1. Written notification, within at least 10 business days of activities commencing, to the SLOAPCD;
2. Preparation of an asbestos survey conducted by a Certified Asbestos Consultant; and
3. Implementation of applicable removal and disposal protocol and requirements for identified NOA.
Conclusion
Standard mitigation measures have been identified above to address potential project impacts associated with sensitive receptors’
exposure to air pollutants and potential impacts associated with NOA and materials containing asbestos. Upon implementation
of the identified mitigation measures, residual impacts associated with air quality would be less than significant.
Page 122 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 23 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through
habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans,
policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
1, 2,
53 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans,
policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
1, 2,
53 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected
wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool,
coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
1, 2,
16, 53 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident
or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites?
2, 53 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
2, 15 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation
Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved
local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
2 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Evaluation
This evaluation is based, in part, on the Biological Resources Assessment (BRA) for the Village at the Palms, San Luis Obispo,
San Luis Obispo County, California (Assessor’s Parcel Number 052-162-021) (Kevin Merk Associates, LLC [KMA] 2021;
Attachment 2). The BRA prepared for the project includes the results of a desktop -level background review and a reconnaissance-
level survey of the project site. Desktop-level background review included a review of Google Earth and other publicly available
aerial imagery, review of soil types in the vicinity of the project site using the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NR CS)
Web Soil Survey, a query of the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) for special -status species occurrences and
natural communities in the vicinity of the project site, and review of other relevant databases, as necessary (KMA 2021). The
reconnaissance-level survey of the project site was conducted on February 8, 2021, which is outside of the blooming period for
most sensitive plant species (KMA 2021). The reconnaissance-level survey was conducted to determine the potential for special-
status species and sensitive natural communities to occur within the project site based on data collected during the background
review.
Regional Setting
The city is generally surrounded by open space, rangeland used for grazing, and other agricultural uses that support a variet y of
natural habitats and plant communities. The city’s many creeks provide sheltered corridors that allow local wildlife to move
between habitats and open space areas. The City’s COSE identifies various goals and policies to maintain, enhance, and protect
natural communities within the City’s planning area. These policies include, but are not limited to, protection of listed species
and species of special concern, preservation of existing wildlife corridors, protection of significant trees, and maintaining
development setbacks from creeks.
Page 123 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 24 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Existing Conditions
The project site is in a previously developed portion of the city at the corner of Palomar Avenue and Ramona Drive. Old Garden
Creek currently flows through the central portion of the project area. Old Garden Creek is an intermittent stream and is a tributary
to Stenner Creek; Stenner Creek is a tributary to San Luis Obispo Creek. Within the project site, there is a surface parking lot
located to the east and the west of Old Garden Creek and ornamental landscaping is present throughout the project area.
Topography of the site is predominantly flat with the elevation ranging from 235 to 240 feet. The project area is dominated by
three habitat types including ornamental (landscaping), developed/ruderal (surface parking lot), and riparian (within the Old
Garden Creek bed). Riparian habitat is considered a sensitive biological resource by the City ’s COSE and the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) (KMA 2021). Ornamental landscaping includes palm trees, roses, succulents, fruit
trees, creeping vines, and English ivy (Hedera helix). Developed/ruderal habitat consists of bare ground and pavement. Riparian
vegetation includes coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis), toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia), poison
oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum), coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis), and California black walnut (Juglans californica) within
the Old Garden Creek bed. Based on the presence of coast live oak and arroyo willow, the riparian habitat on-site aligns with the
Central Coast Live Oak Riparian Forest community (riparian forest community), which is a sensitive natural community with a
State Rarity Rank of 3.2 (KMA 2021).
Wetlands and Jurisdictional Waters
Based on desktop-level background review of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI)
Surface Water and Wetlands Mapper, Old Garden Creek, which runs through the central portion of the project site, is identifie d
as a freshwater forested/shrub wetland. The San Luis Obispo, California U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute quadrangle
identifies Old Garden Creek as an intermittent stream. During the reconnaissance survey on February 8, 2021, Old Garden Creek
was observed to have a defined bed and bank and flowing water. Based on the presence of a defined bed and bank structure with
seasonal flowing water that connects to San Luis Obispo Creek and ultimately the Pacific Ocean, Old Garden Creek is expected
to be a water of the United States and State of California (KMA 2021). Old Garden Creek would be under the jurisdiction of
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), RWQCB for Section 401 of the
CWA, and the CDFW for Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement (LSAA).
Designated Critical Habitat
The project site is located within designated critical habitat for the California red-legged frog (CRLF) (Rana draytonii)
(Unit SLO-3). Unit SLO-3 consists of designated critical habitat for CRLF, including a permanent and ephemeral aquatic
breeding habitat, non-breeding aquatic and riparian habitat, upland habitat, and dispersal habitat for the species. This unit extends
over 116,517 acres and provides connectivity within and between the inner Coa st Range and the Santa Lucia Range. However,
the project site does not provide suitable habitat for CRLF based on the lack of aquatic breeding habitat due to the inconsis tent
level and duration of water within Old Garden Creek. The riparian area on-site could support juvenile frogs but is highly unlikely
because there is no breeding habitat within the vicinity of the project site. Therefore, there is no linkage between this sit e and
other previously documented sites and CRLF is not anticipated to occur on-site (KMA 2021).
Special-Status Species
Based on the desktop-level background review and the reconnaissance-level survey conducted for the project, the following
special-status plant and animal species, sensitive natural communities, and designated critical habitat have the potential to occur
on-site.
Special-Status Plant Species
Desktop-level background review determined that there was low potential for special -status plant species to occur within the
project site due to the presence of previously developed areas. In addition, the riparian forest community on-site is narrow and
supports dense clusters of non-native English ivy. Due to the presence of the non-native plant, native plants are not expected to
occur within the riparian forest community. The following special-status plant species is the only species identified as having
the potential to occur on-site:
• California (southern) black walnut (Juglans californica): This species is a California Rare Plant Ranking (CRPR)
4.2 and approximately five California black walnut trees were observed within the understory of the riparian forest
community on-site during the reconnaissance-level field survey.
Page 124 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 25 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Special-Status Animal Species
Desktop-level background review of the CNDDB identified numerous occurrences of special-status animal species within a
5-mile radius of the project area. Based on conditions at the site, the following 14 special -status animals were determined to have
potential to occur within the project site at one point during their lifecycle:
• Obscure bumble bee (Bombus caliginosus): This species does not have a specific listing status but is a CDFW Special
Animal. No suitable overwintering habitat was present on-site based on the highly maintained ornamental area and
densely vegetated, narrow creek corridor. Historical records of this species date back from the 1940s to 1970s. Although
there is limited potential for this species to occur on-site, there is little known about this species in San Luis Obispo
County; therefore, this species is considered to have low potential to occur within the riparian forest community,
ornamental landscaping, and ruderal/developed areas on-site.
• San Luis Obispo pyrg (Pyrgulopsis taylori): This species is an aquatic snail and does not have a specific listing status
but is a CDFW Special Animal. There is suitable habitat for this species located within the Old Garden Creek bank.
Suitable habitat for this species is confined to rocks and leaf litter within the riparian forest community on-site and is
not anticipated to be located within the ruderal/developed or ornamental landscaping on-site due to the lack of
freshwater.
• Northern California legless lizard (Anniella pulchra): This species is a CDFW Species of Special Concern (SSC).
There is suitable habitat for this species located within the riparian forest community on-site and marginally suitable
habitat located in the ornamental landscaping on-site where there is abundant leaf litter or other ground cover. This
species would not occur within the ruderal/disturbed area on-site.
• Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii): This species is on the CDFW Watch List for nesting. There is suitable foraging
and nesting habitat located within the riparian forest community and ornamental landscaping on-site. This species is
not anticipated to occur within the ruderal/developed vegeta tion on-site.
• Ferruginous hawk (Buteo regalis): This species is on the CDFW Watch List for wintering sites, and it occurs in the
project region in the winter. There is potential for this species to perch or nest in the riparian forest community and/or
ornamental landscaping on-site. Therefore, there is marginally suitable habitat for this species on-site. This species is
not anticipated to occur within the ruderal/developed area on-site.
• Loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus): This species is a CDFW SSC for nesting. There is suitable nesting habitat
for this species located throughout the riparian forest community and ornamental areas on-site. This species is not
anticipated to occur within the ruderal/developed area on-site.
• Prairie falcon (Falco mexicanus): This species is on the CDFW Watch List for nesting. There were no stick nests
indicative of raptors located within the riparian forest community or other locations on-site. There may be suitable
nesting and roosting habitat located within the riparian forest community on-site. However, there is no foraging habitat
within ornamental, riparian, or ruderal/disturbed areas on-site. Therefore, there is low potential for this species to occur.
• Sharp-shinned hawk (Accipiter striatus): This species is on the CDFW Watch List for nesting. There is no suitable
nesting habitat located on-site; however, marginally suitable foraging habitat is present within the riparian forest
community and ornamental landscaping on-site. This species is not anticipated to occur within the ruderal/developed
area on-site.
• Tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor): This species is a State Threatened species and a CDFW SSC for nesting
colonies. There is no suitable breeding or nesting habitat for this species on-site; however, there is marginally suitable
foraging habitat within the riparian forest community. This species is not anticipated to occur within the
ruderal/developed area on-site.
• White-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus): This species is a CDFW fully protected species for nesting sites. There is
marginally suitable foraging, nesting, and roosting habitat within the riparian forest community and ornamental
landscaping on-site. Therefore, there is marginally suitable habitat for this species on-site. This species is not
anticipated to occur within the ruderal/developed area on-site.
• Yellow warbler (Setophaga petechia): This species is a CDFW SSC for nesting. There is suitable nesting and foraging
habitat within the riparian forest community on-site and marginally suitable nesting and foraging habitat within the
Page 125 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 26 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
ornamental landscaping on-site. Therefore, there is suitable habitat for this species on-site. This species is not
anticipated to occur within the ruderal/developed area on-site.
• Pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus): This species is a CDFW SSC. There is marginally suitable roosting habitat located
within the riparian forest community on-site. Therefore, there is marginally suitable habitat for this species on-site.
This species is not anticipated to occur within the ruderal/developed area on-site.
• Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii): This species is a CDFW SSC. There is suitable foraging
habitat within the riparian forest community on-site. This species is not anticipated to roost within the ornamental
vegetation or ruderal/developed area on-site based on high-human presence. Townsend’s big-eared bats are highly
sensitive toward human presence. Therefore, there is low potential for this species to occur on-site.
• Western mastiff bat (Eumops perotis californicus): This species is a CDFW SSC. There is suitable foraging habitat
throughout the entire project site and potential roosting habitat within large trees or structures on-site. There is potential
for this species to utilize existing structures within the ruderal/developed area; however, it is unlikely based on human
activity.
a) The project site consists of riparian, ornamental, and developed/ruderal habitat types. The riparian forest community and
ornamental landscaping on-site may provide suitable habitat for special-status plant species. The project proposes a 25- to
28-foot setback from the top of bank on-site; therefore, special-status plant species that may be present within the riparian
forest community are not anticipated to be directly disturbed by implementation of the project. Special -status animal
species may be present within the riparian forest community and ornamental landscaping on-site. Implementation of the
project includes removal of six non-native vegetation, including 2 Brisbane Box trees (6-9 inches), 1 Mondell Pine tree
(14 inches), and 3 Evergreen Pear trees (4 inches), along the western property boundary, which may result in impacts to
special-status bird, bat, or other species if present at the time of construction. Implementation of the project would
predominantly disturb the ruderal/developed area (parking lot) on-site. There are no special-status plant or animal species
anticipated to occur within the ruderal/developed area.
Special-Status Plants
Approximately five southern California black walnut trees are located within the understory of the riparian forest
community, as observed during the reconnaissance-level survey. The project includes a 25- to-28-foot setback from the
top of bank and would not include work or other disturbance within the riparian corridor that could result in significant
adverse impacts to California black walnut within the riparian forest community on-site. Further botanical surveys are not
necessary because the ornamental landscaping and ruderal/disturbed areas on-site do not provide suitable habitat for
special-status plant species due to prior disturbance of the area. California black walnut occurrences within the project
area are limited to the riparian forest community on-site, which would be avoided during implementation of the proposed
project through implementation of a 25- to-28-foot setback from the top of bank. Therefore, potential impacts related to
special-status plant species would be less than significant.
Special-Status Animals
Suitable habitat is present within the project site for the obscure bumble bee, San Luis Obispo pyrg, several migratory bird
species, and roosting bat species located within the riparian forest community and/or ornamental landscaping on-site. As
previously mentioned, the project includes a 25- to-28-foot setback from the top of bank and project activities would not
result in habitat loss for identified special-status animal species that may be present within or use the riparian forest
community on-site. If present on-site, San Luis Obispo pyrg individuals would be confined to the rip arian corridor and are
not anticipated to be adversely affected by construction activities based on implementation of the proposed setback.
Therefore, implementation of the project is not anticipated to adversely affect San Luis Obispo pyrg species if pres ent
within the project site.
The project would avoid disturbance to the riparian corridor and, therefore, habitat loss for the obscure bumble bee.
However, individuals of this species could move around the project site and may be directly or indirectly disturbed by
implementation of the project if present within proposed disturbance areas. Mitigation Measure BIO -1 has been included
to avoid or minimize potential impacts to obscure bumble bee.
There may be suitable habitat for northern California legless lizard within the leaf litter of both the ornamental landscaping
and riparian forest community on-site. Although riparian habitat loss would not occur as a result of the project, work within
Page 126 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 27 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
the ornamental landscaping on-site may result in direct or indirect impacts to northern California legless lizard if present
on-site. Mitigation Measures BIO-2 and BIO-3 are provided to avoid and/or minimize potential impacts to the California
legless lizard. With implementation of these measures, impacts would be reduced to less than significant.
Ornamental trees, riparian trees, and buildings within previously developed areas on-site may provide suitable nesting and
foraging habitat for migratory birds passing through the project site. While riparian trees and vegetation would be avoided
during construction activities, ornamental trees located outside of the riparian area along the western property line would
be removed, as necessary, for implementation of the project. Mitigation Measure s BIO-3 and BIO-4 have been included
to reduce potential impacts to nesting migratory birds.
There is marginally suitable roosting bat habitat located within large trees and structures on-site. Impacts to roosting bats
could occur if individuals are present in the ornamental trees during tree and vegetation removal, which may result in the
direct take or other disturbance of individuals or temporary loss of ornamental trees that provide habitat. Mitigation
Measures BIO-3 and BIO-5 have been included to avoid or minimize potential impacts to roosting bats.
Based on the presence of suitable habitat for identified special-status animal species, Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through
BIO-5 have been included to avoid and/or minimize potential adverse impacts from implementation of the proposed
project. In addition, Mitigation Measure BIO-6 has been included to require all construction and other workers to
participate in an environmental awareness training outlining potential special-status species, potential impacts, and
avoidance measures. In addition, while CRLF presence is highly unlikely as noted above, proposed avoidance of the creek
channel, compliance with City stormwater requirements including preparation and implementation of an erosion and
sediment control plan and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), and implementation of mitigation measures
including pre-construction surveys and awareness training would further ensure that any potential impacts to CRLF would
be avoided or minimized to less than significant. Upon implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-6,
impacts related to special-status plant and animal species would be less than significant with mitigation.
b) Old Garden Creek flows through the central portion of the project site and supports a Central Coast Live Oak Riparian
Forest Community (riparian forest community), which has a State Rarity Rank of 3.2. Additionally, the riparian habitat
on-site is considered a sensitive biological resource by the City’s COSE and the CDFW. The project includes a 25- to-28-
foot setback from the Old Garden Creek top of bank. Mitigation Measure BIO-7 requires the setback to be delineated on
all project plans and on-site during construction activities. Therefore, the project would avoid work within the riparian
forest community and would not be required to obtain permits pursuant to Section 404 of the CWA or Section 401 of the
CWA or Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act.
The project would result in approximately 57,000 square feet (1.31 acres) of ground disturbance including 1,575 cy of cut
and 620 cy of fill. The project would be required to prepa re a SWPPP with best management practices (BMPs) pursuant
to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). BMPs would include, but are not limited to, erosion
and pollution control measures, such as silt fencing, straw wattles, berms, and vehicle maintenance. Implementation of a
SWPPP with BMPs would avoid and/or minimize potential erosive or polluted runoff that could adversely affect the
riparian forest community. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-7 to delineate the proposed 25- to
28-foot top of bank setback on all project plans and implementation of the SWPPP and corresponding BMPs, potential
impacts to sensitive natural communities would be less than significant with mitigation.
c) As previously described, based on the presence of a defined bed and bank structure with seasonal flowing water that
connects to San Luis Obispo Creek and ultimately the Pacific Ocean, Old Garden Creek is expected to be a water of the
United States and State of California (KMA 2021). Mitigation Measure BIO-7 requires the proposed 25- to 28-foot setback
from Old Garden Creek top of bank to be delineated on all project plans and on-site with protective fencing during all
construction activities. The project does not include work within the riparian corridor that could result in direct alteration
or other impacts to Old Garden Creek. However, the project would require 1.31 acres of ground disturbance including
1,575 cy of cut and 620 cy of fill and the use of construction vehicles and equipment that could result in indirect impacts,
such as erosive or polluted runoff. Therefore, the project would be required to prepare and implement a SWPPP with
BMPs, including, but not limited to, erosion and pollution control measures, such as silt fencing, straw wattles, berms, and
vehicle maintenance. Additionally, the project would be required to prepare an erosion and sediment control plan in
compliance with the City’s stormwater requirements. The erosion and sediment control plan would require disturbed soils
along the creek corridor to be restored to avoid impacts to Old Garden Creek. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation
Measure BIO-7, impacts to Old Garden Creek would be less than significant with mitigation.
Page 127 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 28 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
d) The project area is located near a designated wildlife corridor by the City ’s COSE. Old Garden Creek runs through the
central portion of the project site and ultimately connects to San Luis Obispo Creek and provides habitat connectivity.
Although Old Garden Creek provides potential wildlife connectivity on-site, implementation of the project would not
interfere with the movement of migratory or native fish because the project does not include work within or alteration of
the stream channel.
Suitable habitat for nesting birds and raptors is present within the or namental landscaping along the western property
boundary and the riparian habitat within the central portion of the project site. The project does not require work within
the riparian corridor. Non-native ornamental landscaping would be removed along the western boundary of the project
site, as necessary, for implementation of the project and may result in a temporary loss of habitat for migratory birds.
Mitigation Measure BIO-3 would require the 6 trees that are removed to be replaced by native species at a 1:1 ratio. The
project proposes to plant 40 new trees at a ratio of 6.7:1 which exceeds the minimum compensatory planting requirement .
Therefore, habitat loss would be temporary. Further, Mitigation Measure BIO -4 would require nesting bird surveys prior
to any ground-disturbing activity, including tree removal, to ensure there are no migratory bird species nesting on-site that
could be directly affected by implementation of the project. If nesting migratory birds are present on-site during project
implementation, Mitigation Measure BIO-4 requires avoidance of individuals through identified nest buffers. Therefore,
upon implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO -3 and BIO-4, potential impacts to nesting birds would be less than
significant with mitigation.
e) The project site supports natural riparian trees, including California black walnut, coast live oak, and arroyo willow, within
the riparian corridor that extend through the central portion of the site. Additionally, there are non-native ornamental trees
along the western property boundary, outside of the riparian area. The project includes a 25- to 28-foot setback from the
top of bank and would maintain existing vegetation with the riparian forest community. Mitigation Measure BIO-7 requires
the setback to be delineated on all project plans and on the project site during construction activities to ensure avoidance
of the riparian area. However, the project includes removal of 6 ornamental trees along the western portion of the property,
including 2 Brisbane Box trees (6-9 inches), 1 Mondell Pine tree (14 inches), and 3 Evergreen Pear trees (4 inches), along
the western property boundary, as necessary, for implementation of the project. In compliance with the City’s Municipal
Code (12.24.090), Mitigation Measure BIO-3, would require trees that are removed to be replaced by native species at a
1:1 ratio. The project proposes to plant 40 new trees at a ratio of 6.7:1 which exceeds the minimum compensatory planting
requirement. Therefore, the project would not conflict with a local plan or ordinance for tree preservation.
The COSE includes various goals and policies to maintain, enhance, and protect natural communities within the City ’s
planning area. These policies include, but are not limited to, protecting listed species and SSC, preserving existing wildlife
corridors, protecting significant trees, and maintaining development setbacks from creeks. The project site provides
suitable habitat for special-status plant and animal species within the orn amental landscaping and riparian habitat areas
on-site. In addition, Old Garden Creek runs through the central portion of the project site and may be indirectly disturbed
by project activities. The project includes a 25- to 28-foot setback from the top of bank and would avoid direct disturbance
of Old Garden Creek and special-status plant species that may be located within the riparian area. The project would be
required to prepare a SWPPP with construction BMPs, which would further avoid or reduce potential impacts to Old
Garden Creek and the riparian area. The project would also be required to prepare an erosion and sediment control plan in
accordance with the City’s stormwater requirements to reduce indirect impact to Old Garden Creek. Implementation of
Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-7 would avoid and/or minimize potential impacts related to biological resources
protected by the City’s COSE and other local policies and ordinances. Therefore, the potential impacts associated with
conflicts with local policies would be less than significant with mitigation.
f) The project is not located within an area under an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan. Therefore, the project would not conflict with
the provisions of an adopted plan, and no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures
BIO-1 Obscure Bumble Bee. Prior to any site disturbance and/or construction activities associated with the proposed project,
the Applicant shall retain a City-approved qualified biologist to conduct preconstruction survey(s) for obscure bumble
bee within suitable habitat areas (e.g., small mammal burrows, thatched/bunch grasses, upland scrubs, brush piles,
unmowed/overgrown areas, dead trees, hollow logs, etc.) on the project site and areas within 50 feet of the project site.
At a minimum, the survey effort shall include visual search methods targeting colonies or individuals. Upon completion
Page 128 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 29 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
of the surveys, the biologist shall prepare a survey report summarizing the findings and submit it to the City Community
Development Department.
If the survey(s) establish presence of obscure bumble bee within the areas of disturbance, the Applicant shall retain a
City-approved biologist to prepare a Biological Resources Management Plan (Management Plan) subject to review and
approval of the City Community Development Department in coordination with the California Department of Fish and
Wildlife (CDFW). The Management Plan shall include avoidance measures to conduct project activities in such a
manner that avoids physical disturbances to the colony/nest site, including a minimum 50 -foot no disturbance buffer to
avoid take and potentially significant impacts. Upon approval by the City Community Development Department and
prior to and during construction, the Management Plan shall be implemented to ensure potentially significant impacts
to the obscure bumble bee are avoided. Following approval, avoidance measures included in the Management Plan shall
be implemented at appropriate times during construction act ivities.
BIO-2 Northern California Legless Lizard. Between 2 and 4 weeks prior to initiation of construction activities, a City -
approved biologist shall conduct surveys for northern California legless lizards. The surveyor shall utilize hand search
or cover board methods in areas of disturbance where northern California legless lizards are expected to be found (e.g.,
under shrubs, other vegetation, or debris within the ornamental and riparian habitats on-site). If cover board methods
are used, they shall commence at least 30 days prior to the start of construction. Hand search surveys shall be completed
immediately prior to and during grading activities. During grading activities, the City-approved biologist shall walk
behind the grading equipment to capture legless lizards that are unearthed by the equipment. The surveyor shall capture
and relocate any legless lizards or other reptiles or amphibians observed during the survey effort. The captured
individuals shall be relocated from the construction area and placed in suitable habitat on-site but outside of the work
area. Following the survey and monitoring efforts, the City-approved biologist shall submit to the City a project
completion report that documents the number of northern California legless liza rds and other reptiles captured and
relocated, and the number of legless lizards or other reptiles taken during grading activities. Observations of these
species or other special-status species shall be documented on California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) forms
and submitted to the CDFW upon project completion.
BIO-3 Tree Replacement. In accordance with the City’s Municipal Code for Tree Removal (12.24.090), trees that are removed
with a minimum diameter at breast height (dbh) of 3 inches shall be replaced at a 1:1 ratio on-site. A compensatory tree
planting program shall be developed and implemented and shall include areas within the creek setback area. Additional
tree planting shall take place within the development as part of the landscaping effort to mitigate all tree removal on the
site. The Applicant shall meet the final specifications of the City ’s municipal code for tree protection and replacement
to receive permit approval.
BIO-4 Migratory Birds. If any ground disturbance will occur during the nesting bird season (February 1–September 15), prior
to any ground-disturbing activity, a preconstruction nesting bird survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist
within 1 week prior to the start of activities. If nesting birds are located on or near the project site, they shall be avoided
until they have successfully fledged, or the nest is no longer deemed active. A non-disturbance buffer of 50 feet will be
implemented for non-listed, passerine species and a 250-foot buffer will be implemented for raptor species. No
construction activities will be permitted within established nesting bird buffers until a qualified biologist has determined
that the young have fledged or that proposed construction activities would not cause adverse impacts to the nest, adults,
eggs, or young. If special-status avian species are identified, no work shall be conducted until an appropriate buffer is
determined in consultation with the City and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and/or CDFW.
BIO-5 Roosting Bat Surveys. Within 2 weeks prior to removal of any trees, a qualified biologist shall survey the proposed
trees to be removed to identify if roosting bats are present. If bats are found to be roosting, tree removal will be postpone d
until such time that roosting bats are no longer present. If postponement is not feasible, a Bat Exclusion Plan shall be
prepared by a qualified biologist and submitted to the CDFW and the City for review and approval prior to construction.
At a minimum, the exclusion plan shall describe the proposed action, background on the surveys conducted to date,
installation and removal of exclusion materials, and the reporting process.
BIO-6 Worker Environmental Awareness Program. As an additional protection measure to avoid impacts t o the creek
corridor, riparian habitat, nesting birds, and other wildlife, the project Applicant shall have a City-qualified biologist
prepare a Worker Environmental Awareness Program that will be presented to all project personnel prior to the start of
construction. This program shall detail measures to avoid impacts on biological resources and shall include a description
Page 129 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 30 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
of special-status species potentially occurring on the project site and their natural history , the status of the species and
their protection under environmental laws and regulations, and the penalties for take. Review of the erosion and
sediment control measures (see Mitigation Measure BIO-7), as well as any other appropriate recommendations, shall
be given as actions to avoid impacts to all wildlife during construction. Other aspects of the training shall include a
description of general measures to protect wildlife, including:
1. Delineation of the allowable work area, staging areas, access points, and limits to vehicle access;
2. Storage of all pipes, metal tubing, or similar materials stored or stacked on the project site for one or more
overnight periods shall be either securely capped before storage or thoroughly inspected for wildlife before the
materials are moved, buried, capped, or otherwise used.
3. Inspected of materials stored on-site, such as lumber, plywood, and rolls of silt fence, for wildlife that may
have sheltered under or within the materials;
4. Use of netting to exclude birds from nesting in construction materials;
5. Constructing escape ramps in all excavations and trenches more than 6 -inches deep;
6. Contact information for the City-approved biologist and instructions should any wildlife species be detected
in the work site;
7. Dust suppression methods during construction ac tivities when necessary to meet air quality standards and
protect biological resources; and
8. Methods for containment of food -related trash items (e.g., wrappers, cans, bottles, food scraps), small
construction debris (e.g., nails, bits of metal and plastic), and other human-generated debris (e.g., cigarette
butts) in animal-proof containers and removal from the site on a weekly basis.
All project personnel who have attended the training shall sign an attendance sheet. The program shall be repeated for
any new crews that arrive subsequently on the site.
BIO-7 Riparian Area. Prior to ground disturbance or other construction activity, the proposed 25- to 28-foot setback from the
Old Garden Creek top of bank shall be identified on all construction plans and shall be mapped on-site through
installation of protective fencing or other measures to demarcate the limits of construction in proximity to Old Garden
Creek. Protective fencing shall remain in place for the duration of all grading and construction activities.
Conclusion
The project site supports suitable habitat for special-status plant and animal species, including southern California black walnut,
San Luis Obispo pyrg, obscure bumble bee, northern California legless lizard, migratory bird species, and roosting bat species.
Potential impacts would be avoided through project design and mitigated through implementation of requirements identified in
Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-8, standard avoidance measures, and BMPs. The project would be setback 25 to 28
feet from Old Garden Creek top of bank and would not conflict with local plans or policies for protection of biological resources
with implementation of the Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-7. Therefore, potential impacts to biological resources
would be less than significant with mitigation.
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historic resource pursuant to §15064.5 ?
1, 5,
17, 18,
54
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?
2, 17,
18, 54 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Page 130 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 31 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries?
2, 17,
18, 54 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Evaluation
This evaluation is based, in part, on the Phase 1 and Phase 2 Archaeological Evaluations of Property at 61 Broad Street (Heritage
Discoveries 1997). The Phase 1 and Phase 2 Archaeological Evaluations included desktop -level background review, an
archaeological survey, and subsurface archaeological testing. Desktop -level review consisted of review of relevant maps,
databases, site records, and historical references. Other background research was conducted at the Central Coast Information
Center (CCIC) at the University of California, Santa Barbara. The project site is generally considered to be a potential
archaeologically sensitive area based on previous archaeological studies conducted in the vicinity of the project site and its
proximity to Old Garden Creek, which traverses the central portion of the project area. Based on the potential archaeological
sensitivity of the area, both surface and subsurface archaeological testing was conducted by a certified archaeologist in addition
to extensive background research (Heritage Discoveries 1997). Subsurface testing included manually and mechanically digging
seven test pits to evaluate the potential for buried archaeological resources to be present on-site. No archaeological resources
were identified within the project site as result of the survey or subsurface testing (Heritage Discoveries 1997).
Pre-Historic Setting
Archaeological evidence demonstrates that Native American groups (including the Chumash) have occupied the Central Coast
for at least 10,000 years. The city of San Luis Obispo is located within the area historically occupied by the Obispeño Chumash,
the northernmost of the Chumash people of California. The Obispeño Chumash occupied much of San Luis Obispo County , and
the earliest evidence of human occupation in the region comes from archaeological sites along the coast. The project site is
located near a Burial Sensitivity Area associated with Old Garden Creek and Stenner Creek identified in Figure 1 of the City ’s
COSE.
