Loading...
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*<$5''80367(57<3     8:72-+<67"6+((7&217(176,)<-"]RQLQJVXEPLWWDO7+,6'5$:,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&$7UDVKGHWDLOV7UDVKGHWDLOV$%8,/',1*$75$6+(1&/2685(352),/(%8,/',1*$75$6+(1&/*$7((/(9$7,21&08:$//:678&&2),1,6+&08:$//:678&&2),1,6+:22'(175(//,66<67(0%8,/',1*%75$6+(1&/2685(%8,/',1*%75$6+(1&/*$7((/(9$7,21%8,/',1*%75$6+(1&/2685(352),/(%8,/',1*$75$6+(1&/2685(:22'(175(//,66<67(0:22'(175(//,66<67(06&$/(  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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x',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/$16 7<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*)$&725 3(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;œGO¦fY¦?EtžbEdEbnEC¦  ¦ %”Ÿ(¦bElˆA;fEC¦  ¦   )#¦AbEEQ¦dEf?;AQ¦   bERYA=gE¦)¦EqMdfMVI¦.2¦`mEEV¦\;RTd¦fY¦fKMd¦RYA=gMYV¦           1+(,1-*!!-1."-!11'1."+1"+)(11 1   1 01 ///#$+%( (&&&"&&"*$*&¦mŽ|“€¦Ž€¦<cB¦~‹‹€Œ“¡  &$"&&"*$*&¦mŽ|“€¦Ž€¦“€€¦€‹–|Š¦ŽŠ|Œ¦|ŒD<hF5¦#&"*1"*#*&¦P@R<*#&#1¦   1 1  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$.i1+, !$ +(+*. # !. )!!*.+&#3683/#,(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€’†ƒŒ¦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`S i#aHTPMB]MSJiTWi6RTT]LMTJGSMDi<TPB]MPGi/XJBSMDi TRUT^SF\iGRM\\MTS\i</ i+T`i+&#3683/#,(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_BPiHTWR iB]]WBD]M_GiPBYJG i`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\\b iPBZJG iPGB]LGWbiPGB_G\i]]WBE]M_GiPBWJG i`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 $BPPiDTPTWiCWMPPMBS]iTWBSJGi]TiWGF iWGPMBCPGiHBPPiDTPTWi!WT^JL]i]TPGWBS]1+8.;6i #3($/+(i +/.!/.i1+.#i83##i ,'GMJL]i i6UWGBFi i$B\] JWT`MSJi 3G\M\]\iTBOiZTT]iWT] i]TPGWB]G\iBSbi\TMPi]bUG iDBSiLB_GiBJJWG\\M_GiWTT]\iWTT]iMS]W^\MTSiLMJL !GDMF^T^\i 'BSF\TRG iPBZJGiPGB_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\G iWT^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|‹Œ|¦D†–€6¦*--¦Š¦Œ“|„€¦ ¦+-¦‚¦8¦1¦’“€€“¦“€€’¦€•†€¦[¦€˜†’“†Œ„¦“€€’¦ ¦1¦Œ€—¦“€€’¦8¦1¦’“€€“¦“€€’¦““|Š¦]|Š‹|¦<–€Œ•€6¦+**¦Š¦Œ“|„€ ¦+-¦“¦8¦4¦e“€€“¦“€€’¦€•†€¦3¦€˜†’“†Œ„¦“€€’¦ ¦+¦Œ€—¦“€€’¦8¦&&¦’“€€“¦“€€’¦““|Š¦  š ehcFFh¦hcFFe&&¦Œ€—¦|Œ¦1¦€˜†’“†Œ„¦’“€€“¦“€€’¦8¦&3¦’“€€“¦“‘€€’¦““|Š&0¦“€€’¦€•†€¦’€€¦~|Š~•Š|“†Œ¦|}–€ › cFRZB<iFD¦^<RU¦hcFFe*¦a•€€Œ¦]|Š‹’¦“¦}€¦€Š~|“€¦8¦*¦ €Š~|“€¦Ž|Š‹¦“€€’› XFp¦_<RU¦hcFFe&,¦Œ€—¦Ž|Š‹¦“€€’› XFp¦eL<DF¦hcFFe&-¦Œ€—¦’…|€¦“€€’›š›hZkR¦hcFFe¦cFUZoFD0¦“€€’¦“¦}€¦€‹–€¦Ž€¦h€€¦c€‹–|