Historic Setting
The City’s COSE establishes various goals and policies to balance cultural and historical resource preservation with other
community goals. These policies include, but are not limited to , the following:
• Identification, preservation, and rehabilitation of significant historic and architectural resources;
• Prevention of demolition of historically or architecturally significant buildings unless doing so is necessary to remove
a threat to health and safety;
• Consistency in the design of new buildings in historical districts to reflect the form, spacing, and materials of nearby
historic structures; and
• Identification and protection of neighborhoods or districts having historical character due to the collective effect of
Contributing or Master List historic properties.
The project site is not located within the Historic Preservation (H) Overlay Zone, nor does it contain any built structures that
may be considered potentially eligible historic resources.
a) Neither the project site nor immediate vicinity contain buildings or structures that are old enough to qualify as potentially
eligible historic resources. In addition, the project does not require demolition of existing buildings or structures that could
be listed or eligible for listing as a historic resource. Therefore, the project would not result in a substantial adverse change
in the significance of a historic resource pursuant to Section 15064.5 and potential impacts would be less than significant.
b) No archaeological resources are known to occur within the project site. Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2 are provided
to address inadvertent discovery during project construction to ensure potential impacts would be less than significant with
mitigation.
c) Although no human remains are known to occur within propo sed development areas, the project site is located near a
Burial Sensitivity Area associated with Old Garden Creek and Stenner Creek identified in Figure 1 of the City ’s COSE.
Potential impacts related to disturbance of human remains would be less than sig nificant with implementation of Mitigation
Measure CR-3. Therefore, impacts related to disturbance of human remains would be less than significant with mitigation.
Page 131 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 32 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Mitigation Measures
CR-1 Prior to construction activities, a City-qualified archaeologist shall conduct cultural resource awareness training for all
construction personnel, including the following:
1. Review the types of archaeological artifacts that may be uncovered;
2. Provide examples of common archaeological artifacts to examine;
3. Review what makes an archaeological resource significant to archaeologists and local Native Americans;
4. Describe procedures for notifying involved or interested parties in case of a new discovery;
5. Describe reporting requirements and responsibilities of construction personnel;
6. Review procedures that shall be used to record, evaluate, and mitigate new discoveries; and
7. Describe procedures that would be followed in the case of discovery of disturbed as well as intact human
burials and burial-associated artifacts.
CR-2 If cultural resources are encountered during subsurface earthwork activities, all ground -disturbing activities within a
25-foot radius of the find shall cease and the City shall be notified immedia tely. Work shall not continue until a City-
qualified archaeologist assesses the find and determines the need for further study. If the find includes Native American -
affiliated materials, a local Native American tribal representative will be contacted to work in conjunction with the City-
approved archaeologist to determine the need for further study. A standard inadvertent discovery clause shall be
included in every grading and construction contract to inform contractors of this requirement. Any previously
unidentified resources found during construction shall be recorded on appropriate California Department of Parks and
Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance in terms of C alifornia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
criteria by a qualified archaeologist.
If the resource is determined significant under CEQA, the qualified archaeologist shall prepare and implement a research
design and archaeological data recovery plan, in conjunction with locally affiliated Native American representative(s)
as necessary, that will capture those categories of data for which the site is significant. The archaeologist shall also
perform appropriate technical analysis, prepare a comprehensive report, and file it with the Central Coast Information
Center (CCIC), located at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and provide for the permanent curation of the
recovered materials.
CR-3 In the event that human remains are exposed during ground-disturbing activities associated with the project, an
immediate halt work order shall be issued, and the City Community Development Director and locally affiliated Native
American representative(s) (as necessary) shall be notified. California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires
that no further disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains shall
occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public
Resources Code (PRC) Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner
shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. These requirements shall be printed on all
building and grading plans.
Conclusion
With implementation of the recommended Mitigation Measures CR-1 through CR-3, the project would have a less-than-
significant impact on cultural resources.
Page 132 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 33 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
6. ENERGY
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to
wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy
resources, during project construction or operation?
1, 17,
19, 21 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable
energy or energy efficiency?
1, 17,
19, 20,
21
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E) has historically been the primary electricity provider for the City. In October 2018,
the City Council committed to joining 3CE and, beginning in January 2020, 3CE has become an alternative electricity provider
within the city. 3CE is striving to provide 100% carbon-free electricity to the city by 2030. This analysis assumes electricity for
the proposed project would be supplied by PG&E given the rest of the development Village at the Palms is supplied by PG&E.
The California Building Code (CBC) contains standards that regulate the m ethod of use, properties, performance, or types of
materials used in the construction, alteration, improvement, repair, or rehabilitation of a building or other improvement to real
property. The CBC includes mandatory green building standards for residenti al and nonresidential structures, the most recent
version of which are referred to as the 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. These standards focus on four key areas:
smart residential photovoltaic systems, updated thermal envelope standards (preven ting heat transfer from the interior to the
exterior and vice versa), residential and nonresidential ventilation requirements, and non -residential lighting requirements.
The City’s COSE establishes goals and policies to achieve energy conservation and increase use of cleaner, renewable, and
locally controlled energy sources. These goals include increasing the use of sustainable energy sources and reducing reliance on
non-sustainable energy sources to the extent possible and encouraging the provision for and protection of solar access. Policies
identified to achieve these goals include, but are not limited to, use of best available practices in energy conservation,
procurement, use, and production; energy-efficiency improvements; pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly facility design; and
fostering alternative transportation modes.
a) During construction, fossil fuels, electricity, and natural gas would be used by construction vehicles and equipment. The
energy consumed during construction would be temporary in nature and would be typical of other similar construction
activities in the city. Federal and State regulations in place require fuel-efficient equipment and vehicles and prohibit
wasteful activities, such as diesel idling; therefore, potential impacts associated with construction energy use would be
less than significant.
Operation of the project would result in an overall increase in consumption of energy resources associated with vehicle
trips, electricity, and natural gas usage by project occupants. The project would include eight electric vehicle (EV) vehicle
parking spaces with charging stations and eight bicycle parking spaces to encourage vehicle fuel reduction. The project
would be designed in full compliance with the CBC, including applicable green building standards. New buildings would
be all electric or mixed-fuel buildings and would be required to be in full compliance with the City ’s Energy Reach Code.
Compliance with existing building codes would ensure the project would not result in a potentially significant
environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources , and would not result
in a significant environmental impact; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
b) The project would be designed in full compliance with the CBC including applicable green building standards. The project
would be consistent with energy goals and policies in the COSE associated with use of best available practices in energy
conservation and encouraging energy-efficient building design. Therefore, the project would not result in a conflict with
or obstruction of a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency, and impacts would be less than significant.
Page 133 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 34 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation measures are not required.
Conclusion
The project has been located and designed in full compliance with applicable energy efficiency standards and would not conflict
with State or local plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency. No potentially significant impacts related to energy would
occur, and mitigation measures are not required.
7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the
most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of
Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
22, 23,
26 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? 22, 23 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? 23, 24,
25 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iv. Landslides? 25, 26 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 25 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that
would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially
result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
23, 24,
25 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1802.3.2 of the
California Building Code (2013), creating substantial direct or
indirect risks to life or property?
25 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic
tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers
are not available for the disposal of waste water?
1 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource
or site or unique geologic feature? 27 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
The City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Safety Element identifies active, potentially active, and inactive mapped and inferred
faults with the potential to affect the city in the event of rupture. The Los Osos Fault, adjacent to the western side of the city of
San Luis Obispo, is identified under the State of California Alquist-Priolo Fault Hazards Act and is classified as active. The West
Huasna, Oceanic, and Edna Faults are considered potentially active and present a moderate fault rupture hazard to developments
near them. The San Andreas Fault and offshore Hosgri Fault, which present the most likely source of ground shaking for San
Luis Obispo, have a high probability of producing a major earthquake within an average lifespan. The highest risk from ground
shaking is found on deep soils that were deposited by water, are geologically recent, and have many pore spaces among the soil
Page 134 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 35 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
grains. These soils are typically found in valleys. Faults capable of producing strong ground-shaking motion in San Luis Obispo
include the Los Osos, Point San Luis, Black Mountain, Rinconada, Wilmar, Pecho, Hosgri, La Panza, and San Andreas Faults.
Engineering standards and building codes set minimum design and construction methods for structures to resist seismic shaking .
Based on the Department of Conservation (DOC) Fault Activity Map and the City’s Safety Element Earthquake Faults – Local
Area map, the project site is not located within or in the immediate vicinity of an active fault zone .
Seismic-Related Ground Failure
Settlement is defined as the condition in which a portion of the ground supporting part of a structure or facility lowers more than
the rest or becomes softer, usually because ground shaking reduces the voids between soil particles, often with groundwater
rising in the process. Liquefaction is the sudden loss of the soil’s supporting strength due to groundwater filling and lubricating
the spaces between soil particles because of ground shaking. Soils with high risk for liquefaction are typically sandy and in creek
floodplains or close to lakes. In extreme cases of liquefaction, structures can tilt, break apart, or sink into the ground. T he
likelihood of liquefaction increases with the strength and duration of an earthquake. Based on the Ground Shaking and Landslide
Hazards Map in the City’s Safety Element, the project site is located within an area with high liquefaction potential.
Slope Instability and Landsides
Slope instability can occur as a gradual spreading of soil, a relatively sudden slippage, a rockfall, or in other forms. Causes
include steep slopes, inherently weak soils, saturated soils, and earthquakes. Improper grading and manmade drainage can be
contributing factors. Much of the development in San Luis Obispo is in valleys, where there is low potential for slope instability.
Based on the Ground Shaking and Landslide Hazards Map in the City ’s Safety Element, the project site is located within an area
with low landslide potential.
Subsidence
Land subsidence is a gradual settling or sudden sinking of the Earth ’s surface due to subsurface movement of earth materials.
Primary causes are groundwater withdrawal, in which water is removed from pore space as the water table dr ops, causing the
ground surface to settle; tectonic subsidence, where the ground surface is warped or dropped lower due to geologic factors such
as faulting or folding; and earthquake-induced shaking that causes sediment liquefaction, which in turn can lea d to ground-
surface subsidence. Based on the USGS Areas of Land Subsidence in California Map, the project site is not located in an area of
known subsidence.
Soil Limiting Factors
The project site is mostly underlain by the Cropley clay, 2 to 9 percent slopes, Major Land Resource Area (MLRA) 14 and soil
unit. This moderately well-drained soil has a medium runoff class and a depth to restrictive feature of more than 80 inches. The
typical profile for this soil unit is clay and sandy clay loam. Since the soil consists of clay and clay materials, there is potential
for expansion. The project site is also underlain by the Los Osos loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes, soil unit. This well-drained soil
unit has a very high runoff class and a depth to restrictive feature of 20 to 40 inches to paralithic bedrock. The typical profile for
this soil type consists of loam, clay, sandy loam, and bedrock.
a.i) Fault rupture refers to the displacement of ground surface along a fault trace that typically occurs during earthquakes of a
magnitude 5 or higher. Based on Figure 3 (Earthquake Faults – Local Area) of the City’s Safety Element and the DOC
Fault Activity Map of California, no known fault lines are mapped on or within 0.5 mile of the project site. Therefore, the
rupture of a known earthquake fault directly under or adjacent to the project site is not anticipated to occur and potential
impacts related to substantial adverse effects involving rupture of a known earthquake fault would be less than significant.
a.ii) The city is in a seismically active region and there is potential for the project to experience seismic ground shaking at some
point(s) during the life of the project. The proposed development would be required to be designed in full compliance with
seismic design criteria established in CBC Section 1613 and City-adopted engineering standards and practices to
adequately withstand and minimize the risk associated with the level of seismic ground shaking expected to occur in the
project region; therefore, impacts associated with strong seismic ground shaking would be less than significant.
a.iii) Based on the Ground Shaking and Landslide Hazards Map in the City’s Safety Element, the project site is located within
an area with high liquefaction potential. Development of the project within this area may have the potential to result in
adverse effects due to seismic-related ground failure. A soils report prepared by a qualified engineer is required upon
review of the building permit to address the nature of the subsurface soils in response to liquefaction potential, in
Page 135 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 36 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
accordance with CBC Chapter 18. Any issues identified in the report will be addressed through standard site construction
techniques, as required by the CBC. This report would also ensure consistency with Policy 4.7 of the City’s Safety Element,
which states proposed development may be in high liquefaction potential areas only after completion of a site-specific
investigation for risk of damage from liquefaction. In addition, t he proposed development would be required to be designed
in compliance with standard seismic design criteria established in CBC Section 1613 to reduce risk associated with
seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction. Therefore, based on compliance with existing regulations, impacts
related to substantial adverse effects due to seismic-related ground failure would be less than significant.
a.iv) Based on the Ground Shaking and Landslide Hazards Map in the City’s Safety Element, the project site is located within
an area of low landslide potential. The project site and surrounding areas are predominantly flat, which further reduces the
risk for a landslide to occur. In addition, the proposed development would be required to be designed in compliance with
standard seismic design criteria established in the CBC and City adopted engineering standards and practices to reduce
risk associated with seismic-related ground failure; therefore, the project would not result in significant adverse effects
associated with landslides, and impacts would be less than significant.
b) The proposed project includes 1.31 acres (57,000 square feet) of ground disturbance including 1,575 cy of cut and 620 cy
of fill that could result in increased soil erosion during proposed project activities. The project site is characterized by a
previously developed surface parking lot and relatively flat topography, which would reduce the potential for substantial
erosion or loss of topsoil during implementation of the project . Based on the amount of proposed ground disturbance,
preparation of SWPPP with construction BMPs for erosion control, including, but not limited to, silt fencing, straw wattles,
and berms, would be required for the project. Addition of standard construction BMPs would minimi ze the amount of
erosive runoff from the site during ground -disturbing activities. The project would be required to comply with the Central
Coast RWQCB requirements set forth in their Post-Construction Stormwater Management Requirements for Development
Projects in the Central Coast Region. Physical improvement of the project site would also be required to comply with the
drainage requirements of the City’s Waterway Management Plan. This plan was adopted for the purpose of ensuring water
quality and proper drainage within the City’s watershed. Based on the proximity of the project to Old Garden Creek,
increased erosion may result in increased erosive runoff. The project would be required to prepare an erosion and sediment
control plan in compliance with the City’s stormwater requirements. The erosion and sediment control plan would require
restoration of soils along the Old Garden Creek corridor to avoid long -term impacts related to erosion and sedimentation.
Following project completion, the project site would be developed with buildings, hardscapes, and landscaping, precluding
the potential for substantial long-term erosion or loss of topsoil. Therefore, based on required compliance with existing
requirements, potential impacts related to increased erosion would be less than significant.
c) Landslides typically occur in areas with steep slopes or in areas containing escarpments. Based on the Ground Shaking
and Landslide Hazards Map in the City’s Safety Element, the project site is located on relatively flat land within an area
with low landslide potential. Based on the City’s Safety Element and USGS data, the project site is not located in an area
of historical or current land subsidence. Based on the Ground Shaking and Landslide Hazards Map in the Cit y’s Safety
Element, the project site is located within an area with high liquefaction potential. A soils report prepared by a qualified
engineer is required upon review of the building permit to address the nature of the subsurface soils in response to
liquefaction potential, in accordance with the CBC Chapter 18. Any issues identified in the report will be addressed through
standard site construction techniques, as required by the CBC. The project would also be required to comply with CBC
Section 1613 for seismic requirements to address potential seismic-related ground failure, including lateral spread and
liquefaction. Therefore, based on compliance with existing regulations, potential impacts related to location on a geologic
unit or soil unit that is unstable would be less than significant.
d) Based on the Soil Survey of San Luis Obispo County and Web Soil Survey, the project site is in an area predominantly
underlain by Cropley clay, 2 to 9 percent slopes. The southwestern portion of the project site is also underlain by Los Osos
loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes. Typically, soils that consist of clay or clay materials have a higher shrink-swell potential
than soils without clay or clay materials. The soil profile of Cropley clay, 2 to 9 percent slopes consists of clay materials
and would be considered to have a high shrink-well potential. The volume changes that soils undergo in this cyclical
pattern can stress and damage slabs and foundations. A soils report prepared by a qualified engineer is required, per CBC
Chapter 18 and Policy 4.7 of the City’s Safety Element, upon review of the building permit to evaluate the proposed
development activities and provide specific recommendations to adequately protect future proposed development against
soil stability hazards, including expansive soils. Typical precautionary measures would likely include premoistening of
the underlying soil in conjunction with placement of non-expansive material beneath slabs, and a deepened and more
Page 136 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 37 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
heavily reinforced foundation. Therefore, based on compliance with existing regulations, potential impacts associated with
expansive soils would be less than significant.
e) The proposed project includes a new connection to the City’s sewer system. No septic tanks or alternative wastewater
treatment systems are proposed on-site; therefore, no impacts would occur.
f) The project site is underlain by the Franciscan Assemblage, which is comprised of previously sheared, slightly
metamorphosed marine sedimentary and mafic volcanic rocks. Based on the lack of previously recorded vertebrate fossils
and previous destruction of the parent material during subduction and metamorphosis, the Franciscan Assemblage has
been determined to have a low paleontological sensitivity. Further, the project site has been previously developed as a
surface parking lot, which further reduces the potential to uncover unknown paleontological resources. Ground disturbance
activities are not anticipated to uncover or otherwise disturb any known or unknown paleontological resources; therefore,
impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation measures are not required.
Conclusion
Based on the location of the project site and underlying geologic and soil properties, and compliance with existing regulations
including the CBC, potential impacts related to seismic and other ground failure and damage to paleontological resources would
be less than significant. However, earthwork related to project construction has the potential to result in erosive runoff.
Compliance with existing regulations would reduce impacts to less than significant.
8. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly,
that may have a significant impact on the environment?
1, 11,
20, 55 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted
for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
11, 19,
20, 55 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Evaluation
Greenhouse gases (GHGs) are any gases that absorb infrared radiation in the atmosphere and are different from the criteria
pollutants discussed in Section 3, Air Quality. The primary GHGs that are emitted into the atmosphere because of human
activities are CO2, methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and fluorinated gases. In 2012 the City’s Climate Action Plan for
Community Recovery was adopted that identified measures and implementation strategies to achieve the City’s GHG reduction
target of 1990 emission levels by 2020. In 2020 the City prepared the updated 2020 CAP, which outlines a strategy for achieving
carbon neutrality by 2035, adopts sector specific goals, and provides foundational actions to establish a trajectory towards
achieving those goals.
In 2018 the City prepared a community-wide inventory of GHG emissions for the 2016 calendar year. In 2016 San Luis Obispo ’s
total GHG emissions were estimated to be 339,290 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalence (MTCO 2e). As in 2005,
transportation was the largest contributor to the City’s total GHG emissions, with an estimated 212,980 MTCO2e or 63% of the
City’s total emissions. Commercial and Industrial energy was the second largest sector with GHG emissions of 44,270 MTCO2e
or 13% of the City’s total emissions. The sectors of residential energy and solid waste account for the remaining 26% of the
City’s total 2016 GHG emissions. Due to lagging data availability, 2016 is the most recent year for complete GHG inventory
data. Statewide legislation, rules, and regulations have been adopted to reduce GHG emissions from significant sources. Senate
Bill (SB) 32 and Executive Order (EO) S-3-05 extended the State’s GHG reduction goals and required the CARB to regulate
sources of GHGs to meet a State goal of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, 40% below 1990 levels by 2030, and
Page 137 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 38 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
80% below 1990 levels by 2050. Other Statewide policies adopted to reduce GHG emissions include Assembly Bill (AB) 32,
SB 375, SB 97, Clean Car Standards, Low Carbon Fuel Standard, Renewable Portfolio Standard, California Building Codes, and
the California Solar Initiative.
Appendix C of the 2020 CAP includes thresholds and guidance for the preparation of GHG emissio ns analysis under CEQA for
projects within the city. To support progress toward the City’s long‐term aspirational carbon neutrality goal, plans and projects
within the city that undergo CEQA review will need to demonstrate consistency with targets in the C AP, a Qualified GHG
Emissions Reduction Plan, consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5. According to the adopted SLOAPCD guidance ,
if a project is consistent with a qualified GHG reduction strategy, such as the City ’s 2020 CAP, the project would not result in a
significant impact.
In October 2018, the City Council committed to joining 3CE, an existing community choice energy program that serves Santa
Cruz, San Benito, and Monterey Counties and provides 100% carbon-free electricity with a rate savings relative to PG&E.
Additionally, at its meeting on September 3, 2019, the City Council adopted the Clean Energy Choice Program for New
Buildings. Unlike other cities that are banning natural gas entirely, the proposed Clean Energy Choice Program encourage s clean,
efficient, and cost-effective all-electric new buildings through incentives, local amendments to the California Energy Code, and
implementation of the Carbon Offset Program. New projects wishing to use natural gas will be required to build more ef ficient
and higher performing buildings and offset natural gas use by performing retrofits on existing buildings or by paying an in -lieu
fee that will be used for the same purpose. When paired with cost-comparable modern electric appliances and carbon-free
electricity from C3E, all-electric new buildings are operationally GHG emissions-free and cost effective and help achieve the
community’s climate action goals.
For this analysis, it is assumed that the Applicant is proposing the continued use of electricity by PG&E, given the rest of the
Village at the Palms is served by PG&E. Unlike 3CE’s reliance of renewable energy resources, approximately 39% of electricity
provided by PG&E is sourced from renewable resources and an additional 47% is sourced f rom non-renewable GHG-free
resources (PG&E 2019).
a) As discussed previously, the proposed project would be consistent with the land use density and projected growth of the
City’s R-4 land use designation. As such, the project is expected to be consistent wit h the demographic and land use
assumptions used for development of the City’s 2020 CAP.
The project would result in the expansion and operation of a residential care facility. During construction, fossil fuels and
natural gas would be used by construction vehicles and equipment. The project would be required to comply with federal
and State regulations in place that require fuel-efficient equipment and vehicles and prohibit wasteful activities, such as
diesel idling. Construction GHG emissions were calculated using the CalEEMod, version 2020.4.0, computer program ,
included as Attachment 5. The project would result in approximately 226.03 MTCO2e/year of construction-related GHG-
emissions without mitigation, over the 14-month construction period. To be conservative, amortized construction
generated GHG emissions were included in annual operational GHG emissions estimates , included in Table 5 below.
Based on required compliance with existing regulations and Mitigation Measure AQ-1, which identifies idling restrictions,
construction of the project would generate less than the estimated 226.03 MTCO2e/year of GHG emissions.
Implementation of the project would result in operation of 59 new residential care units and 16 additional employees. The
main sources of operational emissions include vehicle trips to and from the project site and energy use. The project would
be designed in full compliance with the CBC, including applicable green building standards. The project is estimated to
generate 148 ADT. Although operation of the project will create more than 110 trips per day, based on the City’s
Residential VMT Screening Map, the project is in an area of the city that would result in average VMT less than or equal
to 85% of the regional average, meaning a project in th is area would result in VMT generation below the City’s adopted
thresholds. Operational GHG emissions were estimated for this project using the CalEEMod, version 2020.4.0, computer
program, included as Attachment 5. As shown in Table 5 below, the project would result in approximately 214.83
MTCO2e/year of operational GHG emissions without mitigation. Amortized GHG emissions, when averaged over an
assumed 25-year life of a project, would total approximately 8.59 MTCO2e/year.
Table 5. Operational GHG Emissions
Source Total MTCO2e
Construction Emissions
Page 138 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 39 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Total Construction Emissions 214.84 MTCO2e/year
Amortized Construction Emissions (Over 25 Years) 8.59 MTCO2e/year
Operational Emissions
Annual Operational Emissions 225.78 MTCO2e/year
Total Operational Emissions with Amortized
Construction Emissions 234.37 MTCO2e/year
Service Population (Residents) 641
MTCO2e / Service Population 3.66 MTCO2e/year
2020 CAP Threshold (per resident) 0.7/resident (44.8 MTCO2e/year)
Reduction Required to Meet CAP Threshold
(MTCO2e) 189.57230.71 MTCO2e/year
Reduction Required to Meet CAP Threshold
(MTCO2e/Service Population) 2.96 MTCO2e/year
Source: CalEEMod 2021 (v. 2020.4.0)
1. Population assumption based on proposed studio, one-bedroom, and two-bedroom units
As depicted in Table 5, operational GHG emissions for the proposed project would total approximately 234.37278.24
MTCO2e/year. Based on a service population of 64 residents, the project’s GHG emissions would exceed the GHG
threshold of 0.7 MTCO2e per employee (44.8 MTCO2e based on a service population of 64) as established by the 2020
CAP. Operational emissions in Table 5 above represent a conservative estimate and it is highly likely that proposed project
features including location near a mixed land uses, location near transit facilities, and location near bicycle and pedestrian
facilities would reduce operational GHG emissions. In addition, Mitigation Measure GHG-1 has been incorporated to
ensure consistency with the 2020 CAP. With implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1, operational impacts would
be less than significant with mitigation.
b) The San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) was assigned a GHG -reduction target of 11% from
transportation sources by 2035. SLOCOG adopted the 2019 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Community
Strategies (RTP/SCS) in June 2019, which includes the region’s SCS and meets the requirements of Senate Bill (SB) 375.
In September 2018, the City Council directed City staff to develop a climate action plan with a reduction target of carbon
neutrality by 2035. A carbon neutrality by 2035 target would require achieving a far greater reduction than the SB 32
requirements by 2030, as identified in the State’s 2017 Scoping Plan. On July 20, 2020, SLOCOG issued a letter which
determined that the City’s CAP was consistent with the GHG reduction noted in the SCS for meeting the State ’s 2030
GHG-reduction target. As a result, determination of consistency with the City’s CAP would ensure consistency with the
GHG-reduction targets identified in the RTP/SCS.
The City’s 2020 CAP identifies six pillars, each of which include long-term goals, measures, and foundational actions for
reducing GHG emissions throughout the city. The pillars include:
1. Leading by Example: Create a Municipal Action Plan by 2020 and achieve carbon neutral government operations
by 2030.
2. Clean Energy Systems: Achieve 100% carbon-free electricity by 2020.
3. Green Buildings: Generate no net new building emissions from on‐site energy use by 2020 and achieve a 50 %
reduction in existing building on‐site emissions (after accounting for 3CE) by 2030.
4. Connected Community: Achieve the General Plan mode split objective by 2030 and have 40 % VMT by electric
vehicles by 2030.
5. Circular Economy: Achieve 75% diversion of landfilled organic waste by 2025 and 90% by 2035.
6. Natural Solutions: Increase carbon sequestration on the San Luis Obispo Greenbelt and Urban Forest through
compost application-based carbon farming activities and tree planting to be ongoing through 2035.
Page 139 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 40 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Projects that are consistent with the demographic forecasts and land use assumptions used in the 2020 CAP can utilize the
City’s CEQA GHG Emissions Analysis Compliance Checklist to demonstrate consistency with the 2020 CAP’s GHG
emissions reduction strategy. The demographic forecasts and land use assumptions of the CAP are based on the City of
San Luis Obispo General Plan Land Use Element (LUE) and City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Circulation Element.
If a plan or project is consistent with the existing 2014 General Plan land use and zoning designations of the project site,
then the project would be considered consistent with the demographic forecasts and the land uses assumptions of the
Climate Action Plan. The project is consistent with the City’s land use and zoning designation and would be consistent
with the demographic and land use assumptions used for the development of the 2020 CAP . The proposed project would
not result in an increase in employment or population estimates that would conflict with those used for development of the
City’s CAP or SLOCOG’s RTP/SCS.
According to the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10 th Edition, a continuing care
retirement community generates 2.5 ADT per occupied unit. The project would create 59 new continuing care retirement
units, estimated to generate 148 ADT. Although operation of the project will create more than 110 trips per day, based on
the City’s Residential VMT Screening Map, the project is in an area of the city that would result in average VMT less than
or equal to 85% of the regional average, meaning a project in this area would result in VMT generation below the City ’s
adopted thresholds.
The City has prepared a CEQA GHG Emissions Analysis Compliance Checklist for plans and projects to ensure that they
are consistent with the pillars of the CAP. Based on the analysis provided in Table 6, the project would be consistent with
the City’s GHG Emissions Analysis Checklist with implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1. Mitigation measures
and offsets have been incorporated to ensure consistency with the City’s 2020 CAP, which (in total) would achieve project-
level GHG reductions more than 90%. For these reasons, with mitigation, the proposed project would not be inconsis tent
with SLOCOG’s RTP/SCS or the State’s 2017 Scoping Plan. Therefore, potential impacts associated with a conflict with
a plan or policy adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions of would be less than significant.
Table 6. Project Consistency with the City’s Climate Action Plan
Climate Action Plan Measures Project Consistency
Clean Energy Systems
Does the Project include an operational commitment to participate in
Central Coast Community Energy?
Consistent with Mitigation. The project would
be required to utilize energy from 3CE, as
outlined in Mitigation Measure GHG-1.
Green Buildings
Page 140 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 41 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Does the Project exclusively include “All-electric buildings”? For
the purpose of this checklist, the following definitions and
exemptions apply:
All-electric building. A new building that has no natural gas
plumbing installed within the building and that uses electricity as the
source of energy for all space heating, water heating, co oking
appliances, and clothes drying appliances. An All-Electric Building
may be plumbed for the use of natural gas as fuel for appliances in a
commercial kitchen.
Specific exemptions to the requirements for all - electric buildings
include:
Commercial kitchens
a. The extension of natural gas infrastructure into an industrial
building for the purpose of supporting manufacturing
processes (i.e., not including space conditioning).
b. Accessory Dwelling Units that are attached to an existing
single-family home. Essential Service Buildings including, but
not limited to, public facilities, hospitals, medical centers and
emergency operations centers.
c. Temporary buildings.
d. Gas line connections used exclusively for emergency
generators.
e. Any buildings or building components exempt from the
California Energy Code.
f. Residential subdivisions in process of permitting or
constructing initial public improvements for any phase of a
final map recorded prior to January 1, 2020, unless compliance
is required by an existing Development Agreement.
If the proposed project falls into an above exemption category, what
measures are applicants taking to reduce onside fossil fuel
consumption to the maximum extent feasible? If not applicable
(N/A), explain why this action is not relevant.
Consistent. The project would include
development of either all electric or mixed-fuel
buildings and would be required to be in full
compliance with the City’s Energy Reach Code
and the project would be required to implemen t
green building standards identified in the CBC.
Additionally, the project proposes a commercial
kitchen, which would likely use natural gas;
however, this action has been accounted for in
the 2020 CAP. Building design has been
intended to emphasize electric power and to
maximize photovoltaic energy.
Connected Community
Does the Project comply with requirements in the City’s Municipal
Code with no exceptions, including bicycle parking, bikeway design,
and EV charging stations?
Consistent. The project would include eight EV
parking spaces and eight bicycle parking spaces,
which is consistent with the requirements in the
City’s Municipal Code. The project site is
located near Class II bicycle facilities on
Foothill boulevard and adjacent to existing
bicycle facilities on Ramona Drive and Broad
Street.
Is the estimated Project-generated Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
within the City’s adopted thresholds, as confirmed by the City’s
Transportation Division?
Consistent. The project would create 59 new
continuing care retirement units, estimated to
generate 148 ADT. Although operation of the
project would create more than 110 trips per
day, based on the City’s Residential VMT
Screening Map, the project is in an area of the
city that would result in average VMT less than
or equal to 85% of the regional average,
If “No,” does the Project/Plan include VMT mitigation strategies
and/or a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan approved
by the City’s Transportation Division?
Page 141 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 42 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
meaning a project in this area would result in
VMT generation below the City’s adopted
thresholds.
Does the Project demonstrate consistency with the City’s Bicycle
Transportation Plan?
Consistent. The project includes eight bicycle
parking spots. The project would be required to
comply with the City’s Municipal Code for
bicycle facilities including showers, lockers,
and bicycle parking for the proposed
development (17.70.180).
Circular Economy
Will the Project subscribe all units and/or buildings to organic waste
pick up and provide the appropriate on -site enclosures consistent
with the provisions of the City of San Luis Obispo Development
Standards for Solid Waste Services? Please provide a letter from San
Luis Garbage company verifying that the project complies with their
standards and requirements for organic waste pick up.
Consistent. The project would be subject to
requirements of the City’s Development
Standards for solid waste services. Based on
these standards, the project would be required to
include a minimum of two enclosed solid waste
bins constructed in accordance with City
standards and would be provided solid waste
services by the City which would be picked up
once a week.
Natural Solutions
Does the Project comply with Municipal Code requirements for
trees?
Consistent. The project would require removal
of non-native vegetation, which would require
compensation per Section 12.24.090 (Tree
Removal) of the City’s Municipal Code.
Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measures AQ-1.
GHG-1 A Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan (GGRP) shall be prepared for the proposed project and shall be submitted to the City
for review and approval prior to issuance of grading or building permits. The GGRP shall require annual impacts to be
quantified over the life of the project to also account for reduction in project impacts due to future emission reduction
technology that is included in the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) and shall reduce annual
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the development by a minimum of 189.57276.08 metric tons of carbon dioxide
equivalence (MTCO2e) per year over the operational life of the proposed project. GHG emissions may be reduced
through the implementation of on-site mitigation measures, off-site mitigation measures, or through the purchase of
carbon offsets. It is recommended that the GGRP incorporate GHG-reduction measures identified in the City of San
Luis Obispo’s CEQA GHG Emissions Analysis Compliance Checklist, Climate Action Plan Consistency Checklist for
New Development, as listed below. In the event that carbon offsets are required, carbon offsets shall be purchased from
a validated/verifiable source, such as the California Climate Action Registry, and approved by City Planning staff prior
to purchase. Demonstrated reduction of 276.08 MTCO2e per year over the operational life of the p roject could be
achieved through a combination of the following specific measures. All or some of these measures may be elected and
incorporated into the GGRP to provide the required reduction .
1. The project shall be provided electricity by 3CE.
2. Carbon offsets could be purchased from a validated/verifiable source, such as the California Climate
Action Registry, and approved by City Planning staff prior to purchase.
3. The project shall be designed to minimize barriers to pedestrian access and interconnectivity.
4. The project shall be designed to provide safe and convenient access to public transit contiguous to the
project site.
Page 142 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 43 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
5. Additional Transportation Demand Management (TDM) reduction measures could be included to reduce
vehicle miles traveled (VMT), which include but are not limited to:
a. Telecommuting;
b. Car sharing;
c. Shuttle service;
d. Carpools;
e. Vanpools;
f. Participation in the SLO Rideshare Back ‘N’ Forth Club;
g. Transit subsidies; and
h. Off-site sustainable transportation infrastructure improvements.
6. The project shall provide organic waste pick up and shall provide the appropriate on -site enclosures
consistent with the provisions of the City’s Development Standards for Solid Waste Services.
7. Carbon offsets could be purchased from a validated/verifiable source, such as the California Climate
Action Registry, and approved by City Planning staff prior to purchase.
Conclusion
The proposed project would generate GHG emissions during construction and operation in quantities that exceed the threshold
established by the City’s 2020 CAP; therefore, the project would result in a potentially significant impact related to GHG
emissions during project construction. Mitigation has been included that would ensure GHG emissions would be reduced below
the applicable threshold and ensure the project is consistent with the six pillars of the 2020 CAP; therefore, impacts would be
less than significant with mitigation.
9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
1 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
1 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school?
1 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous
materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to
the public or the environment?
28, 29,
30 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Page 143 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 44 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where
such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety
hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the
project area?
31 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? 23 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a
significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires? 23, 51 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
The Hazardous Waste and Substances Site (“Cortese”) List is a planning document used by the State, local agencies, and
developers to comply with CEQA requirements related to the disclosure of information about the location of hazardous material s
release sites. California Government Code Section 65962.5 requires the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA)
to develop, at least annually, an updated Cortese List. Various State and local government agencies are required to track and
document hazardous material release information for the Cortese List. The California Department of Toxic Substance Control
(DTSC) EnviroStor database tracks DTSC cleanup, permitting, enforcement, and investigation efforts at hazardous waste
facilities and sites with known contamination, such as federal superfund sites, State response sites, voluntary cleanup sites, school
cleanup sites, school investigation sites, and military evaluation sites. The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)
GeoTracker database contains records for sites that impact, or have the potential to impact, water in California, such as Lea king
Underground Storage Tank (LUST) sites, Department of Defense sites, and Cleanup Program Sites. The remaining data regarding
facilities or sites identified as meeting the Cortese List requirements can be located on the CalEPA website:
https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/.
Based on a review of the DTSC EnviroStor and SWRCB GeoTracker databases, the project site is not an active hazardous site,
nor has it previously been recorded as a hazardous site . In addition, there are no active hazardous sites in the vicinity of the
project site. There are several closed sites in the project vicinity—one closed Cleanup Program Site located approximately 380
feet northeast of the project site across Ramona Drive and four closed LUST sites located approximately 700 to 900 feet northeast
of the project site along Foothill Boulevard—however, none of these sites are directly adjacent to the project site.
a) Construction of the proposed project would require the use of commonly used hazardous substances (e.g., fuel, gasoline,
cleaners, solvents, oils, paints, etc.). Construction contractors would be required to comply with applicable federal and
State environmental and workplace safety laws for the handling of hazardous materials, including the federal Occupational
Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Process Safety Management Standard (California Code of Regulations [CCR]
29.1910.119), which includes requirements for preventing and minimizing the consequences of accidental release of
hazardous materials. Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 identifies requirements for the use of hazardous materials during
construction, including, but not limited to, spill kits provided on-site and setbacks for refueling in relation to the on-site
creek. Operation of the project does not include the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous substances. Any
commonly used hazardous substances utilized during operation of the project (e.g., cleaners, solvents, oils, paints, etc.)
would be transported, stored, and used according to regulatory requirements and existing procedures for the handling of
hazardous materials. Therefore, potential impacts associated with the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
substances would be less than significant with mitigation.
b) Construction activities associated with the project are anticipated to require use of limited quantities of hazardous
substances, including gasoline, diesel fuel, hydraulic fluid, solvents, oils, paints, etc. Construction contractors would be
required to comply with applicable federal and State environmental and workplace safety laws for the handling of
hazardous materials, including the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Process Safety
Management Standard (CCR 29.1910.119), which includes requirements for preventing and minimizing the consequences
of accidental release of hazardous materials. Land preparation would require removal of the existing surface parking lot
for construction of the proposed buildings. Therefore, ground-disturbing activities may expose contaminated soils
containing aerially deposited lead (ADL), if present, within the project area. Mitigation Measure HAZ -1 has been included
to ensure potential impacts associated with these hazards would be reduced by requiring proper monitoring, handling, and
disposal of excavated materials and potentially hazardous materials or wastes per applicable federal, State, and local
regulations. Further, as introduced in Section 3, Air Quality, the project site is within an area identified as having a potential
Page 144 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 45 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
for NOA to occur. Pursuant to SLOAPCD requirements and the CARB ATCM for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and
Surface Mining Operations, the Applicant is required to provide a geologic evaluation prior to any construction activities
and comply with existing regulations regarding NOA, if present. Mitigation Measures AQ-3 and AQ-4 have been identified
to require the Applicant to complete a geologic evaluation and follow all applicable protocol and procedures if NOA is
determined to be present on-site.
Operation of the project does not require the handling or use of h azardous materials or volatile substances that would result
in a significant risk of upset or accidental release conditions. Any commonly used hazardous substances utilized during
operation of the project (e.g., cleaners, solvents, oils, paints, etc.) woul d be transported, stored, and used according to
regulatory requirements and existing procedures for the handling of hazardous materials. Therefore, potential impacts
would be less than significant with mitigation.
c) The nearest school is Pacheco Elementary School, located approximately 0.23 mile north of the project site. Operation of
the project does not include the long-term use of hazardous materials or substances that could lead to significant upset due
to accidental release conditions. Any commonly used hazardous substances utilized during construction or operation of
the project (e.g., cleaners, solvents, oils, paints, etc.) would be transported, stored, and used according to regulatory
requirements and existing procedures for the handl ing of hazardous materials. As described above, during construction
activities, contractors would be required to comply with the federal OSHA Process Safety Management Standard (CCR
29.1910.119), which includes requirements for preventing and minimizing th e consequences of accidental release of
hazardous materials. Further, Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 identifies requirements for the use of hazardous materials during
construction including, but not limited to, spill kits provided on-site and setbacks for refueling in relation to the on-site
creek. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 would reduce the potential for significant upset within 0.25 mile of
a school. Although the project would be located within 0.25 mile of an existing school, the project would not result in the
long-term use of any hazardous substances or materials and construction activities would be conducted in accordance with
applicable federal and State laws. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
d) There are no previously identified hazardous materials sites within or adjacent to the project site. Based on a search of the
DTSC EnviroStor database, SWRCB GeoTracker database, and CalEPA Cortese List website, there is one closed Cleanup
Program Site located approximately 380 feet northeast of the project side across Ramona Drive and four closed LUST
sites located approximately 700 to 900 feet northeast of the project site along Foothill Boulevard. The identified hazardous
materials sites have been closed and hazardous materials associated with the sites are not anticipated to be present within
the soils on-site. However, Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 would further reduce potential impacts by requiring proper
monitoring, handling, and disposal of excavated materials and poten tially hazardous materials or wastes per applicable
federal, State, and local regulations. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
e) San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport is the nearest airport to the project site, located approximately 3.7 miles south
of the project site. The project is outside of the Airport Influence Area and any Safety Zone designations established under
the airport’s Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP). Therefore, the project would not be located within 2 miles of an airport or
under the jurisdiction of an ALUP, and no impacts would occur.
f) Project construction may result in temporary traffic controls along Ramona Drive and/or Palomar Avenue; however, no
full road closures would be necessary. Project implementation would not result in a significant temporary or permanent
impact on any adopted emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans. Therefore, the project would result in
less than significant impacts related to the potential for impairment of implementation of emergency response plans or
emergency evacuation plans.
g) The project site is located within a developed area of the city and is not located within or adjacent to a wildland area. The
project site is comprised of ruderal/developed land (surface parking lot), Old Garden Creek and associated native riparian
vegetation, and ornamental landscaping. Implementation of the project would result in the development of two new
buildings associated with the Village at the Palms expansion. New buildings would be required to comply with all
applicable fire safety rules and regulations, including the California Fire Code and PRC. For these reasons, the project
would result in less than significant impacts related to exposure to wildland fire.
Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measures AQ-3 and AQ-4.
Page 145 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 46 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
HAZ-1 Prior to initiation of site preparation, vegetation removal, and earth-moving activities, the project contractor shall
prepare and implement a Hazardous Materials Management Plan that details procedures that will be taken to ensure
proper transport, use, and storage of hazardous construction materials and the appropriate handling, stockpiling, testing,
and disposal of excavated materials to prevent the inadvertent release of hazardous construction materials and/or
contaminated soil and demolished materials to the environment during construction activities. Elements of the plan shall
include, but would not be limited to, the following:
Worker Health and Safety
1. Accident prevention measures.
2. Measures to address hazardous materials and other site-specific worker health and safety issues during
construction, including the specific level of protection required for construction workers. This s hall include
preparation of a site-specific health and safety plan in accordance with federal Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) regulations (29 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 1910.120) and California Division
of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) regulations (8 California Code of Regulations [CCR] 5192)
to address worker health and safety issues during construction.
3. The requirement that all construction crew members be trained regarding best practices for the proper transport,
use, and storage of hazardous construction materials and the appropriate handling, stockpiling, testing, and
disposal of excavated materials prior to beginning work.
Soil Contamination
1. Procedures for the proper handling, stockpiling, testing, and disposal of excavated materials in accordance
with CCR Title 14 and Title 22.
2. Soil contamination evaluation and management procedures, including how to properly identify potential
contamination (e.g., soil staining, odors, or buried material), the requirement that construction activities within
a 50-foot-radius of potentially contaminated soil be halted until the hazard has been assessed and appropriately
addressed, the requirement that access to potentially contaminated areas be limited to properly trained
personnel, and procedures for notification and reporting, including internal management and local agencies
(e.g., fire department, City of San Luis Obispo), as needed.
3. Monitoring of ground-disturbing activities for soil contamination may include visual and organic vapor
monitoring by personnel with appropriate hazardous materials training, including 40 hours of Hazardous Waste
Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) training.
4. If visual and organic vapor monitoring indicates signs of suspected contaminated soi l, then soil samples shall
be collected and analyzed to characterize soil quality.
5. Evaluation of all potentially contaminated materials encountered during project construction activities in
accordance with applicable federal, State, and local regulations and/or guidelines governing hazardous waste.
All materials deemed to be hazardous shall be remediated and/or disposed of following applicable regulatory
agency regulations and/or guidelines. Disposal sites for both remediated and non -remediated soils shall be
identified prior to beginning construction. All evaluation, remediation, treatment, and/or disposal of hazardous
waste shall be supervised and documented by qualified hazardous waste personnel.
Hazardous Construction Materials
1. Appropriate work practices necessary to effectively comply with applicable environmental laws and
regulations, including hazardous materials management, handling, storage, disposal, and emergency response.
These work practices include the following: an on -site hazardous material spill kit shall be provided for small
spills; totally enclosed containment shall be provided for all trash; and all construction waste, including trash,
litter, garbage, other solid waste, petroleum products, and other potentially hazardous materials, shall be
removed to an appropriate waste facility permitted or otherwise authorized to treat, store, or dispose of such
materials.
Page 146 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 47 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
2. The requirement that hazardous construction materials must be stored and equipment must be refueled at least
50 feet from storm drain inlets, creeks, and other drainage features and covered with tarps or stored inside
buildings to ensure that materials are not released to the air during windy conditions or exposed to rain.
3. Procedures for proper containment of any spills or inadvertent releases of hazardous materials.
4. Notification requirements in the event of an accidental release of hazardous materials into the environment.
Construction crew members shall immediately notify a construction foreperson who shall then report the
release to the City of San Luis Obispo to ensure the release is remediated in accordance with City requirements.
Conclusion
The project does not propose the long-term routine transport, use, handling, or disposal of hazardous substances; however, there
is the potential for construction equipment to leak or lead to a hazardous materials spill . There is also potential for ground-
disturbing activities to release ADL or other unknown hazardous materials, if present, on-site. Implementation of Mitigation
Measure HAZ-1 would reduce impacts related to potential release of ADL and other unknown hazardous materials and/or
accidental construction-related spills to less than significant. Although the project is located within 0.25 mile of a school, the
project does not include the long-term use of hazardous materials or substances that could result in significant upset if accidentally
released. Further Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 identifies cleanup protocol for any commonly used construction materials spills
that would reduce the potential to result in significant upset within 0.25 mile of a school. Mitigation Measures AQ-3 and AQ-4
have been identified to require the Applicant to complete a geologic evaluation and follow all applicable protocol and procedures
if NOA is determined to be present on-site. Project implementation would not subject people or structures to substantial risks
associated with wildland fires and would not impair implementation of or interfere with any adopted emergency response or
evacuation plan. Potential impacts associated with hazards and hazardous materials would be less than significant with
mitigation.
10. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or
ground water quality?
1, 2,
53 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project
may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
1, 33,
34 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or
area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream
or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a
manner which would:
i. Result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site; 1, 36,
53 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
ii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff
in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite;
1, 36,
53 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
iii. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage
systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; or
1, 36,
53 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
iv. Impede or redirect flood flows? 1, 23,
32, 59 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Page 147 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 48 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of
pollutants due to project inundation?
1, 2,
23, 32 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality
control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
1, 2,
33, 36 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
The project site is located within the San Luis Obispo Creek watershed and includes Old Garden Creek, which flows through the
central portion of the project site. Old Garden Creek is a tributary to Stenner Creek. The San Luis Obispo Creek watershed is an
approximately 53,271-acre coastal basin in southern San Luis Obispo County. It rises to an elevation of about 2,500 feet above
sea level in the Santa Lucia Range. San Luis Obispo Creek flows to the Pacific Ocean just west of Avila Beach and has six major
tributary basins: Stenner Creek, Prefumo Creek, Laguna Lake, East Branch San Luis Obispo Creek, Davenport Creek, and See
Canyon.
The City is enrolled in the State General Permit NPDES permit program governing stormwater. As part of this enrollment, the
City is required to implement the Central Coast RWQCB’s adopted Post-Construction Stormwater Management requirements
through the development review process. The primary objective of these post -construction requirements is to ensure that the
permittee is reducing pollutant discharges to the maximum extent practicable and preventing stormwater discharges from causing
or contributing to a violation of receiving water quality standards in all applicable development project s that require approvals
and/or permits issued.
The 100-year flood zone identifies areas that would be subject to inundation in a 100 -year storm event, or a storm with a 1%
chance of occurring in any given year. According to Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate
Map 06079C1066G, effective date November 16, 2012, the eastern portion of the project site is located within Zone AE, a 1%
chance of annual flood.
In 2015 the State legislature approved the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), which requires governments and
water agencies of high- and medium-priority basins to halt overdraft and bring groundwater basins into balanced levels of
pumping and recharge. Under the SGMA, these basins should reach sustainability within 20 years of implementing their
sustainability plans. The project would be serviced by the City’s water system, which has four primary water sources—Whale
Rock Reservoir, Salinas Reservoir, Nacimiento Reservoir, and recycled water (for irrigation)—with groundwater serving as a
fifth supplemental source.
a) The project would require the use of construction equipment that would increase the potential for polluted runoff during
construction activities. The proposed project also includes 1.31 acres (57,000 square feet) of ground disturbance including
1,575 cy of cut and 620 cy of fill that could result in increased soil erosion during ground-disturbing activities. Project
improvements would be located directly east and west of Old Garden Creek. Therefore, increased erosive and/or polluted
runoff may result in indirect impacts to Old Garden Creek.
Based on the amount of proposed ground disturbance, consistent with the Municipal Code and as part of the building
permit process, the project would require a SWPPP with BMPs including, but not limited to, erosion and pollution control
measures such as silt fencing, straw wattles, berms, and vehicle maintenance and storage. Implementation of standard
construction BMPs would reduce the potential for polluted runoff during equipment and vehicle use and would minimize
the amount of erosive runoff from the site during ground -disturbing activities. In addition, Mitigation Measure HAZ-1
requires any accidental spills to be properly cleaned and for vehicles to be stored and refueled at least 50 feet away from
Old Garden Creek to avoid any potential polluted runoff. The project would be required to comply with the Central Coast
RWQCB requirements set forth in their Post-Construction Stormwater Management Requirements for Development
Projects in the Central Coast region.
Proposed physical improvement of the project site would also be required to comply with the drainage requirements of the
City’s Waterway Management Plan. This plan was adopted for the purpose of ensuring water quality and proper drainage
within the City’s watershed. As part of these requirements, the City has been mandated to establish a set of minimum
designated BMPs and Pollution Prevention Methods (PPMs). BMPs are steps taken to minimize or control the amount of
pollutants and runoff. PPMs are strategies to eliminate the use of polluting materials and/or exposure of potential pollutant s
to rainwater or other sources of runoff . Additionally, the project would be required to prepare an erosion and sediment
control plan in compliance with the City’s stormwater requirements. The erosion and sediment control plan would require
Page 148 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 49 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
restoration of soils along the Old Garden Creek corridor to avoid lo ng-term impacts related to erosion and sedimentation.
Following project completion, the project site would be developed with buildings, hardscapes, and landscaping, precluding
the potential for substantial long-term erosion or loss of topsoil. Therefore, b ased on required compliance with existing
requirements and implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1, potential impacts related to violation of water quality
standards would be less than significant with mitigation.
b) As identified above, the project would be provided water through the City’s water system, which has four primary water
sources—Whale Rock Reservoir, Salinas Reservoir, Nacimiento Reservoir, and recycled water (for irrigation)—with
groundwater serving as a fifth supplemental source. The City’s diversification of water sources in the last several decades
has allowed the City to maintain sufficient water supplies even following the driest years on record. The total water
available for the City in the 2020 water year (October 1, 2019, to Septe mber 30, 2020) was 10,107 AFY, which included
215 AFY of recycled water. As this availability was adjusted following years of drought and updates to the City ’s safe
annual yield model, the availability is considered a reasonable long-term safe yield value for the purposes of this analysis.
The City’s water demand for 2020 was 4,730 AF. The project site is currently comprised of impervious surfaces associated
with the existing surface parking lot. Implementation of the project would result in new impervious surfaces, including
smaller surface parking lots, buildings, and hardscapes. However, new impervious surfaces would be within the footprint
of the existing surface parking lot and new surface parking lots would be built on pervious pavers, which would ultimately
create less impervious surfaces on-site. Therefore, the project is not anticipated to disrupt groundwater recharge on-site.
Therefore, the project would not deplete groundwater resources, and impacts would be less than significant.
c.i-iii) The project construction consists of 1.31 acres (57,000 square feet) of ground disturbance, including 1,575 cy of cut and
620 cy of fill activity that could result in temporary impacts to drainage patterns in the area through erosive runoff. The
project must develop and implement a SWPPP that includes BMPs to protect stormwater runoff, including measures to
prevent soil erosion. In addition, the project would be required to prepare an erosion and sediment control plan in
compliance with the City’s stormwater requirements to reduce the potential for long-term erosion from implementation of
the project. Following project construction, the project site would be developed with buildings, hardscapes, or otherwise
landscaped areas, precluding the potential for substantial erosion or loss of topsoil. Further, the project would not result in
the direct alteration of Old Garden Creek. The project includes a 25- to 28-foot setback and Mitigation Measure BIO-7
requires the setback to be clearly identified on-site and on project plans during construction activities.
Implementation of the project would result in new impervious surfaces , including paved roads, hardscapes, and buildings
that have potential to increase polluted runoff. However, new impervious surfaces would be within the footprint of the
existing surface parking lot and new surface parking lots would be built on pervious pavers, which would ultimately reduce
the amount of impervious surfaces on-site. Therefore, the reduction of impervious surface area on-site would reduce runoff
at the project site. To meet the requirements of the City’s Municipal Code (Chapter 12.08), the project would protect
existing stormwater infrastructure and would include expanded infrastructure capable of supporting the project . The
purpose of these features is to create infrastructure capable of conveying stormwater runoff from the project site to the
City’s utility connections that can support the additional runoff. Implementation of a SWPPP, as required by the Municipal
Code and through the building permit process, and Mitigation Measures BIO-8 would minimize potential impacts to
drainages during project construction; therefore, project impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
c.iv) According to FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map 06079C1066G, effective date November 16, 2012, the eastern portion of
the project site is located within Zone AE, a 1% chance of annual flood. However, the project does not include alteration
of Old Garden Creek that would result in altered flood flows. Therefore, potential impacts associated with impeding or
redirection of flood flows would be less than significant.
d) Based on the San Luis Obispo County Tsunami Inundation Maps, the project sit e is not located in an area with potential
for inundation by a tsunami. The project site is not located within close proximity to a standing body of water with the
potential for a seiche to occur. Therefore, there would be no impacts associated with tsunami or seiche zones, and any
potential risk of pollutant release due to project inundation due to flooding would be less than significant.
e) Per the City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Water and Wastewater Element, Policy A2.2.1, the City has four primary
water supply sources—Whale Rock Reservoir, Salinas Reservoir, Nacimiento Reservoir, and recycled water; groundwater
serves as a fifth supplemental source. The City’s diversification of water sources in the last several decades has allowed
the City to maintain sufficient water supplies even following the driest years on record. The total water available for the
City in the 2020 water year (October 1, 2019, to September 30, 2020) was 10,107 AFY, which included 215 AFY of
Page 149 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 50 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
recycled water. As this availability was adjusted following years of drought and updates to the City’s safe annual yield
model, the availability is considered a reasonable long-term safe yield value for the purposes of this analysis. The City’s
water demand for 2020 was 4,730 AF. The project includes stormwater treatment and storage facilities and would not
conflict with the City’s Waterways Management Plan or other water quality control plans. The project would not conflict
with the SGMA, Central Coast Basin Plan, or other local or regional plans or policies intended to manage water quality or
groundwater supplies; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measures HAZ-1 and BIO-7.
Conclusion
Through project design, implementation of Mitigation Measures HAZ-1 and BIO-7, standard BMPs, PPMs, and City Engineering
Standards, the project would not substantially impede or redirect flood flows, alter existing drainage patterns, degrade surface
water quality, decrease groundwater supplies, or conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or
sustainable groundwater management plan. The project would retain the preconstruction infiltration rates and volume currently
occurring on the unimproved project site. Therefore, potential impacts related to hydrology and water quality would be less than
significant with mitigation.
11. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Physically divide an established community? N/A ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with
any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose
of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
1, 2, 5 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Evaluation
The Village at the Palms Planned Development consists of three existing buildings, each on a separate parcel. The existing
building located on APN 052-162-022 is known as “Garden Creek” and consists of an assisted living facility with 64 rooms; no
changes are proposed to this parcel. The remaining two parcels were recently adjusted on October 16, 2020, under the lot line
adjustment application SBDV-0246-2020 (SLO AL 20-0002). The existing building located on APN 052-162-018 (1.4 acres) is
known as “The Oaks” and consists of a 50-unit senior living facility; no changes are proposed to this parcel. The existing building
located on APN-052-162-021 (4.6 acres) is known as “The Palms” and consists of a 127-unit senior living facility; the proposed
project and associated site improvements would be located within this parcel (henceforth referred to as Parcel 2 SLOAL
20-0002). In addition to Broad Street located along the project ’s frontage, the project site is bound by Palomar Avenue to the
west and Ramona Drive to the north. The project site is generally surrounded by one- and two-story commercial office uses, with
a few remaining unimproved parcels, as summarized below:
• Northeast: commercial center (Foothill Plaza Shopping Center) and single-family residential development
• Northwest: commercial center (Foothill Plaza Shopping Center), Church of Jesus Christ Latter -day Saints, and
apartment complex (Valencia Apartments)
• Southwest: planned apartment complex (The Academy Palomar) and low -density residential development
• Southeast: low-density residential development
a) The project would result in the expansion of an assisted living facility within the R-4-PD zone. The project would be
surrounded by other residential land uses and would not physically divide an established community. The project would
be consistent with the existing level of development in the project vicinity and would not create, close, or impede any
Page 150 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 51 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
existing public or private roads, or create any other barriers to movement or accessibility within the community. Therefore,
the project would not physically divide an established community and no impacts would occur.
b) The project is consistent with existing surrounding development and proposes a compatible land use. The project would
be generally consistent with the property’s R-4 land use designation and the guidelines and policies for development within
the R-4-PD zoning designation. The Applicant is requesting the following zoning exceptions and deviations from
development standards:
• A deviation is requested to exceed the 35-foot height standard within the R-4-PD zone (17.22.020);
• An exception to the setback requirements of the R-4-PD zone (Section 17.70.170 D.1.B) including an exception
to allow a reduction in the side yard setback along Palomar Avenue to facilitate an additional building setback
from the top of the bank of the creek, an exception to allow parking within the required side yard setback adjacent
to Palomar Avenue and the small section of Building B parking along Palomar Avenue front yard setback, and
an exception to allow the trash/recycling enclosure for Building B to be located within the side yard adjacent to
Palomar Avenue, in accordance with Section 17.70.170 D.1.B, to facilitate increased setback from the creek;
• An exception to allow a section of replacement parking to incorporate impervious paving at the southwestern
corner of Building A (Section 17.70.030 G.1);
• An exception to allow a section of replacement parking incorporating impervious paving within the 20-foot creek-
side setback on the east side of Building B (Section 17.70.030 G.1); and
• An exception to allow encroachment into the additional 10-foot creek-side setback at the upper stories (Section
17.70.030 E.3).
The project is located within a PD Overlay, which provides for deviations from development standards of Municipal Code
Title 17 where determined necessary and justifiable to accommodate the development of the project (17.48.030.D). The
exceptions and deviations requested by the Applicant do not include any exceptions to policies or regulations adopted for
the purpose of avoiding or mitigating environmental effects. Rather, the policies and requirements where exceptions are
being requested are related to development requirements that the City has in place to ensure that neighboring developments
are compatible with one another and serve community preferences, versus protection of significant environmental
resources.
The COSE includes various goals and policies to maintain, enhance, and protect natural communities within the City ’s
planning area. These policies include, but are not limited to, protection of listed species and SSC, preservation of existing
wildlife corridors, protection of significant trees, and maintaining development setbacks from creeks. The project site has
been previously disturbed and does not support highly sensitive environmental resources. Old Garden Creek would be
protected during project construction and operations by a 25 - to 28-foot setback. Further, implementation of Mitigation
Measures BIO-1 through BIO-7 would ensure indirect effects to Old Garden Creek, special-status species, nesting
migratory birds, and roosting bats resulting from construction activities would be avoided and/or m inimized and the project
would not result in a conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources and impacts. Therefore, the
project would not conflict with policies or regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating environmental
effects and impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-7.
Conclusion
The proposed project would not physically divide an established community and would be consistent with surrounding land uses.
The proposed 25- to 28-foot setback from Old Garden Creek within the project site and implementation of Mitigation Measures
BIO-1 through BIO-7 would ensure potential impacts to biological resources would not result in a conflict with local policies or
ordinances protecting biological resources and potential impacts would be less than significant.
Page 151 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 52 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
12. MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource
that would be of value to the region and the residents of the
state?
2 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral
resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan,
specific plan or other land use plan?
2 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Evaluation
Based on the City’s COSE, mineral extraction is prohibited within city limits.
a,b) No known mineral resources are present within the project site and future extraction of mineral resources is very unlikely
due to the urbanized nature of the area. Therefore, no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation measures are not required.
Conclusion
No impacts to mineral resources were identified; therefore, mitigation measures are not required.
13. NOISE
Would the project result in:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of
standards established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
5, 37,
38, 39,
58, 61
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne
noise levels?
38, 39,
40 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or
an airport land use plan, or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project expose people residing or working in
the project area to excessive noise levels?
31 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Evaluation
The City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Noise Element establishes standards for maximum acceptable noise levels associated
with stationary and transportation sources. Noise created by new transportation noise sources are required to be mitigated to not
exceed the maximum acceptable noise levels identified in Table 7.
Outdoor activity areas are not defined in the City’s Noise Element but are defined in the City of San Luis Obispo, Noise
Guidebook, Measurement & Mitigation Techniques. The guidebook states that outdoor activity areas are “patios, decks,
Page 152 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 53 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
balconies, outdoor eating areas, swimming pool areas, yards of dwellings, and other areas commonly used for outdoor activities
and recreation.”
The City’s Noise Element also identifies Policy 1.4 regarding noise created by new transportation sources, including roa d,
railroad, and airport expansion projects, which states noise from these sources shall be mitigated to not exceed the levels s pecified
in Table 7 for outdoor activity areas and indoor spaces of noise -sensitive land uses.
Table 7. Maximum Noise Exposure for Noise-Sensitive Uses due to Transportation Noise Sources
Noise-Sensitive Use
Outdoor
Activity Areas1 Indoor Spaces
Ldn or CNEL,
in dB
Ldn or
CNEL, in dB Leq in db2 Lmax in dB3
Residences, hotels, motels, hospitals, nursing homes 60 45 -- 60
Theaters, auditoriums, music halls -- -- 35 60
Churches, meeting halls, office building, mortuaries 60 -- 45 --
Schools, libraries, museums -- -- 45 60
Neighborhood parks 65 -- -- --
Playgrounds 70 -- -- --
Notes: CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level; Ldn = day-night average sound level; Leq = equivalent continuous sound level; Lmax = maximum
sound level.
1 If the location of outdoor activity areas is not shown, the outdoor noise standard shall apply at the property line of the receiving land use.
2 As determined for a typical worst-case hour during periods of use.
3 Lmax indoor standard applies only to railroad noise at locations south of Orcutt Road.
The existing noise environment in the project area is dominated by roadway traffic along Ramona Drive and Palomar Avenue.
Nursing homes are considered a noise-sensitive land use by the City’s Noise Element. Per City Municipal Code Chapter 9.12
Noise Control, operating tools or equipment used in construction between weekday hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. or any time
on Sundays or holidays is prohibited, except for emergency works of public service utilities or by exception issued by the
Community Development Department. The Municipal Code also states that construction activities shall be conducted in such a
manner, where technically and economically feasible, that the maximum noise levels at affected properties will not exceed
85 A-weighted decibels (dBA) at mixed residential/commercial uses. Based on the City Municipal Code (9.12.050.B.7),
operating any device that creates vibration that is above the vibration perception threshold of an individual at or beyond 150 feet
from the source if on a public space o r right-of-way is prohibited.
a) During project construction, noise from construction activities may intermittently dominate the noise environment in the
immediate area. The project would require the use of typical construction equipment (dozers, excavators, etc.) for land
preparation and development of the two new buildings. Typical noise levels produced by equipment commonly used in
construction projects are shown in Tab le 8.
Table 8. Construction Equipment Noise Emission Levels
Equipment Type Typical Noise Level (dBA)
50 ft From Source
Concrete Mixer, Dozer, Excavator, Jackhammer, Man Lift,
Paver, Scraper
85
Heavy Truck 84
Page 153 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 54 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Crane, Mobile 83
Concrete Pump 82
Backhoe, Compactor 80
Source: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) 2017
As shown above, construction equipment that would be utilized during project construction would not exceed 85 dBA and
would be similar to other construction activity within the city. Construction-related noise would be intermittent and
temporary in nature. However, the project would be located within a residential area with sensitive receptor locations
located in all directions. The nearest off-site sensitive receptor location is an apartment complex located 50 feet west.
Based on the proximity of the sensitive receptor s at and around the project site, Mitigation Measures N-1 through N-4
have been included to require construction noise BMPs during all construction activities and for approved construction
hours, truck routes, and all construction noise BMPs to be included on all project plans.
The project does not include components that would significantly add to long-term ambient noise in the project vicinity.
Upon completion of construction activities, the project would include the use of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning
(HVAC) systems that would have the potential to contribute additional noise to the existing noise environment, as well as
mobile noise from project-related traffic. The additional noise generated by the project’s HVAC systems would not result
in a noticeable increase in ambient noise levels based on the density of surrounding development. Relative to vehicular
noise, a doubling of traffic is typically needed to produce a noise increase that is audible to the human ear. Currently, there
are 3,609 vehicle trips on Broad Street and 4,107 vehicle trips on Ramona Drive. The project would not result in the
doubling of vehicle trips; therefore, no substantial increase in mobile source noise would occur. For these reasons, potential
impacts associated with generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels would be less
than significant with mitigation.
b) The project does not propose pile-driving or other high-impact activities that would generate substantial noise or
groundborne vibration during construction. Use of heavy equipment would generate groundborne noise and vibration ;
however, noise would be temporary and intermittent and there are no buildings that surround the project site (i.e., historical
buildings and occupants of surrounding buildings) that would be substantially affected by this groundborne vibration.
Further, construction activity would be required to occur between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., which is consistent with the
City’s Municipal Code. Based on the proposed construction activities, groundborne vibration is expected to be
imperceptible at adjacent properties. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant.
c) The project site is not located within 2 miles of an airport or within a designated Safety Zone established by the ALUP .
Therefore, the project would not result in excessive airport-related noise for project occupants and no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures
N-1 For the entire duration of the construction phase of the project, the following Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall
be adhered to:
1. Stationary construction equipment that generates noise that exceeds 60 A-weighted decibels (dBA) at the
project boundaries shall be shielded with the most modern noise control devices (i.e., mufflers, lagging, and/or
motor enclosures).
2. Impact tools (e.g., jack hammers, pavement breakers, rock drills, etc.) used for project construction shall be
hydraulically or electrically powered wherever possible to avoid noise associated with compressed air exhaust
from pneumatically powered tools.
3. Where use of pneumatic tools is unavoidable, an exhaust muffler on the compressed air exhaust shall be used.
4. All construction equipment shall have the manufacturers ’ recommended noise abatement methods installed,
such as mufflers, engine enclosures, and engine vibration insu lators, intact and operational.
5. All construction equipment shall undergo inspection at periodic intervals to ensure proper maintenance and
presence of noise control devices (e.g., mufflers, shrouding, etc.).
Page 154 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 55 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
N-2 Construction plans shall note construction hours, truck routes, and all construction noise BMPs, and shall be reviewed
and approved by the City Community Development Department prior to issuance of grading/building permits. The City
shall provide and post signs stating these restrictions at construction entry sites prior to commencement of construction
and maintained throughout the construction phase of the project. All construction workers shall be briefed at a
preconstruction meeting on construction hour limitations and how, why, and where BMP mea sures are to be
implemented.
N-3 For all construction activity at the project site, additional noise attenuation techniques shall be employed as needed to
ensure that noise levels are maintained within levels allowed by the City of San Luis Obispo Municipa l Code, Title 9,
Chapter 9.12 (Noise Control). Such techniques shall include, but are not limited to:
• Sound blankets shall be used on noise-generating equipment;
• Stationary construction equipment that generates noise levels above 65 dBA at the project boun daries shall be
shielded with a barrier that meets a sound transmission class (a rating of how well noise barriers attenuate
sound) of 25;
• All diesel equipment shall be operated with closed engine doors and shall be equipped with factory-
recommended mufflers;
• The movement of construction-related vehicles, with the exception of passenger vehicles, along roadways
adjacent to sensitive receptors shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 A.M. and 7:00 P.M., Monday through
Saturday. No movement of heavy equipment shall occur on Sundays or official holidays (e.g., Thanksgiving,
Labor Day); and
• Temporary sound barriers shall be constructed between construction sites and affected uses.
N-4 The project contractor shall inform residents and business operators at properties within 300 feet of the project of
proposed construction timelines and noise compliant procedures to minimize potential annoyance related to construction
noise. Signs shall be in place prior to and throughout grading and construction activities informing the public that noise-
related complaints shall be directed to the construction manager prior to the City’s Community Development
Department.
Conclusion
The project would not exceed City Municipal Code construction and operational noise standards for residential development.
However, the project would be near sensitive receptor locations. Therefore, Mitigation Measures N-1 through N-4 are included
to reduce potential impacts. The project would not expose project occupants to excessive airport noise. Therefore, impacts related
to noise would be less than significant with mitigation.
14. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
41, 42 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
1 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Evaluation
According to the City’s General Plan 2020 Annual Report, the average growth rate between 2015 and 2019 was 0.47%. In 2020
the City’s residential growth rate grew to 1.21%. The growth was likely caused by City-issued permits for 210 new units within
Page 155 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 56 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
specific plan areas (of the 261 total units subject to growth management limitations). Despite the growth in 2020, the City has
maintained a 6-year average annual residential growth rate of 0.6 % per year, in compliance with the 1% maximum average
annual residential growth rate (City LUE Policy 1.11.2). San Luis Obispo contains the largest concentration of jobs in the county.
During workdays, the city’s population increases to an estimated 70,000 persons.
The City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Housing Element identifies various goals, policies, and programs based on an
assessment of the City’s housing needs, opportunities, and constraints. The City ’s overarching goals for housing include safety,
affordability, conserving existing housing, accommodating for mixed-income neighborhoods, providing housing variety and
tenure, planning for new housing, maintaining neighborhood quality, providing special needs housing, encouraging sustainable
housing and neighborhood design, maximizing affordable housing opportunities for those who live or work in the City, and
developing housing on suitable sites.
a) The proposed project would result in 59 new residential units and approximately 64 new residents (assumption based on
54 studio and one-bedroom units and five two-bedroom units) and 16 additional employees, which would be consistent
with the density allowed by the project site’s R-4 land use designation. Thus, any indirect population growth resulting
from an increase in residents of the assisted living facility would be consistent with the City ’s General Plan. The project
would be consistent with the projected population growth for the city. Short-term construction activities would likely
source from the local labor pool and is not anticipated to induce population growth through the creation of new jobs. The
project would not result in substantial unplanned population growth; therefore, poten tial impacts would be less than
significant.
b) The portion of the project site that is proposed for development does not include any habitable structures. Therefore, the
project would not result in the displacement of any existing or proposed housing; there fore, no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation measures are not required.
Conclusion
The project would be consistent with the City’s projected population growth. No potentially significant impacts would occur,
and mitigation measures are not required.
15. PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection? 1, 56 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Police protection? 1,57 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Schools? 1, 43 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Parks? 1, 43,
44 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Other public facilities? 1, 43 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Page 156 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 57 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Evaluation
The project site is located within the existing service area of the City of San Luis Obispo Fire Department (SLOFD). The SLOFD
deploys resources and personnel from four fire stations to maintain the response time goal of 4 minutes travel time to 95% of all
emergencies. The nearest SLOFD fire station to the project site is City Fire Station 2, located at 136 North Chorro Street,
approximately 0.2 mile (1,030 feet) northeast of the project site. City Fire Station 2 provides primary response to the northern
portion of the city and has an average response time of 4 minutes 3 seconds. The SLOFD consists of 12 fire captains, 15 fire
engineers, 13 firefighters, 25 paramedics, and 19 emergency medical technicians (EMTs). In 2020 the SLOFD responded to
5,499 incidents, which is nearly 11% lower than 2019.
The City of San Luis Obispo Police Department (SLOPD) provides public safety services for the city. The SLOPD has
approximately 91 employees, 60 of which are sworn police officers. The SLOPD operates out of one main police station , located
at 1042 Walnut Street at the intersection of Santa Rosa (Highway 1) and US 101, and emergency response times to the site would
be less than 5 minutes.
The project site is located within the San Luis Coastal Unified School District (SLCUSD), and public parks and recreation trails
within the city are managed and maintained by the City’s Parks and Recreation Department.
All new residential and non-residential development within the city is subject to payment of Development Impact Fees, which
are administered by and paid through the City’s Community Development Department. Development Impact Fees provide
funding for maintaining City emergency services, infrastructure, and facilities. For example, fire protection impact fees provide
funding for projects such as the renovation of the City’s fire stations and the replacement of fire service vehicles and equipment.
a) Fire protection: The project would be served by the SLOFD; the closest station is Fire Station 2, located at 126 North
Chorro Street, approximately 0.2 mile northeast of the project site with an emergency response time of less than 5 minutes.
The project includes an expansion of the existing Village at the Palms assisted living facility. The project would be
consistent with the general level of development within the high-density residential zone and would be consistent with
anticipated population growth within the city. Implementation of the project would not require the expansion or
construction of new fire protection facilities. Because the proposed project would not require the expansion or construction
of new fire protection facilities, environmental impacts associated with the provision of fire protection services would be
less than significant.
Police protection: The project would be served by the SLOPD. The project would be consistent with the general level of
development within the high-density residential zone and would be consistent with anticipated population growth within
the city. Implementation of the project would result in a marginal increase in demand on police protection services due to
the construction of new occupiable buildings, but this new demand is within the anticipated population growth of the city
and would not result in the need for new or expanded police facilities. Because the proposed project would not require the
expansion or construction of new police protection facilities, environmental impacts associated with the provision of police
services would be less than significant.
Schools: The project would result in the development of an expanded assisted living facility and would not result in an
increased number of school-aged children within the city. For this reason, the project would result in less than significant
impacts to school facilities.
Parks: The proposed expansion of the existing Village at the Palms assisted living facility is not anticipated to result in a
significant increase in demand on local parks and recreational facilities in the area. The assisted living facility would
include internal recreation opportunities for residents of the facility. The project is consistent with the City’s General Plan
designation and zoning designation; therefore, any indirect population growth resulting from the project would be
consistent with the projected population growth for the city. Therefore, potential project impacts on parks would be less
than significant.
Other public facilities: The project would not induce unplanned population growth and would result in a negligible effect
on use of other public facilities, such as roadways and public libraries. Therefore, potential project impacts on public
facilities would be less than significant.
Page 157 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 58 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation measures are not required.
Conclusion
The project would not induce unplanned population growth because employees are likely to come from the local workforce.
Operation of the project may result in a marginal cumulative increase in demand on City services and facilities, including fi re
protection, police protection, parks and recreational facilities, and other public facilities; however, construction of new facilities
is not anticipated to be required. The project would not result in significant impacts to public services; therefore, mitigation
measures are not required.
16. RECREATION
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or
be accelerated?
1, 43,
44 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might
have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
1, 43,
44 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
Existing City recreational facilities consist of 28 parks and recreational facilities, in addition to 10 designated natural resources
and open space areas and two bike trails. The City of San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Element identifies goals, policies,
and programs to help plan, develop, and maintain community parks and recreation facilities. The City’s statement of overall
department goals is for the City’s parks and recreation facilities and programs to enable all citizens to participate in fun, healthful,
or enriching activities, which enhance the quality of life in the community.
As demand for recreation facilities and activities grow and change, the City intends to focus its efforts in the following areas:
continuing development of athletic fields and support facilities, providing parks in underserved neighborhoods, providing a
multi-use community center and therapy pool, expanding paths and trails for recreational use, link ing recreation facilities, and
meeting the special needs of disabled persons, at-risk youth, and senior citizens. City Parks and Recreation Element Policy 3.13.1
establishes the City’s goal to develop and maintain a park system at the rate of 10 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents , 5 acres
of which shall be dedicated as neighborhood parks.
a,b) As previously described, the proposed project would result in 59 new residential units and approximately 64 new residents
(assumption based on 54 studio and one-bedroom units and 5 two-bedroom units) and 16 additional employees, which
would be consistent with the density allowed by the project site’s R-4 land use designation. Based on the type of proposed
development, the proposed expansion of the existing Village at the Palms assisted living facility is not anticipated to result
in a significant increase in demand on local parks and recreational facilities in the area . The assisted living facility would
include internal recreation opportunities for residents of the facility. Employees for construction and operation of the
project are anticipated to come from the local workforce and would not result in an increase in residents of the city. As the
project is consistent with the City’s General Plan designation and underlying zoning, any indirect population growth
resulting from the project would be consistent with the projected population growth for the City. Therefore, potential
project impacts associated with accelerated deterioration of existing facilities or construction of ne w park facilities would
be less than significant.
Page 158 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 59 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation measures are not required.
Conclusion
The project would not induce unplanned population growth because employees are likely to come from the local workforce.
Operation of the project may result in a marginal cumulative increase in demand on City recreational facilities; however,
construction of new facilities is not anticipated to be required. The project would not result in significant impacts to recr eational
facilities; therefore, mitigation measures are not required.
17. TRANSPORTATION
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing
the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities?
13, 46,
58 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section
15064.3, subdivision (b)?
1, 12,
45, 55 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
1, 23,
44 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? 1, 23,
45 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
The City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Circulation Element identifies current traffic levels and delays of public roadways
and identifies transportation goals and policies to guide development and express the community ’s preferences for current and
future conditions. Goals included in the plan include, but are not limited to, maintaining accessibility and protecting the
environment throughout San Luis Obispo while reducing dependence on single -occupant use of motor vehicles; reducing use of
cars by supporting and promoting alternatives, such as walking, riding buses and bicycles, and carpooling; promoting the safe
operation of all modes of transportation; and widening and extending streets only when there is a demonstrated need and when
the projects would cause no significant, long -term environmental problems.
Level of Service (LOS) is a term used to describe the operating conditions of an intersection or roadway based on factors such
as speed, travel time, queuing time, and safety. LOS designations range between A and F, with A representing the best operati ng
conditions and F the worst. The City’s Circulation Element establishes the minimum acceptable LOS standard for vehicles in
the downtown area of the city as LOS E and LOS D for all other areas, and states any degradation of the LOS below these
standards shall be interpreted as transportation operations deficiency under local policy thresholds. While LOS deficiencies are
evaluated for local policy conformity, LOS or other measures of automobile congestion/delay are not applied when evaluating
transportation impacts under CEQA.
The City of San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan (ATP) outlines goals and policies to promote walking, biking, and other
forms of active transportation throughout the city. The ATP provides a blueprint for creating a safe, connected, and efficient
citywide active transportation network. It lays out policies, funding strategies, supporting programs, infrastructure project s, and
implementation priorities to improve active transportation options and access for all community members.
In 2013 SB 743 was signed into law with the intent to “more appropriately balance the needs of congestion management with
Statewide goals related to infill development, promotion of public health through active transportation, and reduction of
greenhouse gas emissions” and required the California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to identify new
Page 159 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 60 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
metrics for identifying and mitigating transportation impacts within CEQA. As a result, in December 2018, the California Natu ral
Resources Agency certified and adopted updates to the State CEQA Guidelines. The revisions included new requirements related
to the implementation of SB 743 and identified VMT per capita, VMT per employee, and net VMT as new metrics for
transportation analysis under CEQA (as detailed in Section 15064.3[b]). In June 2020, the City formally adopted the transition
from LOS to VMT for the purposes of CEQA evaluation and also establish local VMT thresholds of significance.
The project site would be accessed by Palomar Avenue, Ramona Drive, and Broad Street. Palomar Avenue is a local residential
street, Ramona Drive is a neighborhood collector street, and Broad Street is located along the project’s frontage and is a two-
lane collector. At the project site, the City’s Circulation Element designates Broad Street as LOS C. LOS C streets are
characterized as good LOS with less distance between traffic and sidewalk and high volumes of traffic in the lane closest to the
sidewalk. Based on the City’s Traffic County & Speed Surveys Map, the average daily motor vehicle trip volume (ADT) on
Ramona Drive is 4,107. Average daily pedestrian volume is 129 trips, and average daily bicycle volume is 264 trips. On Broad
Street located along the project’s frontage, ADT volume is 3,609, average daily pedestrian volume is 190 trips, and average daily
bicycle volume is 174 trips. There are bicycle lanes and on-street parking along Ramona Drive, Palomar Avenue, and Broad
Street, and a bus stop is located along Ramona Drive, adjacent to the project site.
a) The project proposes expansion of the Village at the Palms assisted living facility within a developed, residential portion
of the city. The project site would be accessed by new driveway entrances off Ramona Drive and Palomar Avenue and an
existing driveway off Broad Street. As described above, the ADT volume for vehicles on Ramona Drive is 4,107 and the
ADT volume for vehicles on Palomar Avenue is 3,609. Implementation of the project would result in ap proximately 148
ADT along adjacent and other roadways in the city. The project would require the payment of the City’s standard Traffic
Impact Fees (TIFs) for maintenance of roads and other transportation infrastructure . Payment of TIFs would offset the
project’s incremental impacts related to a slight increase in ADT. The project site is located along Ramona Drive, which
has bicycle lanes and a transit stop, and the project would provide bicycle parking on-site, which may facilitate the use of
bicycling as a means of transportation for employees or guests. These features would be consistent with the City ’s ATP.
Therefore, with the payment of standard TIFs, project impacts associated with conflicts with any program, plan, ordinance,
or policy addressing transportation facilities would be less than significant.
b) The 2018 OPR SB 743 Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA states that absent substantial
evidence indicating that a project would generate a potentially significant level of VMT, or inconsistency with a n SCS or
general plan, projects that generate or attract fewer than 110 trips per day generally may be assumed to cause a less -than-
significant transportation impact. According to the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition, a continuing care retirement
community generates 2.5 ADT per occupied unit. The project would create 59 new continuing care retirement units,
estimated to generate 148 ADT. Although operation of the project would create more than 110 trips per day, based on the
City’s Residential VMT Screening Map, the project is located in an area of the city that would result in average VMT less
than or equal to 85% of the regional average, meaning a project in this area would result in VMT generati on below the
City’s adopted thresholds. Therefore, the project is not anticipated to generate VMT at a rate that is inconsistent with
adopted plans and impacts would be less than significant.
c) The project proposes two new driveway entrances located off Palomar Avenue and Ramona Drive. The driveways would
not contain dangerous curves, short sight distance, or other dangerous design features. The driveways would be designed
in accordance with City Public Works safety design standards, including the use of red “no parking” curb paint on either
side of the driveway entrance to allow for safe turning movements and provide motorist s an adequate line of sight from
the driveway. The project will be reviewed by the City’s Transportation and Engineering Divisions prior to approval of
any building permits. Therefore, project impacts associated with increased hazards due to a geometric design feature would
be less than significant.
d) During construction, the project may result in temporary traffic controls along Ramona Drive and Palomar Avenue;
however, full road closures would not be required during construction activities. Emergency access would be maintained
to the project site and surrounding areas during construction activities. Operational c omponents of the project have been
designed to comply with the State and City Fire Codes and would be subject to review by the City Fire Marshal to ensure
adequate emergency access has been provided. Therefore, potential impacts related to inadequate emergency access would
be less than significant.
Page 160 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 61 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation measures are not required.
Conclusion
The project would result in a net increase in trips and VMT and would exceed the City ’s established thresholds for VMT;
however, the project is in an area of the city that would result in average VMT less than or equal to 85% of the regional average,
meaning a project in this area would result in VMT generation below the City ’s adopted thresholds. The project would be required
to meet City Public Works safety design standards and would maintain adequate emergency access. Therefore, potential impacts
associated with transportation would be less than significant.
18. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources
Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, or cultural
landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and
scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to
a California Native American tribe, and that is: Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of
Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources
as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k)?
2, 54 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and
supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to
criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code
Section 5024.1? In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision
(c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency
shall consider the significance of the resource to a California
Native American tribe.
2, 54 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Evaluation
Approved in 2014, AB 52 added tribal cultural resources to the categories of resources that must be evaluated under CEQA.
Tribal cultural resources are defined as either of the following:
1) Sites, features, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe
that are either of the following:
a. Included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR);
or
b. Included in a local register of historical resources as defined in PRC Section 5020.1(k).
2) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its di scretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant
pursuant to criteria set forth in PRC Section 5024.1(c). In applying these criteria for the purposes of this paragraph, the
lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American Tribe.
Recognizing that tribes have expertise regarding their tribal history and practices, AB 52 requires lead agencies to provide notice
to tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of a proposed project if they have requested notice
of projects proposed within that area. If the tribe requests consultation within 30 days upon receipt of the notice, the lead agency
must consult with the tribe regarding the potential for adverse impacts on t ribal cultural resources because of a project.
Consultation may include discussing the type of environmental review necessary, the presence and/or significance of tribal
cultural resources, the level of significance of a project’s impacts on the tribal cultural resources, and available project alternatives
and mitigation measures recommended by the tribe to avoid or lessen potential impacts on tribal cultural resources.
Page 161 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 62 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Native American Tribes were notified about the project consistent with State and City regulations under AB 52 on August 6,
2021.
a,b) As described above, consultation with Native American Tribes under AB 52 was initiated on August 6, 2021. As of
September 28, 2021, two responses have been received. The first comment is from the yak titʸu titʸu yak tiłhini Northern
Chumash Tribe of San Luis Obispo County and Region regarding clarification of work along the creek has been received.
The second response was from the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians. As described in Section 5, Cultural Resources,
desktop-level and surface and subsurface testing of the project area did not uncover any known or unknown cultural or
tribal resources that have been listed or been found eligible for listing in the CRHR or in a local register of historical
resources as defined in PRC Section 5020.1. No significant cultural resources are known to occur within the project site.
Mitigation measures CR-1 through CR-3 are provided to address inadvertent discovery during project construction. With
these measures, impacts related to a substantial adverse change in the significance of tribal cultural resource would be less
than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measures CR-1 through CR-3.
Conclusion
With implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-1 through CR-3, the project would have a less-than-significant impact on tribal
cultural resources.
19. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or
expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage,
electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
1 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and
reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry,
and multiple dry years?
49, 50 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider
which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate
capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to
the provider’s existing commitments?
46,
48,60 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in
excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise
impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
47 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and
reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? 1 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
The City’s Utilities Department is the sole water provider within the city, provides potable and recycled water to the community,
and is responsible for water supply, treatment, distribution, and resource planning. The City ’s Water Resource Recovery Facility
(WRRF) treats all the wastewater from the city, Cal Poly, and the airport. The facility treats 4.5 million gallons of wastewater
per day. The WRRF manages and treats wastewater in accordance with standards established by the SWRCB to remove solids,
Page 162 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 63 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
reduce the amount of nutrients, and eliminate bacteria in treated wastewater . A portion of the treated water is recycled for
irrigation use within the city and the remaining flow is discharged to San Luis Obispo Creek.
Water service for the project would be provided by the City’s Utilities Department and the project would be served by the City’s
sewer system. The project site has existing utility infrastructure on-site, including a storm drain easement, sewer easements, a
water pipeline, an electrical line, and a gas line.
a) The project includes additional water, wastewater, stormwater, and energy infrastructure that would connect to City
infrastructure. Proposed infrastructure would be located within the proposed parking lots along Buildings 1 and 2. These
components have been evaluated for their potential to result in adverse environmental effects throughout this document.
Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-4, BIO-1 through BIO-7, CR-1 through CR-3, HAZ-1, and N-1 through N-4 would
reduce potentially significant environmental impacts resulting from expansion and establishment of new utility
connections associated with air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous
materials, noise, and tribal cultural resources to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, potential environmental impacts
associated with construction of utility connections would be less than significant with mitigation.
b) The project would be provided water through the City’s water system, which has four primary water sources—Whale
Rock Reservoir, Salinas Reservoir, Nacimiento Reservoir, and recycled water (for irrigation)—with groundwater serving
as a fifth supplemental source. The City’s diversification of water sources in the last several decades has allowed the City
to maintain sufficient water supplies even following the driest years on record. The total water available for the City in the
2020 water year (October 1, 2019, to September 30, 2020) was 10,107 AFY, which included 215 AFY of recycled water.
As this availability was adjusted following years of drought and updates to the City’s safe annual yield model, the
availability is considered a reasonable long-term safe yield value for the purposes of this analysis. The City’s water demand
for 2020 was 4,730 AF. The project’s estimated water demand is 6 AFY, which would be provided by the City’s water
supply. The City has adequate water supply to provide 6 AFY to the proposed project. Therefore, potential impacts related
to water supply would be less than significant.
c) The project would connect to the City’s wastewater system. Expanded wastewater infrastructure would be located within
the proposed parking lots on-site. The project would generate approximately 2 million gallons of wastewater annually and
would be served by the City’s sewer system. The City’s WRRF treats 4.5 million gallons of wastewater daily (City of San
Luis Obispo 2021). The project would result in an incremental increase in demand on the City ’s WRRF and wastewater
conveyance infrastructure, which would be capable of serving the proposed project. The project is consistent with the
general level of growth anticipated in the City’s General Plan and would be required to pay standard development impact
fees to offset the project’s incremental contribution to demand on the City’s WRRF. Therefore, impacts associated with
the wastewater treatment provider’s capacity to serve the project’s wastewater needs would be less than significant.
d) Based on the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle), the project would result in the
generation of approximately 320 pounds of solid waste per day (Table 9).
Table 9. Estimated Project Solid Waste Generation
Use Generation Rate Project
Pounds Solid Waste
Per Day
Nursing/Retirement Home 5 pounds/person/day 64 persons1 320
Total 320
1 Assumed 64 persons based on 54 studio and one-bedroom units and five two-bedroom units.
Project construction and operational solid waste materials would likely be disposed of at the Cold Canyon Landfill. Cold
Canyon Landfill has a total capacity of 23,900,000 cy and has the capacity to service 1,650 cy per day . Based on these
capacities, the Cold Canyon Landfill is expected to remain operational though at least 2040 and would be capable of
servicing the additional 320 pounds of solid waste per day generated by the project. Therefore, potential impacts related
to solid waste reduction goals and capacity would be less than significant.
Page 163 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 64 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
e) The project would be required to comply with goals, policies, and programs of the City’s COSE (Section 5) and the general
requirements of the City’s Development Standards for Solid Waste Services. Based on the general requirements of the
City’s Development Standards for Solid Waste Services, the project would be required to include a minimum of two
enclosed solid waste bins constructed in accordance with City standards and to be provided solid waste services by the
City, which would be picked up once a week. According to the City’s COSE, the project would be required to participate
in waste-reduction and recycling efforts. Therefore, based on required compliance with the City’s COSE and solid waste
requirements, the project would comply with regulations related to solid waste and potential impacts would be less than
significant.
Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-4, BIO-1 through BIO-7, CR-1 through CR-3, HAZ-1, and N-1 through N-4.
Conclusion
With implementation of the identified mitigation measures, the project’s potential impacts associated with utilities and service
systems would be less than significant.
20. WILDFIRE
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as
very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan? 1, 23 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate
wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant
concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a
wildfire?
1, 23,
51 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated
infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water
sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire
risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the
environment?
1, 23 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including
downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of
runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
1, 23 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
Urban fire hazards result from the materials, size, and spacing of buildings, and from the materials, equipment, and activiti es
they contain. Additional factors include access, available water volume and pressure, and response time for fire fighters. Based
on the City Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, the risk of wildland fires is greatest near the City limits where development meets
rural areas of combustible vegetation. Most of the community is within 1 mile of a designated High or Very High Fire Hazard
Severity Zone (FHSZ), which indicates significant risk to wildland fire.
The City’s Safety Element identifies four policies to address the potential hazards associated with wildfire, includ ing approving
development only when adequate fire suppression services and facilities are available, classification of wildland fire hazard
severity zones as prescribed by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), prohibition of new
subdivisions located within “Very High” wildland fire hazard severity zones, and continuation of enhancement of fire safety and
construction codes for buildings.
Page 164 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 65 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
According to the CAL FIRE FHSZ viewer, the project site is located within a Local Responsibility Area (LRA). Based on the
City’s Safety Element Maps, the project site is located within a developed portion of the city and has a low risk of wildfire.
a) Implementation of the project would not result in a significant temporary or permanent impact to any adopted emergency
response plans or emergency evacuation plans. The project may require temporary traffic controls along adjacent roadways
to the project area (Ramona Drive and Palomar Avenue); however, full road closures are not necessary and emergency
access and public ingress and egress would be maintained during implementation of the project. Breaks in utility service
may be necessary during connection to the City’s infrastructure. Any breaks in utility service would be temporary and
would not conflict with any emergency plans. Access roads and interior roads would be constructed to allow fire and other
emergency vehicles adequate access during project operation. Therefore, the project would maintain adequate public and
emergency access during project activities and would not conflict with emergency plans; therefore, impacts would be less
than significant.
b) The project area is located in a developed area of the city. The project site is located on the western portion of a previously
developed parcel and consists of a surface parking lot, landscaping, and a creek with associated riparian vegetation. The
project would not substantially change the existing topography of the project site. The project would result in the
conversion of the existing surface parking lot into a fully developed site comprised of two new buildings associated with
an existing assisted living facility. The proposed project would be required to meet all applicable stand ards for fire
prevention pursuant to the CBC and California Fire Code. For instance, the project would include the installation of a new
fire hydrant and fire department connection as well as additional an additional water line . A fire sprinkler system would
also be installed within the building. Therefore, the project would not exacerbate wildfire risks or expose project occupants
to substantial pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire . Potential impacts would be
less than significant.
c) The project includes the installation of expanded water, wastewater, stormwater, and energy extensions to be connected
to existing City infrastructure. These proposed infrastructure components would occur within an urbanized area and would
be required to be installed in full compliance with applicable CBC and California Fire Code regulations . Construction of
this infrastructure has been evaluated throughout this environmental document and would not exacerbate fire risks.
Therefore, potential impacts associated with exacerbation of fire risk or environmental impacts from installation of new
infrastructure would be less than significant.
d) The project site is generally flat and is not located near slopes or other areas subject to downstream flooding or landslides.
Based on required compliance with CBC standards for structural and other design components, the project would not
include any design elements that would expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or
downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post -fire slope instability, or drainage changes. Therefore, impacts
would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation measures are not required.
Conclusion
The project would not expose people or structures to new or exacerbated wildfire risks and would not require the development
of new or expanded infrastructure or maintenance to red uce wildfire risks. Therefore, potential impacts associated with wildfire
would be less than significant and mitigation measures are not required.
Page 165 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 66 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a
fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to
drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant
or animal community, substantially reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
1, 2,
15, 16,
18, 25 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
The project would be in a previously developed portion of the city of San Luis Obispo and the project vicinity generally contains
low habitat value for protected plant and animal species. The project site currently consists of a surface parking lot, non-native
ornamental landscaping, and Old Garden Creek and an associated riparian forest habitat. Old Garden Creek flows through the
central portion of the project site and would be avoided and protected by a 25- to 28-foot setback during project construction and
operation. There is potential for special-status plant and animal species to occur on-site, and mitigation measures have been
incorporated to avoid and minimize potential impacts to these resources. Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-7 have been
identified to avoid potential impacts to riparian habitat, Old Garden Creek, special-status plant and animal species, nesting and/or
migratory birds, and roosting bats.
There are no known historic or prehistoric resources within the project site and Mitigation Measures CR -1 through CR-3 would
reduce potential inadvertent discovery of these resources to less than significant. With implementation of identified mitigation
measures and standard requirements, the project would not have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range o f a
rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory.
Potential impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable”
means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the
effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable
future projects)?
N/A ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
The project includes the expansion of the Village at the Palms assisted living facility located within the R-4-PD zone. The project
would be consistent with growth assumed in the R-4 zone, and with approval of the Minor Use Permit, the project would be
consistent with the design standards of the R-4-PD zone. When project impacts are considered in combination with other
reasonably foreseeable impacts, the project’s potential cumulative impacts may be significant. Mitigation measures have been
identified to reduce project-related impacts to a less-than-significant level. With the implementation of identified project-specific
mitigation measures and payment of the City’s standard Development Impact Fees, the individual effects of the project would
be marginal and cumulative effects of the project would not be cumulatively considerable. Therefore, potential impacts would
be less than significant with mitigation.
Page 166 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 67 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
N/A ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
The project has the potential to result in significant impacts associated with air quality that, if left unmitigated, could result in
substantial adverse effects on human beings. Standard mitigation measures have been identified to reduce these potential impacts
to less than significant, including, but not limited to, standard idling restrictions, dust control measures, implementation of BMPs,
and compliance with the CARB ATCM for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations to avoid impacts
related to NOA. Additionally, standard noise BMPs have been included as mitigation to reduce short-term construction-related
noise impacts on surrounding sensitive receptor locations. With incorporation of identified project-specific mitigation and the
payment of the City’s standard Development Impact Fees, potential environmental effects of the project would not directly or
indirectly result in any substantial adverse effects on human beings . Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant
with mitigation.
Page 167 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 68 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
22. EARLIER ANALYSES
Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have
been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). In this case a discussion should
identify the following items:
a) Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review.
The potential environmental effects of d eveloping the project site with uses consistent with the R-4-PD zoning designation
were previously evaluated in the Certified General Plan Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (State Clearinghouse
[SCH] #2013121019), which was certified by the City Council in 2014. The Certified EIR is available on the City’s website
at: < https://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/community-development/planning-zoning/general-plan>
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately
analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addres sed by
mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
This IS/MND does not rely on a previously certified EIR or MND for its analysis. All the environmental analyses contained
herein are independent of previous CEQA documents; no tiering from a previous CEQA document is used.
c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated,” describe the mitigation
measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific
conditions of the project.
As discussed above, project-specific mitigation measures have been developed for t he project to address a more stringent
regulatory environment and more complex analysis methodology. All project-specific mitigation measures recommended in
this IS/MND are consistent with and build upon the programmatic mitigation measures identified in t he Certified EIR.
23. SOURCE REFERENCES
1. Hochhauser Blatter Architects (HBA). 2021. Village at the Palms 55 Broad Street San Luis Obispo, CA. Proposed
Assisted Living Project Plans.
2. City of San Luis Obispo. 2006. City of San Luis Obispo Conservation & Open Space Element (COSE). Available at:
<https://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=6651>.
3. City of San Luis Obispo. 2010. City of San Luis Obispo Community Design Guidelines. June. Available at:
<https://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=2104>.
4. California Scenic Highways, February 2017. Available at:
<https://www.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?useExisting=1&layers=f0259b1ad0fe4093a5604c9b838a486a
>.
5. City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, May 2019. Available at: <https://sanluisobispo.municipal.codes/Code>.
6. California Department of Conservation. 2016. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. Available at:
<https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/>.
7. City of San Luis Obispo. 2020. Interactive Parcel Viewer. March. Available at:
<http://slocity.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=3e0adee3aabd4805bd13f0d4705a4193 >.
8. California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2018. Area Designation Maps / State and National. December. Available
at: <https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/adm.htm>.
9. San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD). 2020. Naturally Occurring Asbestos Mapping
Tool. March. Available at:
<https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/viewer?mid=1YAKjBzVkwi1bZ4rQ1p6b2OMyvIM&ll=35.3649868053637
56%2C-120.52563349999997&z=10>.
10. San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLOACPD). 2012. CEQA Air Quality Handbook. April.
Available at: <https://storage.googleapis.com/slocleanair-
Page 168 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 69 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
org/images/cms/upload/files/CEQA_Handbook_2012_v2%20%28Updated%20Map2019%29_LinkedwithMemo.pd
f>.
11. San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLOACPD). 2001. 2001 San Luis Obispo County Clean Air
Plan. December. Available at: <https://storage.googleapis.com/slocleanair-
org/images/cms/upload/files/business/pdf/CAP.pdf>.
12. City of San Luis Obispo. 2021. City of San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan. Available at:
<https://www.slocity.org/Home/ShowDocument?id=29123>.
13. San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLOACPD). 2017. Clarification Memorandum for the San
Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District’s 2012 CEQA Air Quality Handbook. November. Available at:
<https://storage.googleapis.com/slocleanair-
org/images/cms/upload/files/FINAL_Clarification%20Memorandum%2020172.pdf >.
14. California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2015. Asbestos Airborne Toxic Control Measure for Construction, Grading,
Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations. Available at: < https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/toxics/atcm/asb2atcm.htm>.
15. City of San Luis Obispo. 2019. San Luis Obispo Heritage Trees Map. Available at:
<http://slocity.maps.arcgis.com/apps/Solutions/s2.html?appid=74e2e5bf9e534eaabf95b0917da8bbc7 >.
16. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2020. National Wetlands Inventory Map. Available at:
<https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/Mapper.html>.
17. City of San Luis Obispo. 2019. City of San Luis Obispo Zoning Regulations. Available at:
<https://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=5861>.
18. County of San Luis Obispo. 2019. Cultural Resource Maps.
19. City of San Luis Obispo. 2020. Community Choice Energy. Website. Available at:
<https://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/city-administration/sustainability/community-choice-
energy>.
20. City of San Luis Obispo. 2020. City of San Luis Obispo Climate Action Plan. June. Available at:
<https://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=27835>.
21. California Building Code, 2019. Available at: < https://up.codes/viewer/california/ibc-2018>.
22. California Department of Conservation. 2010. Fault Activity Map of California. Available at:
<https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/fam/>.
23. City of San Luis Obispo. 2014. City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Safety Element. Available at:
<https://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=6645>.
24. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). n.d. Areas of Land Subsidence in California. Available at:
<https://ca.water.usgs.gov/land_subsidence/california-subsidence-areas.html>.
25. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2020 Web Soil Survey. Available at:
<https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx>.
26. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 2004. Geologic Map of the San Luis Obispo Quadrangle, San Luis Obispo County,
California. Available at: < https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/Prodesc/proddesc_71738.htm>.
27. AECOM. 2015. San Francisco VA Medical Center Long Range Development Plan Draft Programmatic EIS , Section
3.4, Cultural Resources. Available at:
<https://www.sanfrancisco.va.gov/ArchivedDocs/3_4_Cultural_Resources.pdf >
28. California Department of Toxic Substances Control. 2020. Envirostor. Available at:
<https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/>.
29. State Water Resources Control Board. 2020. Geotracker. Available at: <https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/>.
30. California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA). 2020. Cortese List Data Resources. Available at:
<https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/>
Page 169 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 70 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
31. County of San Luis Obispo. 2005. County of San Luis Obispo Airport Land Use Plan . May. Available at:
<https://www.sloairport.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/ALUP_TXT.pdf>.
32. City of San Luis Obispo. 2019. Flood Preparedness Map. Available at:
<http://slocity.maps.arcgis.com/apps/Viewer/index.html?appid=e790e7eb2923499b9ddc91126d6376e0 >.
33. California Department of Water Resources. 2019. SGMA Groundwater Management. Available at:
<https://water.ca.gov/Programs/Groundwater-Management/SGMA-Groundwater-Management>.
34. County of San Luis Obispo. 2019. San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Basin. Available at:
<https://www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Public-Works/Committees-Programs/Sustainable-Groundwater-
Management-Act-(SGMA)/San-Luis-Obispo-Valley-Groundwater-Basin.aspx>.
35. California Department of Conservation (DOC). 2009. Tsunami Inundation Map for Emergency Planning Port San
Luis Quadrangle. Available at: <https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/tsunami/maps/San-Luis-Obispo>.
36. State Water Resources Control Board. 2019. Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coast Basin. Available at:
<https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralcoast/publications_forms/publications/basin_plan/amendment/draft_resol_
attch_a_basin_plan_edits_only.pdf >.
37. City of San Luis Obispo. 1996. City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Noise Element. Available at:
<https://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=6643>.
38. Federal Highway Administration. 2017. Construction Noise Handbook: Construction Equipment Noise Levels and
Ranges. September. Available at:
<https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/Environment/noise/construction_noise/handbook/handbook00.cfm >.
39. Federal Transit Administration (FTA). 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. September.
Available at: <https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/research -innovation/118131/transit-noise-and-
vibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta-report-no-0123_0.pdf>.
40. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2013. Transportation and Construction-Induced Vibration
Guidance Manual. September. Available at: <http://website.dot.ca.gov/env/noise/docs/tcvgm-sep2013.pdf>.
41. City of San Luis Obispo. 2020. City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Annual Report. Available at: <
https://www.slocity.org/home/showpublisheddocument/29847/637539899241100000 >.
42. City of San Luis Obispo. 2020. 2020-2028 General Plan Housing Element. November. Available at:
<https://www.slocity.org/home/showpublisheddocument?id=28839>.
43. City of San Luis Obispo. 2018. Community Development Department Development Impact Fees. Available at:
<https://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=20198>.
44. City of San Luis Obispo. 2021. City of San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Element. Available at:
<https://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/parks-and-recreation/parks-and-recreation-plan-and-
element-update
>.
45. City of San Luis Obispo. 2017. City of San Luis Obispo Circulation Element. October. Available at:
<https://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=20412>
46. City of San Luis Obispo. 2020. Wastewater Treatment, City of San Luis Obispo Utilities Department Webpage .
Accessed March 2020. Available at: <https://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/utilities-
department/wastewater/wastewater-treatment>.
47. California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). 2020. SWIS Facility Detail Cold Canyon
Landfill, Inc. Available at: <https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SWFacilities/Directory/40-AA-0004/Detail/>.
48. City of San Luis Obispo. 2014. 2035 Land Use & Circulation Update Draft Program EIR. Table 4.16‐7 Proposed
Land Use Element Development Wastewater Generation.
49. City of San Luis Obispo. 2020. 2020 Water Resources Status Report. City of San Luis Obispo Water Division.
Available at: <https://www.slocity.org/home/showpublisheddocument?id=29191>.
Page 170 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 71 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
50. City of San Luis Obispo. 2015. Final Potable Water Distribution System Operations Master Plan, Table 4‐2. Existing
Water Demand Factors.
51. City of San Luis Obispo. 2019. Community Wildfire Protection Plan. Available at:
<https://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=23872.
52. California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2017. California ’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. November.
https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf
53. Kevin Merk Associates, LLC. (KMA). 2021. Biological Resources Assessment for the Village at the Palms, San Luis
Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California (Assessor ’s Parcel Number 052-162-021). March 23.
54. Heritage Discoveries Inc. 1997. Phase 1 and Phase 2 Archaeological evaluations of Property at 61 Broad Street, San
Luis Obispo, California. March 22.
55. City of San Luis Obispo. 2020. Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines. 2nd Edition. June.
56. San Luis Obispo Fire Department (SLOFD). 2020. 2020 San Luis Obispo Fire Department Annual Report. Available
at < https://www.slocity.org/home/showpublisheddocument/28869/637441408193100000 >
57. City of San Luis Obispo. 2021. About the Department. Available at <
https://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/police-department/about-the-department>
58. City of San Luis Obispo. 2021. Traffic Counts and Speed Surveys. Available at <
https://slocity.maps.arcgis.com/apps/OnePane/basicviewer/index.html?appid=f808ee341ad743259b9f7b455cd7b69
b>
59. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2021. Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM). Available at <
https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search?AddressQuery>
60. City of San Luis Obispo. 2021. Wastewater Treatment. Available at
<https://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/utilities-department/wastewater/wastewater-treatment>
61. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2017. Construction Noise Handbook. Available at
<https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1805/ML18059A141.pdf>
62. Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E). 2019. Exploring Clean Energy Solutions. Webpage. Available at
<https://www.pge.com/en_US/about-pge/environment/what-we-are-doing/clean-energy-solutions/clean-energy-
solutions.page?WT.mc_id=Vanity_cleanenergy>
Page 171 of 222
Issues, Discussion, and Supporting Information Sources
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 72 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Attachments
1. Hochhauser Blatter Architects (HBA), Village at the Palms 55 Broad Street San Luis Obispo, California Proposed Assisted
Living Project Plans (January 2021)
2. Kevin Merk Associates, LLC. (KMA), Biological Resources Assessment for the Village at the Palms, San Luis Obispo,
San Luis Obispo County, California (Assessor’s Parcel Number 052-162-021) (March 2021)
3. Heritage Discoveries Inc., Phase 1 and Phase 2 Archaeological Evaluations of Property at 61 Broad Street, San Luis
Obispo, California (March 1997)
4. CEQA GHG Emissions Analysis Compliance Checklist
5. California Emission Estimator Model (CalEEMod) Report, version 2020.4.0
Page 172 of 222
Required Mitigation and Monitoring Programs
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 73 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
REQUIRED MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAMS
Air Quality
AQ-1 During all construction activities and use of diesel vehicles, the Applicant shall implement the following idling control
techniques:
1. Idling Restrictions Near Sensitive Receptors for Both On- and Off-Road Equipment
a. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors if feasible;
b. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors shall not be permitted;
c. Use of alternative fueled equipment shall be used whenever possible; and
d. Signs that specify the no idling requirements shall be posted and enforced at the construction site.
2. California Diesel Idling Regulations. On-road diesel vehicles shall comply with Section 2485 of Title 13
of the California Code of Regulations. This regulation limits idling from diesel-fueled commercial motor
vehicles with gross vehicular weight ratings of more than 10,000 pounds and licensed for operation on
highways. It applies to California and non-California based vehicles. In general, the regulation specifies that
drivers of said vehicles:
a. Shall not idle the vehicle’s primary diesel engine for greater than 5 minutes at any location, except
as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation; and
b. Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system (APS) to power a heater, air conditioner,
or any ancillary equipment on that vehicle during sleeping or resting in a sleeper berth for greater
than 5 minutes at any location when within 1,000 feet of a restricted area, except as noted in
Subsection (d) of the regulation.
Signs must be posted in the designated queuing areas and job sites to remind drivers of the 5 -minute idling
limit. The specific requirements and exceptions in the regulation can be r eviewed at the following website:
www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/truck-idling/2485.pdf.
AQ-2 During all construction and ground-disturbing activities, the Applicant shall implement the following particulate
matter control measures and detail each measure on the project grading and building plans:
1. Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible.
2. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust fro m leaving the site
and from exceeding the San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD) limit of 20%
opacity for no greater than 3 minutes in any 60 -minute period. Increased watering frequency shall be required
whenever wind speeds exceed 15 miles per hour (mph) and cessation of grading activities during periods of
winds over 25 mph. Reclaimed (non-potable) water is to be used in all construction and dust-control work.
3. All dirt stockpile areas (if any) shall be sprayed daily and covered with tarps or other dust barriers as needed.
4. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans shall be
implemented as soon as possible, following completion of any soil -disturbing activities.
5. Exposed grounds that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than 1 month after initial grading shall be
sown with a fast-germinating, non-invasive, grass seed and watered until vegetation is established.
6. All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using approved chemical binders, jute
netting, or other methods approved in advance by the SLOAPCD.
7. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. In addition,
building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.
Page 173 of 222
Required Mitigation and Monitoring Programs
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 74 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
8. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the
construction site.
9. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or shall maintain at least 2 feet
of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with California
Vehicle Code Section 23114.
10. Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto stre ets or wash off trucks and
equipment leaving the site. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent
paved roads.
11. Water sweepers shall be used with reclaimed water where feasible. Roads shall be pre -wetted prior to
sweeping when feasible.
12. All PM10 mitigation measures required shall be shown on grading and building plans.
13. The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive dust emissions and
enhance the implementation of the measures as necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible
emissions below the SLOAPCD limit of 20% opacity for no greater than 3 minutes in any 60 -minute period.
Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and
telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the SLOAPCD Compliance Division prior to the start
of any site preparation, grading, or earthwork.
14. All off-road construction equipment shall be Tier 3 or higher.
AQ-3 Prior to initiation of site preparation/construction activities, the Applicant shall retain a registered geologist to conduct
a geologic evaluation of the property including sampling and testing for naturally occurring asbestos in full compliance
with California Air Resources Board (CARB) Air Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) for Construction, Grading,
Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations (CARB ATCM Section 93105) and SLOAPCD requirements. This
geologic evaluation shall be submitted to the City Community Development Department upon completion. If the
geologic evaluation determines that the project would not have the potential to disturb naturally occurring asbestos
(NOA), the Applicant must file an Asbestos ATCM exemption request with the SLOAPCD.
AQ-4 If NOA are determined to be present on-site, proposed earthwork and construction activities shall be conducted in full
compliance with the various regulatory jurisdictions regarding NOA, including the CARB ATCM for Construction,
Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations (CARB ATCM Section 93105) and requirements stipulated in
the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) (40 Code of Federal Regulations 61,
Subpart M – Asbestos). These requirements include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. Written notification, within at least 10 business days of activities commencing, to the SLOAPCD;
2. Preparation of an asbestos survey conducted by a Certified Asbestos Consultant; and
3. Implementation of applicable removal and disposal protocol and requirements for identified NOA.
Monitoring Program: Measures AQ-1 through AQ-4 shall be incorporated into project grading and building plans for review
and approval by the City Community Development Department. Compliance shall be verified by the City during regular
inspections, in coordination with the SLOAPCD, as necessary. The applicant shall submit the geologic evaluation detailed in
measure AQ-3 to the City Community Development Department upon completion.
Biological Resources
BIO-1 Obscure Bumble Bee. Prior to any site disturbance and/or construction activities associated with the proposed project,
the Applicant shall retain a City-approved qualified biologist to conduct preconstruction survey(s) for obscure bumble
bee within suitable habitat areas (e.g., small mammal burrows, thatched/bunch grasses, upland scrubs, brush piles,
unmowed/overgrown areas, dead trees, hollow logs, etc.) on the project site and areas within 50 feet of the project
site. At a minimum, the survey effort shall include visual search methods targeting colonies or individuals. Upon
completion of the surveys, the biologist shall prepare a survey report summarizing the findings and submit it to the
City Community Development Department.
Page 174 of 222
Required Mitigation and Monitoring Programs
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 75 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
If the survey(s) establish presence of obscure bumble bee within the areas of disturbance, the Applicant shall retain a
City-approved biologist to prepare a Biological Resources Management Plan (Management Plan) subject to review
and approval of the City Community Development Department in coordination with the California Department of
Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). The Management Plan shall include avoidance measures to conduct project activities in
such a manner that avoids physical disturbances to the colony/nest site, including a minimu m 50-foot no disturbance
buffer to avoid take and potentially significant impacts. Upon approval by the City Community Development
Department and prior to and during construction, the Management Plan shall be implemented to ensure potentially
significant impacts to the obscure bumble bee are avoided. Following approval, avoidance measures included in the
Management Plan shall be implemented at appropriate times during construction activities.
BIO-2 Northern California Legless Lizard. Between 2 and 4 weeks prior to initiation of construction activities, a City-
approved biologist shall conduct surveys for northern California legless lizards. The surveyor shall utilize hand search
or cover board methods in areas of disturbance where northern California legless lizards are expected to be found
(e.g., under shrubs, other vegetation, or debris within the ornamental and riparian habitats on-site). If cover board
methods are used, they shall commence at least 30 days prior to the start of construction. Hand search su rveys shall
be completed immediately prior to and during grading activities. During grading activities, the City-approved biologist
shall walk behind the grading equipment to capture legless lizards that are unearthed by the equipment. The surveyor
shall capture and relocate any legless lizards or other reptiles observed during the survey effort. The captured
individuals shall be relocated from the construction area and placed in suitable habitat on -site but outside of the work
area. Following the survey and monitoring efforts, the City-approved biologist shall submit to the City a project
completion report that documents the number of northern California legless lizards and other reptiles captured and
relocated, and the number of legless lizards or other re ptiles taken during grading activities. Observations of these
species or other special-status species shall be documented on California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) forms
and submitted to the CDFW upon project completion.
BIO-3 Tree Replacement. In accordance with the City’s Municipal Code for Tree Removal (12.24.090), trees that are
removed with a minimum diameter at breast height (dbh) of 3 inches shall be replaced at a 1:1 ratio on-site. A
compensatory tree planting program sh all be developed and implemented and shall include areas within the creek
setback area. Additional tree planting shall take place within the development as part of the landscaping effort to
mitigate all tree removal on the site. The Applicant shall meet the final specifications of the City’s municipal code for
tree protection and replacement to receive permit approval.
BIO-4 Migratory Birds. If any ground disturbance will occur during the nesting bird season (February 1 –September 15),
prior to any ground-disturbing activity, a preconstruction nesting bird survey shall be conducted by a qualified
biologist within 1 week prior to the start of activities. If nesting birds are located on or near the project site, they shal l
be avoided until they have successfully fledged, or the nest is no longer deemed active. A non -disturbance buffer of
50 feet will be implemented for non -listed, passerine species and a 250-foot buffer will be implemented for raptor
species. No construction activities will be permitted within established nesting bird buffers until a qualified biologist
has determined that the young have fledged or that proposed construction activities would not cause adverse impacts
to the nest, adults, eggs, or young. If special-status avian species are identified, no work shall be conducted until an
appropriate buffer is determined in consultation with the City and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and/or
CDFW.
BIO-5 Roosting Bat Surveys. Within 2 weeks prior to removal of any trees, a qualified biologist shall survey the proposed
trees to be removed to identify if roosting bats are present. If bats are found to be roosting, tree removal will be
postponed until such time that roosting bats are no longer present. If postponement is not feasible, a Bat Ex clusion
Plan shall be prepared by a qualified biologist and submitted to the CDFW and the City for review and approval prior
to construction. At a minimum, the exclusion plan shall describe the proposed action, background on the surveys
conducted to date, installation and removal of exclusion materials, and the reporting process.
BIO-6 Worker Environmental Awareness Program. As an additional protection measure to avoid impacts to the creek
corridor, riparian habitat, nesting birds, and other wildlife, the project Applicant shall have a City-qualified biologist
prepare a Worker Environmental Awareness Program that will be presented to all project personnel prior to the start
of construction. This program shall detail measures to avoid impacts on biological re sources and shall include a
description of special-status species potentially occurring on the project site and their natural history, the status of the
species and their protection under environmental laws and regulations, and the penalties for take. Review of the erosion
Page 175 of 222
Required Mitigation and Monitoring Programs
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 76 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
and sediment control measures (see Mitigation Measure BIO-7), as well as any other appropriate recommendations,
shall be given as actions to avoid impacts to all wildlife during construction. Other aspects of the training shall include
a description of general measures to protect wildlife, including:
1. Delineation of the allowable work area, staging areas, access points, and limits to vehicle access;
2. Storage of all pipes, metal tubing, or similar materials stored or stacked on the project si te for one or more
overnight periods shall be either securely capped before storage or thoroughly inspected for wildlife before
the materials are moved, buried, capped, or otherwise used.
3. Inspected of materials stored on-site, such as lumber, plywood, and rolls of silt fence, for wildlife that may
have sheltered under or within the materials;
4. Use of netting to exclude birds from nesting in construction materials;
5. Constructing escape ramps in all excavations and trenches more than 6-inches deep;
6. Contact information for the City-approved biologist and instructions should any wildlife species be detected
in the work site;
7. Dust suppression methods during construction activities when necessary to meet air quality standards and
protect biological resources; and
8. Methods for containment of food-related trash items (e.g., wrappers, cans, bottles, food scraps), small
construction debris (e.g., nails, bits of metal and plastic), and other human -generated debris (e.g., cigarette
butts) in animal-proof containers and removal from the site on a weekly basis.
All project personnel who have attended the training shall sign an attendance sheet. The program shall be repeated for
any new crews that arrive subsequently on the site.
BIO-7 Riparian Area. Prior to ground disturbance or other construction activity, the proposed 25- to 28-foot setback from
the Old Garden Creek top of bank shall be identified on all construction plans and shall be mapped on-site through
installation of protective fencing or other measures to demarcate the limits of construction in proximity to Old Garden
Creek.
Monitoring Program: The survey requirements of Mitigation Measures BIO -1, BIO-2, BIO-4, and BIO-5 and delineation
requirements of Mitigation Measure BIO-7 shall be incorporated into the project grading and building plans for review and
approval by the City Community Development Department . Compliance shall be verified through submittal of an obscure
bumble bee survey report, a northern California legless lizard survey report, a preconstruction nesting bird survey report, and
a roosting bat survey report to the City Community Development Department. Mitigation Measure BIO-6 requires construction
personnel to participate in environmental awareness training and sign a sign-in sheet following the training. The sign-in sheet
shall be submitted to the City Community Development Department to confirm that all construction personnel have attended.
Compliance shall be verified by the City prior to the start of construction and durin g regular inspections, as necessary.
Cultural Resources
CR-1 Prior to construction activities, a City-qualified archaeologist shall conduct cultural resource awareness training for
all construction personnel, including the following:
1. Review the types of archaeological artifacts that may be uncovered;
2. Provide examples of common archaeological artifacts to examine;
3. Review what makes an archaeological resource significant to archaeologists and local Native Americans;
4. Describe procedures for notifying involved or interested parties in case of a new discovery;
5. Describe reporting requirements and responsibilities of construction personnel;
6. Review procedures that shall be used to record, evaluate, and mitigate new discoveries; and
7. Describe procedures that would be followed in the case of discovery of disturbed as well as intact human
burials and burial-associated artifacts.
Page 176 of 222
Required Mitigation and Monitoring Programs
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 77 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
CR-2 If cultural resources are encountered during subsurface earthwork activities, all ground -disturbing activities within a
25-foot radius of the find shall cease and the City shall be notified immediately. Work shall not continue until a City -
qualified archaeologist assesses the find and determines the need for further study. If the find includes Native
American-affiliated materials, a local Native American tribal representative will be contacted to work in conjunction
with the City-approved archaeologist to determine the need for further study. A standard inadvertent discovery clause
shall be included in every grading and construction contract to inform contractors of this requirement. Any previously
unidentified resources found during construction shall be recorded on appropriate California Department of Parks and
Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance in terms of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
criteria by a qualified archaeologist.
If the resource is determined significant under CEQA, the qualified archaeologist shall prepare and implement a
research design and archaeological data recovery plan, in conjunction with locally affiliated Native American
representative(s) as necessary, that will capture those categories of data for which the site is significant. The
archaeologist shall also perform appropriate technical analysis, prepare a comprehensive report, and file it with the
Central Coast Information Center (CCIC), located at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and provide for the
permanent curation of the recovered materials.
CR-3 In the event that human remains are exposed during ground-disturbing activities associated with the project, an
immediate halt work order shall be issued, and the City Community Development Director and locally affiliated Native
American representative(s) (as necessary) shall be notified. California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires
that no further disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains shall
occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public
Resources Code (PRC) Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner
shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. These requirements shall be printed on all
building and grading plans.
Monitoring Program: The conditions in Mitigation Measures CR-1 through CR-3 shall be noted on all grading and
construction plans. The City shall review and approve the City -qualified archaeologist consistent with the Archaeological
Resource Preservation Program Guidelines.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Implement Mitigation Measures AQ-1.
GHG-1 A Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan (GGRP) shall be prepared for the proposed project and shall be submitte d to the
City for review and approval prior to issuance of grading or building permits. The GGRP shall require annual impacts
to be quantified over the life of the project to also account for reduction in project impacts due to future emission
reduction technology that is included in the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) and shall reduce
annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the development by a minimum of 276.08 metric tons of carbon dioxide
equivalence (MTCO2e) per year over the operational life of the proposed project. GHG emissions may be reduced
through the implementation of on-site mitigation measures, off-site mitigation measures, or through the purchase of
carbon offsets. It is recommended that the GGRP incorporate GHG-reduction measures identified in the City of San
Luis Obispo’s CEQA GHG Emissions Analysis Compliance Checklist, Climate Action Plan Consistency Checklist for
New Development, as listed below. In the event that carbon offsets are required, carbon offsets shall be purc hased
from a validated/verifiable source, such as the California Climate Action Registry, and approved by City Planning
staff prior to purchase. Demonstrated reduction of 276.08 MTCO2e per year over the operational life of the project
could be achieved through a combination of the following specific measures. All or some of these measures may be
elected and incorporated into the GGRP to provide the required reduction .
1. The project shall be provided electricity by 3CE.
2. The project could offset natural gas usage by building more efficient and higher performing buildings
and performing retrofits on existing buildings..
3. The project shall be designed to minimize barriers to pedestrian access and interconnectivity.
Page 177 of 222
Required Mitigation and Monitoring Programs
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 78 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
4. The project shall be designed to provide safe and convenient access to public transit contiguous to the
project site.
5. Additional Transportation Demand Management (TDM) reduction measures could be included to reduce
vehicle miles traveled (VMT), which include but are not limited to:
a. Telecommuting;
b. Car sharing;
c. Shuttle service;
d. Carpools;
e. Vanpools;
f. Participation in the SLO Rideshare Back ‘N’ Forth Club;
g. Transit subsidies; and
h. Off-site sustainable transportation infrastructure improvements.
6. The project shall provide organic waste pick up and shall provide the appropriate on-site enclosures
consistent with the provisions of the City’s Development Standards for Solid Waste Services.
7. Carbon offsets could be purchased from a validated/verifiable source, such as the California Climate
Action Registry, and approved by City Planning staff prior to purchase.
Monitoring Program: Mitigation Measure AQ-1 shall be incorporated into project grading and building plans for review and
approval by the City Community Development Department. Mitigation Measure GHG-1 shall be submitted to the City for
review and approval prior to issuance of grading or building permits . Compliance shall be verified by the City during regular
inspections, in coordination with the SLOAPCD, as necessary.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Implement Mitigation Measures AQ-3 and AQ-4.
HAZ-1 Prior to initiation of site preparation, vegetation removal, and earth-moving activities, the project contractor shall
prepare and implement a Hazardous Materials Management Plan that detai ls procedures that will be taken to ensure
proper transport, use, and storage of hazardous construction materials and the appropriate handling, stockpiling,
testing, and disposal of excavated materials to prevent the inadvertent release of hazardous constr uction materials
and/or contaminated soil and demolished materials to the environment during construction activities. Elements of the
plan shall include, but would not be limited to, the following:
Worker Health and Safety
1. Accident prevention measures.
2. Measures to address hazardous materials and other site-specific worker health and safety issues during
construction, including the specific level of protection required for construction workers. This shall include
preparation of a site-specific health and safety plan in accordance with federal Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA) regulations (29 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 1910.120) and California
Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) regulations (8 California Code of Regulations
[CCR] 5192) to address worker health and safety issues during construction.
3. The requirement that all construction crew members be trained regarding best practices for the proper
transport, use, and storage of hazardous construction materials and the appropriate handling, stockpiling,
testing, and disposal of excavated materials prior to beginning work.
Soil Contamination
1. Procedures for the proper handling, stockpiling, testing, and disposal of excavated materials in accordance
with CCR Title 14 and Title 22.
Page 178 of 222
Required Mitigation and Monitoring Programs
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 79 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
2. Soil contamination evaluation and management procedures, including how to properly identify potential
contamination (e.g., soil staining, odors, or buried material), the requirement that construction activities
within a 50-foot-radius of potentially contaminated soil be halted until the hazard has been assessed and
appropriately addressed, the requirement that access to potentially contaminated areas be limited to properly
trained personnel, and procedures for notification and reporting, includi ng internal management and local
agencies (e.g., fire department, City of San Luis Obispo), as needed.
3. Monitoring of ground-disturbing activities for soil contamination may include visual and organic vapor
monitoring by personnel with appropriate hazardous materials training, including 40 hours of Hazardous
Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) training.
4. If visual and organic vapor monitoring indicates signs of suspected contaminated soil, then soil samples shall
be collected and analyzed to characterize soil quality.
5. Evaluation of all potentially contaminated materials encountered during project construction activities in
accordance with applicable federal, State, and local regulations and/or guidelines governing hazardous waste.
All materials deemed to be hazardous shall be remediated and/or disposed of following applicable regulatory
agency regulations and/or guidelines. Disposal sites for both remediated and non -remediated soils shall be
identified prior to beginning construction. All evalua tion, remediation, treatment, and/or disposal of
hazardous waste shall be supervised and documented by qualified hazardous waste personnel.
Hazardous Construction Materials
1. Appropriate work practices necessary to effectively comply with applicable environmental laws and
regulations, including hazardous materials management, handling, storage, disposal, and emergency
response. These work practices include the following: an on-site hazardous material spill kit shall be provided
for small spills; totally enclosed containment shall be provided for all trash; and all construction waste,
including trash, litter, garbage, other solid waste, petroleum products, and other potentially hazardous
materials, shall be removed to an appropriate waste facility permitted or otherwise authorized to treat, store,
or dispose of such materials.
2. The requirement that hazardous construction materials must be stored and equipment must be refueled at
least 50 feet from storm drain inlets, creeks, and other drainage features and covered with tarps or stored
inside buildings to ensure that materials are not released to the air during windy conditions or exposed to
rain.
3. Procedures for proper containment of any spills or inadvertent releases of hazardous materials.
4. Notification requirements in the event of an accidental release of hazardous materials into the environment.
Construction crew members shall immediately notify a construction foreperson who shall then report the
release to the City of San Luis Obispo to ensure the release is remediated in accordance with City
requirements.
Monitoring Program: Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 shall be incorporated into project grading and building plans for review
and approval by the City Community Development Department. Compliance shall be verified through submittal of a Hazardous
Materials Management Plan to the City Community Development Department. Mitigation Measures AQ-3 and AQ-4 shall be
incorporated into project grading and building plans for review and approval b y the City Community Development Department.
Compliance shall be verified by the City during regular inspections, in coordination with the SLOAPCD, as necessary. The
applicant shall submit the geologic evaluation detailed in measure AQ-3 to the City Community Development Department
upon completion.
Hydrology and Water Quality
Implement Mitigation Measure BIO-7.
Monitoring Program: Delineation requirements of Mitigation Measure BIO-7 shall be incorporated into the project grading
and building plans for review and approval by the City Community Development Department. Compliance shall be verified by
the City prior to the start of construction and during regular inspections, as necessary .
Page 179 of 222
Required Mitigation and Monitoring Programs
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 80 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Land Use and Planning
Implement Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-7.
Monitoring Program: The survey requirements of Mitigation Measures BIO -1, BIO-2, BIO-4, and BIO-5 and delineation
requirements of Mitigation Measure BIO-7 shall be incorporated into the project grading and building plans for review and
approval by the City Community Development Department. Compliance shall be verified through submittal of an obscure
bumble bee survey report, a northern California legless lizard survey report, a preconstruction nesting bird survey report, and
a roosting bat survey report to the City Community Development Department. Mitigation Measure BIO-6 requires construction
personnel to participate in environmental awareness training and sign a sign -in sheet following the training. The sign-in sheet
shall be submitted to the City Community Development Department to confirm that all construction personnel have attended.
Compliance shall be verified by the City prior to the start of construction and during regular inspections, as necessary.
Noise
N-1 For the entire duration of the construction phase of the project, the following Best Management Practices (BMPs)
shall be adhered to:
1. Stationary construction equipment that generates noise that exceeds 60 A-weighted decibels (dBA) at the
project boundaries shall be shielded with the most mode rn noise control devices (i.e., mufflers, lagging,
and/or motor enclosures).
2. Impact tools (e.g., jack hammers, pavement breakers, rock drills, etc.) used for project construction shall be
hydraulically or electrically powered wherever possible to avoid noise associated with compressed air
exhaust from pneumatically powered tools.
3. Where use of pneumatic tools is unavoidable, an exhaust muffler on the compressed air exhaust shall be used.
4. All construction equipment shall have the manufacturers’ recommended noise abatement methods installed,
such as mufflers, engine enclosures, and engine vibration insulators, intact and operational.
5. All construction equipment shall undergo inspection at periodic intervals to ensure proper maintenance and
presence of noise control devices (e.g., mufflers, shrouding, etc.).
N-2 Construction plans shall note construction hours, truck routes, and all construction noise BMPs, and shall be reviewed
and approved by the City Community Development Department prior to iss uance of grading/building permits. The
City shall provide and post signs stating these restrictions at construction entry sites prior to commencement of
construction and maintained throughout the construction phase of the project. All construction workers shall be briefed
at a preconstruction meeting on construction hour limitations and how, why, and where BMP measures are to be
implemented.
N-3 For all construction activity at the project site, additional noise attenuation techniques shall be employed as n eeded to
ensure that noise levels are maintained within levels allowed by the City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, Title 9,
Chapter 9.12 (Noise Control). Such techniques shall include, but are not limited to:
• Sound blankets shall be used on noise-generating equipment;
• Stationary construction equipment that generates noise levels above 65 dBA at the project boundaries shall
be shielded with a barrier that meets a sound transmission class (a rating of how well noise barriers attenuate
sound) of 25;
• All diesel equipment shall be operated with closed engine doors and shall be equipped with factory-
recommended mufflers;
• The movement of construction-related vehicles, with the exception of passenger vehicles, along roadways
adjacent to sensitive receptors shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 A.M. and 7:00 P.M., Monday
through Saturday. No movement of heavy equipment shall occur on Sundays or official holidays (e.g.,
Thanksgiving, Labor Day); and
• Temporary sound barriers shall be constructed between const ruction sites and affected uses.
Page 180 of 222
Required Mitigation and Monitoring Programs
ER # EID-0528-2021
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 81 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
N-4 The project contractor shall inform residents and business operators at properties within 300 feet of the project of
proposed construction timelines and noise compliant procedures to minimize potential annoyance related to
construction noise. Signs shall be in place prior to and throughout grading and construction activities informing the
public that noise-related complaints shall be directed to the construction manager prior to the City’s Community
Development Department.
Monitoring Program: Construction plans shall note construction hours, truck routes, and all construction noise BMPs, and
shall be reviewed and approved by the City Community Development Department prior to issuance of grading/building permits .
Compliance shall be verified by the City prior to the start of construction and during regular inspections, as necessary .
Tribal Cultural Resources
Implement Mitigation Measures CR-1 through CR-3.
Monitoring Program: These conditions shall be noted on all grading and construction plans. The City shall review and approve
the City-qualified archaeologist consistent with the Archaeological Resource Preservation Program Guidelines.
Utilities and Service Systems
Implement Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-4, BIO-1 through BIO-7, CR-1 through CR-3, HAZ-1, and N-1 through
N-4.
Monitoring Program: Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-4 shall be incorporated into project grading and building plans
for review and approval by the City Community Development Department. Compliance shall be verified by the City during
regular inspections, in coordination with the SLOAPCD, as necessary. The applicant shall submit the geologic evaluation
detailed in Mitigation Measure AQ-3 to the City Community Development Department upon completion. The survey
requirements of Mitigation Measures BIO-1, BIO-2, BIO-4, and BIO-5 and delineation requirements of Mitigation Measure
BIO-7 shall be incorporated into the project grading and building plans for review and approval by the City Community
Development Department. Compliance shall be verified through submittal of an obscure bumble bee survey report, a northern
California legless lizard survey report, a preconstruction nesting bird survey report, and a roosting bat survey report to the City
Community Development Department. Mitigation Measure BIO -6 requires construction personnel to participate in
environmental awareness training and sign a sign-in sheet following the training. The sign-in sheet shall be submitted to the
City Community Development Department to confirm that all construction personnel have attended. Compliance shall be
verified by the City prior to the start of construction and during regular inspections, as necessary. The conditions of Mitigation
Measures CR-1 through CR-3 shall be noted on all grading and construction plans. The City shall review and approve the City-
qualified archaeologist consistent with the Archaeological Resource Preservation Program Guidelines. Mitigation Measure
HAZ-1 shall be incorporated into project grading and building plans for review and approval by the City Community
Development Department. Compliance shall be verified through submittal of a Hazardous Materials Management Plan to the
City Community Development Department. Construction plans shall note construction hours, truck routes, and all construction
noise BMPs, and shall be reviewed and approved by the City Commun ity Development Department prior to issuance of
grading/building permits. Compliance shall be verified by the City prior to the start of construction and during regular
inspections, as necessary.
Page 181 of 222
Page 182 of 222
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE AN EXISTING 5.09-ACRE PROPERTY INTO A
TWO LOT COMMERCIAL SUBDIVISION (SLOAL 21-0025), WITH AN EXCEPTION
FROM THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS FOR THE MINIMUM STREET FRONTAGE
OF 0 FEET, WHERE 40 FEET IS NORMALLY REQUIRED.
PROJECT ADDRESS: 1146 Farmhouse Road BY: Kyle Bell, Associate Planner
Phone Number: 805-781-7524
Email: kbell@slocity.org
FILE NUMBER: SBDV-0781-2021 FROM: Tyler Corey, Deputy Director
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Draft Resolution (Attachment A) approving the project and associated
Addendum to the Senn-Glick IS/MND, based on findings and subject to conditions of
approval.
SITE DATA
Applicant
Representative
Zoning
General Plan
Site Area
Environmental
Status
Farmhouse Development, LLC
Carol Florence & Emily Ewer
C-S-SP (Commercial Services) within
the Airport Area Specific Plan
Services & Manufacturing
~5.09 acres
Addendum to the Mitigated
Negative Declaration (MND) (ED01-
273) adopted for the Senn-Glick
Conditional Use Permit and Master
Development Plan (D000336D).
SUMMARY
The applicant has applied for a Tentative Parcel Map (SLO AL 21-0025) to create two
parcels from one existing parcel (APN 076-511-038). The existing property contains an
existing two-story commercial office development occupied by the Tri-Counties Regional
Center, which will remain in place. The project site is located in the Commercial Services
(C-S-SP) zone, within the recently annexed East Airport Area , and the parcel is located
within the Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP). No changes to the zoning or land use
designations are proposed.
Meeting Date: 2/9/2022
Item Number: 4b
Time Estimate: 30 Minutes
Page 183 of 222
Item 2
SBDV-0781-2021 – 1146 Farmhouse Road
Planning Commission Report – February 9, 2022
The proposed minor subdivision includes a requested exception to the Subdivision
Regulations for the lot frontage requirements for Parcel 2, which do es not provide any
direct access to the street, however, an access easement is proposed to connect Parcel
2 to Farmhouse Road through existing developed portion of Parcel 1 (Attachment B,
Project Description).
The project includes division of a 5.09-acre parcel into two parcels 2.55 acres/111,078
sq. ft. (Parcel 1), and 2.54 acres/110,642 sq. ft. (Parcel 2) (Attachment C, Tentative
Parcel Map). Parcel 1 currently contains the existing commercial office development. No
development is proposed as part of the project, it is assumed that Parcel 2 would
ultimately be developed into a commercial service development, similar to other adjacent
properties.
1.0 PLANNING COMMISSION’S PURVIEW
In most cases, a minor subdivision is reviewed by the Subdivision Hearing Officer.
However, when exceptions are requested, the City’s Subdivision Regulations require the
Planning Commission to act on the project (§16.04, Table 1). The Planning Commission’s
role is to review the project in terms of consistency with the General Plan and Subdivision
Regulations, and take final action on the subdivision application (SBDV-0781-2021).
General Plan: https://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/community-
development/planning-zoning/general-plan
Subdivision Regulations: https://sanluisobispo.municipal.codes/Code/16
2.0 BACKGROUND
The 5-acre property is within the East Airport area recently annexed by the City of San
Luis Obispo (ANNX-2030-2018). The annexation was approved by the City and Local
Agency Formation Commission in late 2020.
The original commercial property, tract improvements, and many of the properties in the
annexed area were developed prior to the annexation subject to the County’s
development review and permitting process. The original development within the County
anticipated eventual annexation to the City, therefore infrastructure was designed and
installed for general compatibility with City standards. The Annexation Agreement for the
area stipulated specific utility infrastructure improvements for utility service connecti ons,
roadway improvements, and acceptance of the road right-of-way. Annexation public
improvements plans have been submitted to the City for approval and permitting. The
pending annexation improvements do not materially impact the existing physical
conditions of the subject property or proposed subdivision.
On May 23, 2003, the County of San Luis Obispo issued a Mitigated Negative Declaration
(MND) (ED01-273) for the Senn/Glick Conditional Use Permit (D000366D). The Senn -
Glick development area is comprised of three parcels totaling ten acres and included a
master plan development that consists of 180,000 square feet (SF) of commercial area
throughout three separate buildings with various components of shared infrastructure
(e.g., access and stormwater) across the parcels.
Page 184 of 222
Item 2
SBDV-0781-2021 – 1146 Farmhouse Road
Planning Commission Report – February 9, 2022
In 2012, the first 20,000 SF building was completed on the subject property. The existing
building is currently occupied by Tri-Counties Regional Center and is intended to remain.
The annexation included the 180,000 SF of development potential for the Senn-Glick
properties, and the existing 5.09 acre parcel was allotted 93,977 SF of building floor area.
The proposed subdivision will maintain consistency with the annexation development
potential by proportionally dividing the allotment of the commercial building area across
the two parcels.
3.0 PROJECT STATISTICS
Table 1: Project Site Information
Site Size ~5.09 acres
Present Use & Development Government Office – Tri-Counties Regional Center
Topography Relatively flat with gentle slopes
Parcel 1 – 2.7% Average Cross Slope
Parcel 2 – 2.5% Average Cross Slope
Access Farmhouse Road
Surrounding Use/Zoning North: Outside City Limits (Single-Family Residences)
South: C-S-SP (Warehousing & Distribution)
East: Outside City Limits (Single-Family Residences)
West: C-S-SP (Undeveloped Land)
Table 2: Subdivision Lot Dimension Requirements (AASP)
C-S zone
Min. Lot
Area
(sq. ft.)
Min. Width
(feet)
Min. Depth
(feet)
Min. Width
to Depth
Ratio
Min. Street
Frontage
(feet)
Requirement 9,000 60 100 3:1 (max) 40
Parcel 1 ~111,078 332 333 1:1 332
Parcel 2 ~110,642 332 332 1:1 0
4.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS
The proposed project must conform to the standards and limitations of the Zoning
Regulations, Airport Area Specific Plan, and Engineering Standards and be consistent
with the applicable Community Design Guidelines. Staff has evaluated the project’s
consistency with relevant requirements and has found it to be in substantial compliance,
as discussed in this analysis.
4.1 Consistency with the Airport Area Specific Plan
The AASP encourages infill opportunities through compact development of undeveloped
lots or redevelopment of currently developed lots. The AASP also establishes
development standards for commercial subdivisions, including lot sizes and floor area
ratios. The proposed project provides for a new commercial parcel to accommodate infill
development of an existing underutilized property and is consistent with the subdivision
standards and the intent of the AASP, except for the lot frontage requirements, which are
discussed in greater detail in the next section.
Page 185 of 222
Item 2
SBDV-0781-2021 – 1146 Farmhouse Road
Planning Commission Report – February 9, 2022
4.2 Consistency with the Subdivision Regulations
The project site has enough area to divide the property into two parcels in compliance
with the strict application of the Subdivision Regulations, however, the property is of such
size that it is impractical/undesirable, in this particular case, to conform to the strict
application of the standards codified in Section 16.18.030 Table 3 for lot frontage
requirements. An exception is necessary for Parcel 2 from the 40-foot lot frontage
requirement to provide shared access through the existing drive aisle, where strict
compliance with the Subdivision Regulations would result in illogical lot patterns that
places unnecessary and undesirable constraints on future development of the site . Full
conformance with the frontage requirement would result in a new driveway approach on
a portion of the property with a steep slope requiring significant grading , which is
unnecessary as the property is capable of sharing access through the existing drive aisle.
The project site is within an already developed commercial subdivision representing an
infill development opportunity. The proposed exception is minor in nature where access
from Farmhouse Road can easily be accomplished through a shared private drive aisle.
The resulting parcels will be consistent with the size, density, and development pattern of
the neighborhood and can accommodate the existing and proposed site improvements
without exceptions to the City’s property development standards.
Staff has evaluated the proposed parcel map for conformity with the intent of the required
findings for an exception to lot frontage dimensions as identified in the City’s Subdivision
Regulations (16.23.020.A). No development is proposed at this time, and the resultant
parcels and proposed easements would leave the two parcels with adequate on-site
access for the anticipated future development of a commercial development.
5.0 CONSISTENCY COVID-19 ORDERS & CURRENT FISCAL CONTINGENCY PLAN
This activity is presently allowed under the State and Local emergency orders associated
with COVID-19. This Project 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.
6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
On August 23, 2005, the City Council certified the FEIR for the AASP through Council
Resolution No. 9726 (2005 Series). On March 17, 2020, the City Council approved the
IS/MND for the East Airport Annexation through Resolution No. 11103 (2020 Series),
which evaluated the annexation of the East Airport and Senn-Glick properties and
associated infrastructure improvements. As proposed, the project is consistent with the
Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP) and associated Final Environmental Impact Report
(FEIR) and the IS/MND for the East Airport Annexation (ANNX-2030-2018).
In 2003, the County of San Luis Obispo adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND)
(ED01-273) for the Senn/Glick Conditional Use Permit (D000366D), inclusive of the
project site. The Senn-Glick development area is comprised of three parcels totaling ten
acres and included a master plan development consisting of 180,000 square feet of
commercial area throughout three separate buildings with various components of shared
Page 186 of 222
Item 2
SBDV-0781-2021 – 1146 Farmhouse Road
Planning Commission Report – February 9, 2022
infrastructure (e.g., access and stormwater) across the parcels. The IS/MND also
assumed full disturbance of the site. In 2012, the first 20,000-sf building was completed
on the subject property. The existing building is currently occupied by Tri-Counties
Regional Center and is intended to remain.
The proposed subdivision will maintain consistency with the development potential
identified in the adopted Senn-Glick IS/MND by proportionally dividing the allotment of
the commercial building area across the two parcels and would not increase development
floor area or area of disturbance as identified in the adopted IS/MND . The project does
not include any changes within or around the drainage and detention basin along the
northwestern edge of the site. The project does not include any changes from the previous
approvals that would have any effect on the existing easements associated with the
existing developed property.
An Addendum (Attachment D) has been prepared to address the minor modifications to
the project, including the creation of a new lot and associated potential development of
an additional building (no development is currently proposed). As proposed, full build-out
of the Senn-Glick area would not exceed the originally approved and evaluated 180,000
square feet of floor area (93,977 specific to the project site). Because the proposed
subdivision would not result in an increase in overall development potential or site
disturbance, and there are no new significant impacts or mitigation measures as a result
of the project, an Addendum is the appropriate CEQA document.
In addition, the project is consistent with and subject to all mitigation measures adopted
as part of the AASP FEIR and Senn-Glick IS/MND that are applicable to the proposed
project, which are carried forward and applied to the proposed project to effectively
mitigate the impacts that were previously identified (Attachment E, CEQA Mitigated
Negative Declaration Compliance Summary). No Supplemental Environmental Impact
Report is required pursuant to Public Resources Code §21166 and State CEQA
Guidelines Section 15162 because: 1) the project changes are minor and do not result in
new or more severe environmental impacts; 2) the circumstances under which the project
is undertaken do not require major changes to the adopted Mitigated Negative
Declaration; 3) the modified project does not require any new mitigation measures and
the project will comply with all applicable previously-adopted mitigation measures.
7.0 OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
The project has been reviewed by various City departments and divisions including
Planning, Engineering, Transportation, Building, City Arborist, Utilities, and Fire. Staff has
not identified any unusual site conditions or circumstances that would require special
conditions. Other comments have been incorporated into the draft resolution as
conditions of approval.
Page 187 of 222
Item 2
SBDV-0781-2021 – 1146 Farmhouse Road
Planning Commission Report – February 9, 2022
8.0 ALTERNATIVES
1. Continue project. An action to continue the item should include a detailed list of
additional information or analysis required to make a decision.
2. Deny the project. An action denying the application should include findings that
cite the basis for denial and should reference inconsistency with the General Plan,
Subdivision Regulations, Zoning Regulations or other policy documents.
9.0 ATTACHMENTS
A. Draft Resolution
B. Project Description
C. Tentative Parcel Map (SLOAL 12-0025)
D. Addendum to Senn-Glick IS/MND
E. ED01-273 - MND Compliance Summary
Page 188 of 222
RESOLUTION NO. PC-XXXX-2022
A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING A TENTATIVE PARCEL M AP TO CREATE TWO PARCELS
FROM ONE EXISTING LOT (SLO 21-0025), WITH AN EXCEPTION
FROM THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS FOR THE MINIMUM STREET
FRONTAGE OF 0 FEET, WHERE 40 FEET IS NORMALLY REQUIRED,
AND ASSOCIATED ADDENDUM TO THE ADOPTED SENN-GLICK
IS/MND PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
ACT (CEQA), AS REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND
ATTACHMENTS DATED FEBRUARY 9, 2022 (1146 FARMHOUSE,
SBDV-0781-2021)
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a
web based public hearing on February 9, 2022, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under
SBDV-0781-2021, Farmhouse Development, 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 hearing 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 approval to
the project (SBDV-0781-2021), based on the following findings:
1. The design of the tentative parcel map is consistent with the General Plan because
the proposed subdivision is consistent with the development pattern established in
the neighborhood and the resulting parcels allow for commercial development with
sufficient access through a shared drive aisle.
2. The site is physically suited for the type of development allowed in the C-S zone,
since the resulting parcels require minimal exceptions to the Subdivision
Regulations and resulting development will be subject to consistency with the
development standards of the Airport Area Specific Plan and Zoning Regulations.
3. The design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements for access through
(or use of property within) the proposed subdivision since all resulting parcels will
have adequate access from Farmhouse Road through a shared drive aisle.
Page 189 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
1146 Farmhouse Road, SBDV-0781-2021
Page 2
4. The property to be divided is of such size that it is impractical/undesirable, in this
particular case, to conform to the strict application of the standards codified in th e
Subdivision Regulations because the design will result in a more efficient use of
the land. An exception is requested to use a shared access aisle for the new
parcels rather than the creation of new driveways or illogical lot pattern
configurations intended to simply conform to the lot frontage requirements.
5. The cost to the subdivider of strict or literal compliance with the regulations is not
the sole reason for granting the modification, because other findings are made to
support approval of the exceptions related to existing physical conditions of the
project site such as the existing development on the site, and steep slopes along
the east property line that are infeasible to accommodate a new drive aisle for the
sole purposes of complying with the frontage requirements.
6. The modification will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare, or
be injurious to other properties in the vicinity since the minor exception will provide
for a shared driveway access rather than a new individual driveway, and there are
several examples of similar subdivisions and development in the immediate
vicinity.
7. Granting the modification is in accord with the intent and purposes of the
Subdivision Regulations and is consistent with the General Plan because the
exceptions are consistent with other properties in the vicinity and the project does
not grant special privileges or modify allowable land uses within the existing C-S
zoning district.
SECTION 2. Environmental Review. In accordance with Section 15164 of the
State CEQA Guidelines, the City of San Luis Obispo has determined that an Addendum
to the Senn-Glick IS/MND is necessary to document minor changes that have occurred
in the project description since the IS/MND was adopted. The Addendum is approved
and no supplemental environmental document is required pursuant to Public Resources
Code §21166 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 because:
1. The minor change to the project consists of the subdivision of an existing parcel
into two parcels and no development is currently proposed. Full build -out of the
subject site would not exceed the underlying assumptions identified in the adopted
Senn-Glick IS/MND, including maximum floor area and area of disturbance.
2. None of the following circumstances included in Section 15162 of the State CEQA
Guidelines have occurred which require a subsequent environmental document:
a. The project changes do not result in new or more severe environmental
impacts.
b. The circumstances under which the project is undertaken do not require major
changes to the adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration.
c. The modified project does not require any new mitigation measures and the
project will comply with all previously-adopted mitigation measures.
Page 190 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
1146 Farmhouse Road, SBDV-0781-2021
Page 3
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 does hereby approve tentative parcel map SBDV -0781-2021, allowing a
minor subdivision of one lot into two parcels at 1146 Farmhouse Road subject to the
following conditions:
Planning Division
1. All pertinent conditions, code requirements and mitigation measures applicable to
this project site per the County of San Luis Obispo adopted Mitigated Negative
Declaration (MND) (ED01-273) for the Senn/Glick Conditional Use Permit
(D000366D), as well as the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the
Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP), and the MND for the East Airport Annexation
(ANNX-2030-2018). A full-size sheet shall be included in working drawings
submitted for a building permit that lists all mitigation measures applicable to the
project approval as Sheet No. 2. Reference should be made in the margin of listed
items as to where in plans requirements are addressed.
2. Prior to parcel map recordation, all affected parties must record an updated
agreement governing the shared driveway access, to the satisfactory of the
Community Development Director.
3. 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 within 20 feet of the front property line 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.
Engineering Division – Public Works/Community Development Department
4. The subdivision shall be recorded with a parcel map. The parcel map preparation
and monumentation shall be in accordance with the City’s Subdivision
Regulations, Engineering Standards, and the Subdivision Map Act. The parcel
map shall use United States Customary Units in accordance with the current City
Engineering Standards.
5. Plans submitted final parcel map recordation, shall demonstrate consistency with
all requirements and engineering standards associated with the East Airport Pre -
Annexation Agreement adopted on March 17, 2020 (ANNX-2030-2018).
Page 191 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
1146 Farmhouse Road, SBDV-0781-2021
Page 4
6. The parcel map exhibits and legal descriptions shall be prepared by a Cali fornia
Licensed Land Surveyor or Civil Engineer authorized to practice land surveying.
7. If the scope of subdivision improvements does not include any public
improvements on site and does not require the extension of public water, sewer,
or storm drain mainlines, or the installation of street improvements, said
improvements may be shown on the building plans with the requirement for a
separate encroachment permit. Separate public improvement plans are not
otherwise required where the scope of work within the public right-of-way or areas
of dedications is limited to curb ramp, curb, gutter, sidewalk, bus stop upgrades,
and driveway approach repairs or replacements, and for utility abandonments or
new utility construction or connections.
8. A separate exhibit showing all existing public and private utilities shall be approved
to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director and Public Works
Director prior to recordation of the map. The utility plan shall include water, sewer,
storm drains, site drainage, gas, electricity, telephone, cable TV, water wells,
private waste disposal systems, and any utility company meters for each parcel if
applicable. The relocation of any utility shall be completed with proper permits
prior to recordation of the map. Utilities shall not cross proposed property lines
unless located within suitable easements. Easements, if proposed, shall be shown
on the parcel map or shall be recorded concurrently to the satisfaction of the
Community Development Director, Public Works Director and serving utility
companies.
9. Any easements including but not limited to provisions for all public and private
utilities, access, grading, drainage, construction, common driveways, and
maintenance of the same shall be shown on the parcel map and/o r shall be
recorded separately prior to map recordation if applicable. Said easements may
be provided for in part or in total as blanket easements.
10. Any shared improvements or utilities shall include a maintenance agreement or
other mechanism to clarify the maintenance responsibility between separate
owner’s or a Property Owner’s Association.
11. Any sections of damaged or displaced curb, gutter & sidewalk or driveway
approach shall be repaired or replaced to the satisfaction of the Public Works
Director prior to recordation of the map or shall be covered under a subdivision
improvement surety.
12. Plans submitted for final parcel map recordation shall include and/or dedicate a
ten-foot wide street tree easement and a ten -foot wide public utility easement
(P.U.E.) across the frontage of each lot, as needed. Said easement shall be
adjacent to and contiguous with all public right-of-way lines bordering each lot.
Page 192 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
1146 Farmhouse Road, SBDV-0781-2021
Page 5
13. The parcel map shall show and label all existing and proposed easements and
dedications including the existing dedication(s) for Farmhouse Lane.
14. Unless otherwise allowed for deferral by the Community Development Director,
separate utilities, including water, sewer, gas, electricity, telephone, and cable TV
shall be served to each parcel to the satisfacti on of the City and serving utility
companies. A private sewer main may be proposed to the satisfaction of the
Building Official, Utilities Engineer, and Public Works Director. Wire utilities to
new/future structures shall be underground.
15. The parcel map submittal shall include a summary drainage report to clarify the
existing and proposed drainage improvements, post -development drainage
impacts, and any proposal or requirements for drainage system upgrades for the
campus.
16. The developer/owner shall include an analysis of the drainage from the existing
impervious surfaces and any existing designed and/or passive water quality
treatment systems. The owner and engineer of record shall propose reasonable
and readily achievable water quality upgrades to treat the existing run-off prior to
discharge to the off-site receiving waters or stormdrain systems. The upgrades
may include mechanical systems or filter inserts. These upgrades are not subject
to the Post Construction Stormwater Regulations as promulgated b y the Central
Coast Water Board. The upgrades may require an O & M Manual and recorded
agreement to maintain the improvements.
17. Unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department, future access to
Parcels 2 shall be through the common access easemen ts across Parcels 1 rather
than by direct access from Farmhouse Lane. Access rights shall be dedicated to
the City along Farmhouse Lane except at approved driveway locations shown on
the tentative map.
18. A separate notice of requirements shall be recorded in conjunction with the map
to identify any specific development conditions that may pertain to the
development or redevelopment of the proposed vacant or developed parcel.
19. A preliminary soils report is required in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act
and the City of San Luis Obispo Subdivision Regulations. The report is required
at the time of parcel map submittal and prior to map recordation. The report shall
be referenced on the map in accordance with the City’s Subdivision Regulations
and the Subdivision Map Act.
Page 193 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
1146 Farmhouse Road, SBDV-0781-2021
Page 6
Utilities Department
20. Water services are not permitted to serve development on multiple parcels. Plans
submitted for a building permit shall identify separate domestic and landscape
water meters shall be provided to each parcel in the proposed subdivision
consistent with the City’s Municipal Code.
21. Plans submitted for a building permit shall identify an 8-inch recycled water main that
must be placed within the public right of way and along the proposed frontage
improvements. If there is an existing recycled water main that was installed prior to
the property annexing into the City, the main can remain if it meets the City
specifications and pressure ratings.
22. The subdivision is within the City’s Recycled Water Master Plan area, however the
City’s recycled water distribution system may not be extended to Farmhouse Lane
for a few years. Applicant shall design the irrigation system of future proposed
projects to the standards described in the City’s Procedures for Recycled Water Use
so that recycled water may be used for irrigation of the site’s landscape when it is
available in the future. This includes providing the appropriate backflow prevention
device on the project’s domestic water services.
Fire Department
23. Plans submitted for parcel map recordation shall identify a dedicated minimum 20-
foot-wide fire access easement to the rear lot.
24. Plans submitted for parcel map recordation shall identify a utility easement for the
Fire lateral from the public way to the rear lot, to include a double backflow device
with Fire Department connection within 20 feet of the public way. Due to the
distance, on-site fire hydrants may be required, subject to the satisfaction of the
Fire Marshal.
Page 194 of 222
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-22
1146 Farmhouse Road, SBDV-0781-2021
Page 7
Indemnification
25. 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 ag ainst an
Indemnified Claim.
Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by
_______________________, and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
RECUSED:
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 9th day of February 2022.
____________________________________
Tyler Corey, Secretary
Planning Commission
Page 195 of 222
Page 196 of 222
Tentative Parcel Map SLO-21-0025 Farmhouse Development, LLC
Oasis Associates, Inc. October 2021
1 of 1
Project Statement / Supplement
to the application for the proposed
Farmhouse Lane Parcel Map SLO-21-0025
1146 Farmhouse Lane
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
APN 076-511-038
05 November 2021
I. INTRODUCTION
The proposed project is a 2-lot subdivision of a 5-acre commercial property within the newly annexed
“Senn Glick” properties located east of the San Luis Obispo County Airport and State Route 227. The
existing development in the southern portion of the property is to remain as-is. The subdivision will
allow for new ownership and opportunities for future commercial development on the north portion of
the property.
II. PROJECT TEAM
A. Applicant/Property Owner
FARMHOUSE DEVELOMENT, LLC
Mr. Clint Pearce
284 Higuera Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
805-543-0300
clint@madonnainn.com
B. Applicant’s Agent
OASIS ASSOCIATES, INC.
C.M. Florence, AICP & Emily Ewer, AICP
3427 Miguelito Court
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
805.541.4509
cmf@oasisassoc.com
emily@oasisasso.com
C. Land Surveyor
MBS Land Surveys
Mr. Michael B. Stanton, PLS
3559 South Higuera Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
805-594-1960
MStanton@mbslandsurveys.com
III. PROPERTY & PROJECT INFORMATION
A. Property information and Context
The Senn-Glick development area is comprised of three (3) parcels totaling ten (10) acres. In 2003, the
County approved a conditional use permit for a master plan development that included a total of 180,000
square feet (SF) of floor area in three (3) buildings with various components of shared infrastructure
(e.g., access and stormwater) across the parcels. In 2012, the first 20,000 square foot (SF) building was
completed on the subject property. (See Figure 1. Subject Property) The building is currently tenanted
and intended to remain “as-is” for purposes of this application.
Page 197 of 222
Tentative Parcel Map SLO-21-0025 Farmhouse Development, LLC
Oasis Associates, Inc. October 2021
2 of 5
Table 1. Property Statistics
Address 1146 Farmhouse Lane, City of San Luis Obispo
APN 076-511-038
Parcel Size (acres) Senn-Glick Development = 78 acres±.
Existing Parcel = 5.09 acres±
Proposed Parcels = 2.55 acres± + 2.54 acres±
Zoning Designation Commercial Service with Specific Plan Overlay (C-S-SP)
Physical Characteristics Southern portion of property is developed northern portion of
property is vacant consisting of non-native grasses.
Existing Development 20,000 SF, 2-story office building
Airport Land Use Plan
– Safety Area
Zone 6; Traffic Pattern Zone
Average Slope* 5%
*Per County of San Luis Obispo’s GIS data
Figure 1. Subject Property
The surrounding area is characterized by commercial properties to the west and south and small
agricultural properties/rural residential to the north and east. The San Luis Obispo County Regional
Airport is west of the subject property on the other side of Broad Street/ State Route 227. The adjacent
zoning and uses include the following:
Table 2. Adjacent Property Zoning & Uses
Direction Zoning
North County Agriculture (AG) / Single Family Residence
East County Agriculture (AG) / Single Family Residence
South Commercial Service (C-S-SP)/ Office and warehouse (East Airport Commerce Park)
West Commercial Service (C-S-SP)/ Vacant (with shared-stormwater basin)
Senn-Glick Dev. Plan Area
(E) Basin
Subject Property
(P) Prop. Line
(E) Bulding
Page 198 of 222
Tentative Parcel Map SLO-21-0025 Farmhouse Development, LLC
Oasis Associates, Inc. October 2021
3 of 5
B. Proposed Project
Tentative Parcel Map SLO21-0025 is a 2-lot subdivision created to evenly divide the existing parcel.
The southern Parcel 1 (2.55 acres) will contain the existing development with access and utility
easements provided to the northern Parcel 2 (2.54 acres). No additional development is proposed or
considered with the proposed subdivision.
The required utility connections for Parcel 2 were discussed and coordinated with the City Public
Works/Engineering and Utilities Departments during the June 10, 2021, pre-application meeting. Since
the ultimate development of Parcel 2 is unknown, utility loads and infrastructure sizing is undetermined.
Based on direction from City staff, the applicant is requesting utility connection and sub-outs be deferred
to the time of development for Parcel 2. Existing utilities and utility easements are depicted on the
tentative map.
The 10-acre site was designed for a shared stormwater system and drainage easements and maintenance
agreements were established, accordingly. Drainage and stormwater infrastructure components (e.g.,
storm drain inlets, pipes, and a detention basin) were installed with completion of the first building in
2012. This existing infrastructure and the Hydrology and Hydraulics Analysis Report, (Wallace Group,
2008) were reviewed and used as the basis for an updated Drainage Report (Walsh Engineering, 30 July
2021) provided with this application. The Drainage Report addresses the City’s Engineering Standards,
Waterway Management Plan, and Post-Construction Stormwater Management requirements for the full
10-acres of the former Senn-Glick properties. Since the drainage system is shared, the report includes
the proposed development on the adjacent parcels (APN 076-511-039, 076-511-040) which are being
submitted separately and independently from this land division application. The drainage design
includes development assumptions to account for and accommodate future development on the northerly
Parcel 2 of the subdivision.
C. Annexation and Entitlement History
The 5-acre property is within the area recently annexed by the City of San Luis Obispo (Annexation No.
81). The annexation was approved by the City and Local Agency Formation Commission in late 2020.
The annexation area included Senn-Glick area and East Airport Commerce Park. The City’s zoning of
the subject parcel – Commercial Service, is a consistent and similar zone to the County’s previous
Commercial Service land use designation.
The original commercial subdivision, tract improvements, and many of the properties in the annexed
area were developed prior to the annexation and processed through the County’s development review
and permitting. The original development within the County anticipated eventual annexation to the City,
therefore backbone infrastructure was designed and installed for compatibility with City standards. The
Annexation Agreement for the area stipulated specific utility infrastructure improvements for utility
service connections and acceptance of the road right-of-ways. Annexation improvements plans have
been submitted to the City for approval and permitting.
The pending annexation improvements do not materially impact the existing physical conditions of the
subject property or proposed subdivision. Annexation improvements on the subject property include the
following: exchange of the existing water meters for City meters; inspection of the existing sewer
lateral; and 400 SF of minor sidewalk repairs.
Page 199 of 222
Tentative Parcel Map SLO-21-0025 Farmhouse Development, LLC
Oasis Associates, Inc. October 2021
4 of 5
The City’s annexation relied on the existing County entitlements and environmental review to establish
and confirm the development potential of the annexation area and related impact fees. The applicability
and compliance of the current project with the Mitigated Negative Declaration completed for the original
County Conditional Use Permit is provided as an attachment to this submittal.
The annexation included the 180,000 SF of development potential for the Senn-Glick properties,
previously entitled by the County’s Conditional Use Permit. The existing 5.08 acre parcel was allotted
93,977 SF of building floor area. The proposed subdivision will maintain consistency with the
annexation development potential by proportionally dividing the allotment to the two new parcels.
Environmental and transportation development impact fees for future development (or redevelopment)
are consistent with the building size allotment and have been satisfied with the analysis and agreements
completed as part of the annexation approval. Review under the City’s regulatory framework (e.g.,
Airport Area Specific Plan, Community Design Guidelines, Zoning Regulations and design review
processes are applicable to future development.
Table 3. Development Allotment
Pacel Size Building Development
Allotment (SF)
Parent Parcel 5.09 acres 93,977
Parcel 1 2.55 acres 47,082
Parcel 2* 2.54 acres 46,895
*Contains existing development of a 20,000 SF building and related improvements.
IV. CONFORMANCE TO REGULATIONS
The subject property is within the boundary of the Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP) and the San Luis
Obispo Regional Airport Land Use Plan. The proposed land division and configuration around the
existing development complies with applicable zoning and subdivision regulations with a minor
exception request described in section A below.
A. Parcel Size and Dimensions (AASP §4.4.1)
The proposed subdivision is consistent in size and configuration with the surrounding commercial
properties.
Table 4. Parcel Size and Dimensions
Minimum Requirement Proposed Dimensions
Parcel 1 Parcel 2
Area 9,000 SF 2.55 acres (111,078 SF) 2.54 acres (110,642 SF)
Width 60 ft 332 ft 332 ft
Depth 100 ft 333 ft 332 ft
Width to
Depth Ratio 3:1 (maximum) 1:1 1:1
Frontage 40 ft 332 ft 0 ft
The proposed subdivision includes an exception request to the minimum frontage requirements for
Parcel 2. As an alternative to a 40-foot frontage width flag lot configuration, the subdivision provides
easements for access and utility services to Parcel 2. This exception is requested to accommodate the
Page 200 of 222
Tentative Parcel Map SLO-21-0025 Farmhouse Development, LLC
Oasis Associates, Inc. October 2021
5 of 5
existing development characteristics. The 10-acre Senn-Glick development was approved and designed
with a shared driveway access which exists today. There is existing parking, landscaping, irrigation, and
improvements for the existing building around the existing access. A flag lot at this point would bifurcate
these improvements from the development they serve. This disconnection would be inconsistent with
the overall goal of orderly development by complicating ownership, maintenance, and responsibilities
for the existing improvements. The proposed access and utility easements are contained within the
existing drive aisle which better maintains the arrangement and ownership of the existing development.
The proposed easement is consistent with existing adjacent parcel configuration and other parcels within
the annexed area.
B. Lot Coverage/ Floor Area Ratio (AASP §4.4.2)
The existing 2-story includes 20,000 SF of floor area. The building footprint and hardscape areas total
50,617 SF of coverage. On the proposed 2.55-acre/Parcel 1, the floor area ratio (FAR) of .45 and
coverage of 37% are well below the maximum 0.6 FAR and 90% lot coverage allowed by the Airport
Area Specific Plan. Future development of Parcel 2 would be designed in compliance with applicable
FAR and coverage requirements at the time of development.
C. Yards/Setbacks (AASP §4.4.4)
The subject property is zoned C-S which requires a 16-foot building setback from public street and 5-
foot setback for parking. There is a 0-foot setback requirement for side and rear yards. The existing
building complies with the AASP setback requirements, as the building setback from any existing or
proposed property line ranges from 80 to 140 feet. The existing parking area is also 40 feet from the
street property line. Future development of Parcel 2 would be designed in compliance with applicable
setback requirements at the time of development.
D. Height (AASP §4.4.6)
The existing building, at 28 feet in height, is below the allowed 36-foot height limitation in the C-S
zone. This building height is consistent with and below the height of adjacent buildings.
E. Airport Land Use Plan (updated March 26, 2021)
In March 2021, the Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP) was amended and restated. The amendments
included modifying the airport safety zones and noise mapping. To date, the ALUP update has not yet
been reflected in the Airport Area Specific Plan, therefore this section addresses the amended and
restated ALUP regulations. The project is within Safety Zone 6 traffic pattern zone which has a non-
residential density of 300 person per acre and 1,200 person per single acre. The existing office and other
typical commercial service uses have a non-residential density well below this threshold. The subject
property is outside the lowest CNEL-60 noise contour therefore extremely and moderately noise
sensitive uses are allowed without noise mitigations. (ALUP Table 4-1)
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Parcel Map SLO-21-0025, MBS Land Surveys, 15 July 2021
• Drainage Report, Walsh Engineering, 31 August 2021
• Mitigated Negative Declaration & Notice of Determination, County of San Luis Obispo, May
23, 2003
• Mitigation Measure Matrix Comparison, Oasis Associates, Inc., 05 November 2021
Page 201 of 222
Page 202 of 222
Page 203 of 222
Page 204 of 222
ADDENDUM TO INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION ED01-273
1. Project Title: 1146 Farmhouse Road Two-Lot Subdivision (SBDV-0781-2021;
SLOAL 21-0025)
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of San Luis Obispo
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
3. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Kyle Bell, Associate Planner
Phone: (805) 781-7524
Email: kbell@slocity.org
4. Project Location: 1146 Farmhouse Road
5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address:
Farmhouse Development, LLC
284 Higuera Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
6. General Plan Designation: Services and Manufacturing
7. Zoning: C-S-SP (Commercial Services) within the Airport Area Specific Plan
8. Description of the Project:
The project consists of a Tentative Parcel Map (SLOAL 21-0025) to create two
parcels from one existing parcel (APN 076-511-038). The existing property
contains an existing two-story commercial office development occupied by the
Tri-Counties Regional Center, which will remain in place. The proposed minor
subdivision includes requested exceptions to the Subdivision Regulations for the
lot frontage requirements for Parcel 2, which does not provide any direct access to
the street, however, an access easement is proposed to connect Parcel 2 to
Farmhouse Road through existing developed portion of Parcel 1 (Attachment B,
Project Description).
The project includes division of a 5.09-acre parcel into two parcels 2.55
acres/111,078 sq. ft. (Parcel 1), and 2.54 acres/110,642 sq. ft. (Parcel 2)
(Attachment C, Tentative Parcel Map). Parcel 1 currently contains the existing
commercial office development. No development is proposed as part of the
project, it is assumed that Parcel 2 would ultimately be developed into a
commercial service development, similar to other adjacent properties.
Page 205 of 222
Addendum to Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ED01-273
For the Senn-Glick Project
Page 2
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Settings: Single-family residences (outside City
limits); Warehousing and Distribution and undeveloped land (C-S-SP).
10. Project Entitlements Requested: Tentative Parcel Map - Two-lot subdivision.
11. Other public agencies whose approval is required: None.
INTRODUCTION
This document is an Addendum to the IS/MND prepared for the Senn-Glick Conditional
Use Permit, which included the evaluation of three buildings totaling 180,000 square feet
over three parcels totaling ten acres.
In 2003, the County of San Luis Obispo issued a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND)
(ED01-273) for the Senn/Glick Conditional Use Permit (D000366D). The Senn-Glick
development area is comprised of three parcels totaling ten acres and included a master
plan development consisting of 180,000 square feet of commercial area throughout three
separate buildings with various components of shared infrastructure (e.g., access and
stormwater) across the parcels. In 2012, the first 20,000-sf building was completed on the
subject property. The existing building is currently occupied by Tri-Counties Regional
Center and is intended to remain.
The five-acre property is within the Airport Area Specific Plan and an area recently
annexed by the City of San Luis Obispo (ANNX-2030-2018). The annexation was
approved by the City and Local Agency Formation Commission in late 2020. The
annexation included the 180,000 square feet of development potential for the Senn-Glick
properties, and the existing 5.09 acre parcel was allotted 93,977 sf of building floor area.
The proposed subdivision will maintain consistency with the development potential
identified in the adopted Senn-Glick IS/MND by proportionally dividing the allotment of
the commercial building area across the two parcels.
This Addendum is intended to address the minor modifications to the project, including
the creation of a new lot and associated development potential of an additional building
where three buildings were originally proposed. As proposed, full build-out of the Senn-
Glick area would not exceed the originally approved and evaluated 180,000 square feet
(93,977 specific to the project site). Because the proposed subdivision would not result in
an increase in overall development potential and there are no new significant impacts or
mitigation measures as a result of the project and this updated analysis, an Addendum is
the appropriate CEQA document.
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. According to §15164(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines, an Addendum
to a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) 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
Page 206 of 222
Addendum to Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ED01-273
For the Senn-Glick Project
Page 3
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;
(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 includes an introduction and a description of the proposed project as
they relate to the previously-approved project. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section
15164(c) this Addendum does not require public circulation, and the City shall consider
this Addendum with the adopted MND as part of the approval of the updated project.
The CEQA documentation for this Project, including this Addendum and the previously
adopted IS/MND (ED01-273), is available for review at 919 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California. It is also available on the City’s website at
https://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/community-
development/documents-online/environmental-review-documents.
Page 207 of 222
Addendum to Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ED01-273
For the Senn-Glick Project
Page 4
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
Environmental impacts associated with the development of the project site were
evaluated in IS /MND ED01-273. The IS/MND evaluated the development of the project
site and adjacent parcels, including three buildings totaling 180,000 square feet and
disturbance of the entire ten-acre area (inclusive of the project site). The adopted MND
identified potential significant, but mitigable to less than significant, impacts in the
following issue areas: aesthetics, air quality, geology and soils, hazards/hazardous
material, noise, public services/utilities, transportation/circulation, wastewater, and water.
The minor change to the project addressed in this Addendum consists of the subdivision
of an existing parcel into two parcels. No development is currently proposed, and full
build-out of the subject site would not exceed 93,977 sf of building floor area or the area
of disturbance anticipated for the underlying parcel. In addition, the previously-approved
annexation of the project site, including implementation of associated infrastructure
improvements that would connect the project site to City water and wastewater services,
would further reduce potential impacts related to water supply and wastewater discharge
as identified in the adopted IS/MND.
Based on the minor change to the project and consistency with overall development
assumptions identified in the adopted IS/MND, implementation of the two-lot
subdivision would not result in any new significant impacts, or increase the severity of
any previously-identified impact. The project is subject to all previously adopted
mitigation measures associated with the Senn-Glick IS/MND, in addition to mitigation
measures adopted with the Airport Area Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact
Report.
DETERMINATION
In accordance with Section 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City of San Luis
Obispo has determined that this Addendum to the Senn-Glick IS/MND is necessary to
document minor changes that have occurred in the project description since the IS/MND
was adopted. The preparation of a subsequent environmental document is not necessary
because:
1. The minor change to the project consists of the subdivision of an existing parcel into
two parcels and no development is currently proposed. Full build-out of the subject
site would not exceed the underlying assumptions identified in the adopted Senn-
Glick IS/MND, including maximum floor area and area of disturbance.
2. None of the following circumstances included in Section 15162 of the State CEQA
Guidelines have occurred which require a subsequent environmental document:
a. The project changes do not result in new or more severe environmental
impacts.
Page 208 of 222
Addendum to Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ED01-273
For the Senn-Glick Project
Page 5
b. The circumstances under which the project is undertaken do not require
major changes to the adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration.
c. The modified project does not require any new mitigation measures and
the project will comply with all previously-adopted mitigation measures.
Attached:
1. Project Alignment Map
2. Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ED01-273
Page 209 of 222
Page 210 of 222
Mitigative Negative Declaration ED01-273 for Senn/Glick Conditional Use Permit D000366D. 2003. County of San Luis Obispo. Page 1 of 12
Senn/Glick Conditional Use Permit (D000366D)
San Luis Obispo County (ED01-273) – Mitigation Measure Summary Table
05 November 2021
On May 23, 2003, the County of San Luis Obispo issued a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and Notice of Determination for the Senn/Glick
Conditional Use Permit. Now that the properties have been annexed into the City of San Luis Obispo, there is an expectation that the original
environmental document would form the basis for any subsequent review of development projects. The MND-related Initial Study Checklist
determined that the following environmental factors did not have a “potentially significant impact” (i.e., no significant impact) and, therefore, no
mitigation measures were proposed. These environmental factors included: Ag Resources; Biological Resources, Cultural Resources,
Population/Housing, Recreation, and Land Use. The table below includes those environmental factors that the project could have a “potentially
significant impact” on, and the adopted mitigation measures. The compliance comment column identifies the applicability to future development with
the City for ease of reference.
We assume that minor technical changes to the MND will need to be made based upon revisions to CEQA over time. We anticipate that an
Addendum, pursuant to Section 21166 of CEQA Section 15162 of the State Guidelines, would be the appropriate vehicle to process future
development(s) based upon the conditions noted in the above sections. Finally, it is noteworthy that the Airport Area Specific Plan EIR also
contemplated these properties to ultimately be annexed and developed in the City.
MITIGATION MEASURE COMPLIANCE
COMMENT
AESTHETICS
V-1 Upon submittal of construction plans:
A. As per the Landscape Concept Plan (revised 12/13/02) prepared by Oasis Landscape Architecture
and Planning, all future structures shall show they will be landscaped to provide a 50% screening (at
plant maturity) as viewed from Highway 227 as provided in the landscape plan. Screening vegetation,
plant types, and locations, shall be: evergreen, fast-growing in clay soils (75% reaching maturity heights
within 5 years), and drought-tolerant or other County approved plant materials achieving a similar
result. Mature size and type of vegetation shall be in scale with the size and height of the proposed
structures. Plant types and locations shall be reviewed and approved by the county (Planning Dept.)
prior to issuance of construction plans. Tree species with mature heights greater than 40 feet shall
not be allowed (to minimize potential conflicts with airport operations);
Applicant to development,
as required.
B. All parking areas, water tank(s) and outside storage areas shall be landscaped to provide a 100%
screening (at plant maturity) as viewed from Highway 227. Screening vegetation shall be: sized to the
situation (e.g., 4-5 ft shrubs for parking areas, etc.), evergreen, fast-growing in clay soils, and
drought-tolerant.
Applicant to development,
as required.
C. All fencing should be minimized, but when needed shall use attractive materials. Applicant to development,
as required.
D. Where possible, structures (on-site or surrounding) shall be used to help screen parking areas as seen
from Highway 227 primarily, with secondary consideration given to screening from other streets;
Applicant to development,
as required. Page 211 of 222
Mitigative Negative Declaration ED01-273 for Senn/Glick Conditional Use Permit D000366D. 2003. County of San Luis Obispo. Page 2 of 12
MITIGATION MEASURE COMPLIANCE
COMMENT
E. To minimize the visual impacts of proposed massing of structures, in addition to the proposed
landscaping, the exterior walls and metal canopies of the three structures located on Sites 1, 2 and 3
of the proposed development shall be painted according to the approved color board (prepared by
Pults & Associates). These darker, blending colors shall consist of the following: copper metallic (MBCI,
SIG- 300), Adobe (Dunn Edwards, SP 41) and Navajo white (Dunn Edwards, SP 60). All highway-
visible accessory structures over six feet tall shall use a similar or darker color palette.
May be Applicant to
development, as required.
F. All landscaping not needed for screening buildings or other structures shall be "low profile", where
long distance views through the site are maximized;
Applicant to development,
as required.
G. All landscaping materials and design shall be specified by a landscape architect and installed by a
qualified landscape contractor; all recommendations to maximize the success of the vegetation shall
be incorporated into the installation of this vegetation (e.g., soil amendments, etc.);
Applicant to development,
as required.
H. No portion of any structure, including roof-mounted equipment, shall exceed 35 feet. All roof-
mounted equipment shall not be visible as viewed from Highway 227, and as needed, shall be
architecturally screened (e.g. roof parapets, etc.);
Applicant to development,
as required.
I. All monument signage shall be low profile and no more than four feet eight inches in height.
Building, monument or other signage shall not be "backlit".
See City Sign Regulations
Chapter 15.40
V-2 All exterior lighting that could have a direct "line of sight" with surrounding residential development
shall be fully shielded, where none of the bulb or highly reflective portions of the light can be seen directly.
This shall be verified by the county prior to final inspection. All other exterior lighting shall be shielded and
directed downwards into the development. The height of light standards shall be no higher than
determined absolutely necessary for its specific application. Light intensity shall be no more than
determined necessary for safety purposes. Light sources shall be of energy efficient design (e.g., sodium-
based, metal halide, etc.). As a part of construction plan submittal, a lighting plan shall be submitted
for county review and approval that incorporates the above measures.
Development will comply
with §17.70.100 Lighting
and night sky preservation
V-3 All efforts will be made to create drainage basins that are shallow enough to avoid the need for
fencing. If fencing is required, such fencing shall be fully screened with evergreen and fast-growing
landscaping. Basin design shall be reviewed and approved by the County prior to issuance of
construction permit.
N/A. Basin completed with
first building development
(finalized in 2012).
V-4. The following areas will be fully screened from Highway 227: loading, service, storage, trash, recycling
collection areas, utilities. Wherever possible, landscaping shall be used to "soften" or enhance the
screened area.
Applicant to development,
as required.
Page 212 of 222
Mitigative Negative Declaration ED01-273 for Senn/Glick Conditional Use Permit D000366D. 2003. County of San Luis Obispo. Page 3 of 12
MITIGATION MEASURE COMPLIANCE
COMMENT
AIR QUALITY
AQ-1 During construction/ground disturbing activities, the applicant shall implement the following
particulate (dust) and ozone control measures. These measures shall be
shown on all applicable construction plans. In addition, the contractor or builder shall designate a person or
persons to monitor the dust control measures and to order increased watering, as necessary, to prevent
transport of dust off-site. Their duties
shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone
number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD prior to commencement of construction.
a. Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible.
b. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving
the site. Increased watering frequency will be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 mph.
Reclaimed (non-potable) water should be used whenever possible.
c. All dirt stockpile areas should be sprayed daily as needed.
d. Permanent dust control measures, such as implementation of approved landscape plans, shall be
implemented as soon as possible following completion of any soil disturbing activities.
e. Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial
grading should be sown with a fast-germinating non-aggressive grass seed (e.g., native, barley)
and watered until vegetation is established.
f. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed as soon as possible. In
addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil
binders are used.
g. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or should maintain at
least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in
accordance with California Vehicle Code Section 23114. (This measure has the potential to
reduce PM10 (particulate matter) emissions from this source by 7 to 14%).
h. Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and
equipment leaving the site. (This measure has the potential to reduce PM10 emissions from this
source 40 to 70%).
i. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water
sweepers with reclaimed water should be used where feasible. (This measure has the potential to
reduce PM10 emissions from this source 25 to 60%).
j. Maintain equipment in tune per manufacturer's specifications.
k. Limit the cut and fill process to less than 2,000 cubic yards per day.
Construction activities to
comply with current APCD
control measures.
Page 213 of 222
Mitigative Negative Declaration ED01-273 for Senn/Glick Conditional Use Permit D000366D. 2003. County of San Luis Obispo. Page 4 of 12
MITIGATION MEASURE COMPLIANCE
COMMENT
AQ-2 At the time of application for construction permits, up to eight showers will be shown on plans
and installed as follows and made available to all employees of this development:
A. Prior to final inspection of the first building, install one (1) men's, women's or unisex shower/
dressing room on the ground floor, and the "stubbing in" for a second shower facility (to be used as
storage area until determined otherwise); this shall be easily accessible to all employees within the
development;
B. Prior to final inspection of the second building, install one (1) men's, women's or unisex shower/
dressing room on the ground floor, and the "stubbing in" for a second shower facility (to be used as
storage area until determined otherwise); this shall be easily accessible to all employees within the
development;
C. Upon completion of the first two buildings, one men's and one women's, or two unisex
shower/ dressing room(s) will exist.
D. Prior to final inspection of the third building, install one (1) men's and one (1) women's
shower/dressing room on the ground floor, and the "stubbing in" of plumbing lines for two (2) additional
shower facilities (one for men, one for women)(to be used as storage areas until determined
otherwise); these shall be easily accessible to all employees within the development;
E. Prior to final inspection, water meters shall be installed where shower usage can be measured.
Readings shall be taken once a month with a yearly summary - provided to APCD. Based on the
usage of these facilities, as determined necessary by APCD, applicant will convert storage areas to
shower facilities.
Current APCD mitigation
measures to apply based
upon City review.
AQ-3 At the time of application for construction permits, 10 bicycle spaces and four bicycle lockers
shall be shown within close proximity of customer and employee entrances, as determined appropriate by
APCD. Prior to occupancy, these items shall be installed. Other potential areas (for at least 12 lockers)
shall be identified on the plans for possible future installation (should the usage warrant additional lockers).
Locker usage shall be monitored by the applicant and APCD. As determined warranted by APCD,
additional lockers in these identified areas shall be installed by the applicant.
Bicycle parking to be
provided pursuant to the
§17.72.070 Bicycle parking
standards.
AQ-4 As a part of construction plan submittal, an APCD-approved trip reduction program shall be
submitted. The intent of the TRP will be to reduce parking requirements by 20%. The following is a partial
list of components to be considered in such a plan: providing APCD one point of contact (e.g., property
manager) for the entire development; requiring each business (e.g., through lease agreement) to designate
a specific employee responsible for implementing and following the TRP for their business, which may
include employee flex time (e.g., reducing work week from 5 to 4 days), providing biking facilities, education
of employers and employees on benefits of telecommuting, employee incentives (e.g., transit, rideshare or
carpooling subsidies), and feasible means to monitoring the TRP measures, etc. An enforcement
mechanism shall be included that meets APCD approval. All applicable components shall be shown on
construction plans.
Need to determine
applicability to
development.
Page 214 of 222
Mitigative Negative Declaration ED01-273 for Senn/Glick Conditional Use Permit D000366D. 2003. County of San Luis Obispo. Page 5 of 12
MITIGATION MEASURE COMPLIANCE
COMMENT
AQ-5 At the time of occupancy of the first unit and thereafter as new or additional uses are
proposed, an applicant-generated parking availability report shall be submitted to the county for review and
approval that demonstrates there is adequate parking for each use proposed per the Land Use
Ordinance. No additional business license approvals shall be issued, if approved development is shown
to exceed approved number of parking spaces. The applicant, or successor in interest, shall submit an
annual report to the county that identifies approved uses and their parking requirements per the LUO.
Parking to be provided
pursuant §17.72.030
Required parking spaces.
AQ-6 At the time of application for construction permits for tenant improvements, the applicant shall
show on all applicable plans the location of indoor and outdoor eating areas for employees. Initially,
outdoor facilities shall consist of two picnic tables, or equivalent, located in a pleasant setting. Plans shall
show where future expansion for two picnic tables, or equivalent, could be accommodated out of doors
should the initial facilities be fully used. At such time, this expansion area shall be improved with the
necessary furniture/accessories. Each business shall provide for or have access to refrigeration and
microwave facilities for employee use.
Applicant to development,
as required.
AQ-7 At the time of application for construction permits, the plans shall show what the minimum energy
requirements are and that the buildings' wall and attic insulation will be at least one level (10%) above Title
24 requirements.
Project to comply with
Clean Energy Choice
Program (See §15.04.110
Amendments to CA Energy
Code
AQ-8 At the time of application for construction permits, the applicable plans shall show that at least
two of the following energy efficiency measures will be incorporated into the project design:
A. Provide shade tree planting along the southern exposures of buildings to reduce summer cooling
needs;
B. Provide shade tree planting in parking lots to reduce evaporative emissions from parked cars;
C. Provide built-in energy efficient appliances, where applicable;
D. Provide double-paned windows;
E. Use sodium parking lot lights;
F. Use energy efficient interior lighting.
See comment to AQ-7..
Geology and Soils
GS-1 Prior to surface water leaving the site, it shall be first intercepted by properly sized hydrocarbon
separators/filters. Prior to occupancy, a commercial property owner's association, or some other
method/means approved by the county, shall be established to include a provision and financial means to
keep these separators/filters maintained on a regular basis and in good working order. These measures
shall be shown on all applicable improvement plans and approved by the county prior to grading/building
construction.
N/A. Completed with
recorded CC&Rs.
GS-2 As a part of-construction plan submittal, to minimize potential sedimentation to downstream resources, a
sedimentation and erosion control plan shall be prepared for all grading activities.
Applicant to development,
as required.
GS-3 Any disturbed areas shall be restored and revegetated as soon as possible. Applicant to development,
Page 215 of 222
Mitigative Negative Declaration ED01-273 for Senn/Glick Conditional Use Permit D000366D. 2003. County of San Luis Obispo. Page 6 of 12
MITIGATION MEASURE COMPLIANCE
COMMENT
as required.
GS-4 Prior to issuance of construction permits, applicant shall prepare a Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (approved by Regional Water Quality Control Board) that includes Best Management
Practices. These measures shall be incorporated into the applicable construction plans.
Applicant to development,
as required.
Noise
N-1 At the time of construction plan submittal, per the noise analysis (Lord; May 2001), all loud
stationary equipment shall be located either: inside the building; west of Buildings 1, 2 or 3, where any
direct line of noise source would be blocked by one of these buildings; or fully within an enclosure designed
for noise reduction to acceptable levels. As a part of this submittal or as a part of all future business
license requests, use of any heavy machinery, such as milling machines, industrial blowers,
compressors, etc., shall be identified in the application. A supplemental noise report shall be included
showing the noise impacts and what, if any, special measures will be installed to reduce these impacts to
acceptable thresholds to surrounding residential development.
Applicant to development,
as required.
N-2 Roll-up doors on the north and east sides of Buildings 1 and 2 shall be kept closed during working
hours when not being used for loading. At such time that Building 3 is constructed, these doors may be
left open if internal noises will be sufficiently blocked by Building 3 to stay within acceptable property
boundary noise thresholds.
Applicant to development,
as required.
N-3 Prior to occupancy of any building, an acoustical analysis shall be performed (and submitted to the
County for review and approval) that shows adequate measures have been installed to be able to meet
acceptable interior noise levels relating to aircraft and airport operations.
Development to include
applicable noise level
reduction methodologies,
PUBLIC SERVICES
FIRE SAFETY
PS-1 The applicant has read CDF's 4/24/00 letter and agrees to incorporate these measures as a part of a
fire safety plan, prior to final inspection, including but not necessarily limited to: installation of a
commercial fire/life safety sprinkler system (monitored by licensed alarm company), providing portable fire
extinguishers, providing roof access from two points, providing at least 180,000 gallons exclusively for
stored fire water (1,500 gallons for 120 minutes) available at all times with water pressure between 20 and
150 psi, installation of several fire hydrants meeting CDF standards, providing minimum of 20' fire lanes
that are all-weather surfaces, and roads shall provide for at least a 30-ton load capacity (City of SLO Fire
Department requirement).
PS-2 Water delivery system for fire water should be designed with eventual connection to City of San Luis
Obispo water anticipated. Such provisions shall be shown on construction plans.
PS-3 As a part of construction plan submittal, the development will need to:
A. Identify what, if any, hazardous materials or wastes could result from the proposed uses. In addition,
the application shall identify how any such materials or wastes will be handled or stored on-site;
B. Work with GDF on the need for additional fire hydrants if development is more than 150 feet from
N/A per annexation.
Development to comply
with City Fire/Life/Safety
requirements.
Page 216 of 222
Mitigative Negative Declaration ED01-273 for Senn/Glick Conditional Use Permit D000366D. 2003. County of San Luis Obispo. Page 7 of 12
MITIGATION MEASURE COMPLIANCE
COMMENT
streets.
Transportation/Circulation
TR-1 Pre-realignment of Airport Drive west of Highway 227 - Should occupancy of this development
be approved prior to the County Airport realigning Airport Drive (southern access) with Tract 2368 northern
access road, the applicant shall install a median (or functional equivalent such as a right-in, right-out
triangle on Airport Drive) along Highway 227, if required by Caltrans. Such improvements should meet
Caltrans approval and design standards, to prevent left turns to or from Airport Drive onto Highway 227, if
required by Caltrans, this work shall be completed prior to occupancy. This shall remain in effect until such
time Airport Drive is realigned with project's access road and is signalized.
N/A. Road improvements
has been completed.
TR-2 Prior to occupancy or final building permit inspection, whichever occurs first, the following
traffic measures shall be completed, or financial arrangements made pursuant to a mitigation fee
program:
Completed with first
building development
(finalized in 2012). See
below.
A. Installation of the access road fronting the site to a 2/3 A-2 (urban) standard, minimum paved width to
be 26 feet (two 12-foot lanes plus a 2-foot shoulder adjacent to the curb); and from the site to
Highway 227, a 2/3 A-1 (rural) standard, minimum paved width to be 24 feet (two 12-foot lanes); all
within a minimum 40-foot dedicated right-of-way. Curb, gutter and sidewalk improvements are required
along the project side of the access road, along the frontage of the site only. Design of the access
road shall be consistent with the design and alignment that is shown for Tract 2368 and shall provide for
an ultimate cross-section of two 12-foot lanes, two 2-foot shoulders and one 12-foot center turn lane
in the segment between Highway 227 and the westerly access point to the Senn project.
N/A. Road improvement has
been completed.
B. Installation of 3" electrical conduit for future signalization of Highway 227 /Airport Drive (realigned
location) intersection along the Broad Street frontage of project access road.
N/A. Road improvement has
been completed.
C. The applicant shall enter into an "Agreement for Pro-Rata Share for Improvements" with Caltrans,
in which the applicant agrees to deposit $50,000, plus an inflation factor based on Caltrans
Highway Construction Cost Index, toward the signalization of the Highway 227/access road
intersection or pay an equivalent amount into a County Road Fee Program for Highway 227, if one
has been established for this area.
N/A. Completed with first
building development
(finalized in 2012). .
D. A signed Memorandum of Understanding between the Airport, Tract 2368 and the Senn
development shall be submitted to the County; it shall include a provision that specifies the location
of the intersection, which must align with Tract 2368.
N/A. Airport Master Plan
was modified and
developed, accordingly.
E. Installation of right-turn-in deceleration lane and right-turn-out acceleration lane on Highway 227 at
the access road intersection to the satisfaction of Caltrans.
N/A. Road improvement has
been completed.
Page 217 of 222
Mitigative Negative Declaration ED01-273 for Senn/Glick Conditional Use Permit D000366D. 2003. County of San Luis Obispo. Page 8 of 12
MITIGATION MEASURE COMPLIANCE
COMMENT
F. To address the cumulative effects of the project, the applicant shall do one of the following:
i. Payment of Road Improvement Fees to County Public Works if an impact fee program for this
area has been established under the authority of the Mitigation Fee Act and County
Ordinance No. 2379. Any capital improvements constructed by the applicant, which are
included in the calculation of the fees, or reports prepared by the applicant which are related
to the implementation of the impact fee program, shall be considered an "in-kind" contribution,
and credited against the amount that would otherwise be owed; or
ii. Enter into an "Agreement for Pro-Rata Share for Improvements" with Caltrans, in which the
applicant agrees to deposit $95,500, plus an inflation factor based on Caltrans Highway
Construction Cost Index, toward improvements as specified in Table 8 of the Traffic Impact
Analysis prepared for the project, or additional improvements listed in #27.F.iii below. Applicant
shall provide receipt or other written documentation from Caltrans that the funds have been
deposited. Any capital improvements constructed by the applicant, or reports prepared by the
applicant, which are related to the implementation of the cumulative mitigation measures, shall be
considered an "in-kind" contribution and credited against the amount that would otherwise be
owed; or
iii. Construct one or more of the following improvements and document that the total value of
improvements constructed equals or exceeds $95,500, plus an inflation factor based on Caltrans
Highway Construction Cost Index:
a. Southbound right-turn deceleration lane on Highway 227 at Crestmont Drive.
b. Two-way left-turn lane on Highway 227 between Crestmont Drive and Los Ranchos Road.
c. Extend the southbound right-turn deceleration lane on Highway 227 at Los Ranchos Road.
N/A. Completed with first
building development
(finalized in 2012). .
Any capital improvements constructed by the applicant, or reports prepared by the applicant, which are related
to the implementation of the cumulative mitigation measures, shall be considered an "in-kind" contribution and
credited against the amount that would otherwise be owed.
N/A. Road improvement has
been completed.
TR-3 Prior to installing any road improvements within Highway 227 right-of-way, an encroachment
permit shall be obtained from Caltrans.
N/A. Road improvement has
been completed.
TR-4 At the time any construction permit is submitted for approval (involving the establishment of
new buildings or outdoor use areas), a cumulative summary of all previously approved and pending
applications shall be submitted for the 68 acres known as the Senn/Glick development (D000336D) and the
Morabito/Burke development (Tract 2368 - see Figure 1). If the cumulative total (including the proposed
use) of approved and pending uses is greater than 450,000 square feet of gross floor area, a traffic signal
warrant analysis shall be conducted by the applicant for review by the County and Caltrans. When the
warrants for the installation of the traffic signal are met, the signal shall be installed at the Highway
227/project access
road/Airport Drive (realigned location) intersection prior to occupancy or final inspection (whichever occurs
first) of the proposed building(s). All monies previously collected by Caltrans/ MOU for this purpose shall
This mitigation was
superseded and incorporated
into the County’s State
Route 227 Corridor Traffic
Mitigation Program based
on the SLOCOG State
Route 227 Operations
Study.
Page 218 of 222
Mitigative Negative Declaration ED01-273 for Senn/Glick Conditional Use Permit D000366D. 2003. County of San Luis Obispo. Page 9 of 12
MITIGATION MEASURE COMPLIANCE
COMMENT
be provided to help offset the costs of the traffic signal.
TR-5 _ Prior to occupancy, and as a part of each business license request, the specific use and square
footage shall be identified with the calculated parking requirements. The development shall show how it is
incorporating the APCD-approved Trip Reduction Plan. A 20% credit will be applied towards parking with
adequate TRP compliance. This revised estimate will be added to previously approved business licenses on
the subject property. If the total for the entire development is greater than the approved parking spaces
(approximately 258), the use shall be revised or reduced so this total will not exceed the approved number of
spaces or additional on-site spaces constructed to provide for the proposed use. If this threshold is ever
reached prior to project achieving full occupancy, all subsequent development allowed shall only be uses that
have low parking lot requirements (1 employee or less per 2,000 square feet) or additional on-site parking
spaces may be constructed for the use. Additional uses will only be allowed when it can be shown the
additional parking needs will not exceed the approved parking space maximum.
Applicant to development,
as required., as required.
TR-6 At the time of application for construction permits, applicable plans shall show pedestrian access
being provided between the main building entrances and the primary street serving the development;
pedestrian access shall also be provided to adjacent development, where appropriate.
Applicant to development,
as required., as required.
AIRPORT SAFETY
TR-7 As a part of construction plan application submittal,
A. Electrical plans shall show how it will not interfere with navigation signals or radio communications
between aircraft and the airport;
B. All roof materials will be non-reflective;
C. All uses shall show how all exterior lighting will not conflict with airport lighting;
D. No portion of the structure, including roof mounted equipment, shall exceed 35 feet in height;
E. No landscaping, at maturity, shall exceed 40 feet in height;
F. As applicable, development shall meet and maintain the requirements of FAR 77 "Objects Affecting
Navigable Airspace";
G. A noise analysis shall be included, by a qualified expert, that shows how acceptable interior noise
levels will be met, per the Noise Element and Airport Land Use Plan. All applicable construction plans
shall show installation of these noise measures;
H. No uses shall be permitted that are not allowed in the most current Airport Land Use Plan.
Applicant to development,
as required.
TR-8 Prior to occupancy or final inspection of any structure, an avigation easement shall be
executed and recorded. This document shall be disclosed to all owners, potential purchasers, occupants,
potential occupants of the presence of the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport and its associated
airport operation impacts prior to entering any contractual obligation to purchase, lease, rent, or otherwise
occupy any portion of this development. This document shall specify that no uses under this permit will be
allowed that could electrically interfere with airport communications.
Applicant to development,
as required.
Page 219 of 222
Mitigative Negative Declaration ED01-273 for Senn/Glick Conditional Use Permit D000366D. 2003. County of San Luis Obispo. Page 10 of 12
MITIGATION MEASURE COMPLIANCE
COMMENT
WASTEWATER
WW-1 Wastewater will be handled through an on-site treatment plant, off-site purveyor (Fiero Lane Water
Company), or by the City of San Luis Obispo (should the property be annexed) as approved by
Environmental Health and/or Regional Water Quality Control Board. If an off-site purveyor is used, it
must be clearly shown to the county that such a connection will not result in any significant direct or
secondary effects (e.g., pipe installation running through a riparian area or archaeological site; requiring
enlargement of existing pipes that are currently within sensitive resources; etc.). An on-site system shall
be based on no more than 500 employees (Katherman; Dec. 2001), and prior to occupancy of the first
tenant, an approved Wastewater Discharge Permit (if required) will be submitted to the county. This shall
include regular monitoring for potentially hazardous wastes. At that time, the applicant shall submit to the
county a permit or letter from APCD regarding the emissions relating to the operation of this system.
N/A per annexation and City
water service.
WW-2 All applicable construction plans shall show the location of the dry sewer line to be installed (for
eventual hook-up between development and a (future) city sewer main line). Pipe sizing shall be based
on the proposed project's 180,000 square foot maximum limit. The applicant shall work with the City of
San Luis Obispo to determine appropriate location(s) and any related infrastructure requirements to maximize
compatibility with city systems. This sewer line shall be installed prior to final inspection.
N/A per annexation and City
wastewater service.
WW-3 Notice shall be provided to all building tenants (and included in all lease/rental agreements) that
hazardous wastes will not be allowed into the wastewater system and locations of where these wastes can
be disposed of properly. Wastewater effluent shall be monitored regularly, as specified by RWQCB or
Environmental Health for hazardous wastes.
N/A per annexation and City
wastewater service.
Compliance with City
wastewater discharge
requirements.
WATER
W-1 Prior to occupancy,
A. The applicant shall provide sufficient evidence to the Environmental Health Division that an
acceptable water purveyor (including a Landowner's Water Association) has been established to
serve the development;
N/A per annexation and City
water service.
B. Water meters shall be installed at all water wells providing water to the proposed development
(potable and non-potable sources), as well as at each building. N/A per annexation and City
water service. Wells to be
abandoned.
C. All non-potable water lines shall be constructed in a manner that prevents any backflows to potable
water supply sources.
Applicant to development, as
required; in compliance with
the City’s Engineering
standards.
D. Any "brine" or otherwise unusable water resulting from certain filtering systems that are determined
needed to improve water quality (e.g., reverse osmosis) shall be used for non-potable applications
(e.g., toilets, etc.). If Environmental Health or RWQCB determine that the "brine" cannot be used as
a non-potable water use, this brine will be subtracted from the 5 acre-feet of water available for the
overall project.
N/A per annexation and City
water service.
Page 220 of 222
Mitigative Negative Declaration ED01-273 for Senn/Glick Conditional Use Permit D000366D. 2003. County of San Luis Obispo. Page 11 of 12
MITIGATION MEASURE COMPLIANCE
COMMENT
W-2 The water purveyor shall take monthly meter readings and provide to the county (Planning Dept. and
Environmental Health Division) a yearly summary which would include the following:
N/A per annexation and City
water service.
A. Monthly water levels reading from all water purveyor wells and pumpage consumed from all wells
and each approved development, including water used for irrigation or any water filtering system(s)
(e.g., reverse osmosis including brine, etc.);
B. Provide the areal extent of the mutual water company's boundaries (in acres).
C. Testing for volatile and synthetic organic compounds shall be conducted at intervals determined
appropriate by the Environmental Health Division.
D. Determine on a yearly basis that the leakage/loss within the water piping system is not greater than
15%. If the loss exceeds 15%, then the leaky section of pipe will be found and repaired-within 60
days of detection;
E. Monthly readings shall be made available upon request of the county or other prospective tenants of the
development.
W-3 All landscaping shall be drought tolerant. At a minimum, the following shall be used/installed prior to
final inspection/occupancy:
Applicable to future
development, and subject to
§17.70.220 Water efficient
landscape standards A. All landscape irrigation (except turf) shall employ low water use techniques (e.g., drip irrigation);
B. Turf shall be a warm-season variety and shall be used as an incidental component of the overall
landscape plan; and
C. Reclaimed water shall be used for all landscape water requirements (including all turf areas) if
available from on-site wastewater treatment. Periodic flushing with potable water (up to 10% of
estimated water requirements) may be allowed.
W-4 All water fixtures installed (including showers) that are not specified in the Uniform Plumbing Code
shall be of "ultra-low" flow design, where applicable.
Applicant to development, as
required.
W-5 The project's water analysis is based on the entire project using up to 5-acre feet per year (AFY) at
the time of full build-out and/or full occupancy. When a business license is submitted, all water uses
shall be specified, and the current project water consumption and extraction (water summary
information per item #2) quantified using acceptable "industry" averages, or similar project-specific
water data. At no time shall the cumulative water demand + the estimated future demand for the
project exceed the proposed usage of 5 AFY + 10% (totaling 5.5 afy).
N/A per annexation and City
water service.
W-6 Existing wells shall be used to monitor groundwater basin water levels. Readings shall be taken
quarterly and submitted to the county yearly.
N/A per annexation and City
water service.
W-7 Prior to approval of any business license submittal, should the water summary information
indicate that the existing development + any proposed development will use more than 10% over
the project's allocation (5 AFY) of area ground water, additional ground water analysis (prepared by
a qualified State-licensed geologist/hydrogeologist) shall be performed, using all existing well data,
to show that there is a long-term, sustainable water source, including during "severe" drought
periods. Additional water conservation measures or land use limitations may be necessary.
N/A per annexation and City
water service.
Page 221 of 222
Mitigative Negative Declaration ED01-273 for Senn/Glick Conditional Use Permit D000366D. 2003. County of San Luis Obispo. Page 12 of 12
MITIGATION MEASURE COMPLIANCE
COMMENT
W-8 Prior to issuance of construction permit of the first building, a master "Drought Water
Management Plan" shall be prepared to provide guidelines for how all future uses will be managed
during "severe" drought periods and submitted to the county for approval. This plan shall include,
but is not necessarily limited to:
N/A per annexation and City
water service.
a. the definition of a "severe" drought year (as defined by NOAA's Palmer Drought Severity method or
other similarly recognized methodology);
b. identification of general measures available to reduce indoor water usage (to be refined as needed
for each use approved);
c. identification of specific measures to be applied for landscape watering;
d. determination of appropriate early triggers to determine when "severe" drought conditions exist
and process for initiating additional water conservation measures;
e. discussion of an off-site water credit program where additional water availability would be credited
to the project for any "extra" reclaimed water from the package treatment plant (that is not used for
on-site landscaping) that would be delivered to surrounding development's landscaping.
Once it is determined that a "severe" drought condition exists, restricted (drought) water usage measures
shall remain in effect until it is shown satisfactorily to the county that the "severe" drought condition no
longer exists.
N/A per annexation and City
water service.
W-9 If the County determines that a "severe" drought condition exists (per the Palmer Index), it must be
shown, prior to any new business license approvals, that the cumulative project water use+ any
proposed development use, after applying all or some of the measures listed in the Drought Water
Management Plan, does not exceed a "drought" estimate of reduced water demand of 4.2 AFY. This
condition is intended to maintain a balance between safe yield (annual recharge) and annual water
consumption during a drought condition.
N/A per annexation and City
water service.
W-10 Upon submittal of a building permit, a county-approved water treatment system shall be included.
If any approved water filtering process (e.g., reverse osmosis, ) will result in water wastage (e.g.,
create brine) to create potable water, a separate secondary non-potable water line shall be incorporated
on all applicable plans where the "brine" will be used/blended for non-potable applications (e.g., toilets,
etc.) to the extent that all of the brine generated has been used.
N/A to future development.
Attachment: County of San Luis Obispo (Mitigated) Negative Declaration & Notice of Determination, May 23, 2003.
Page 222 of 222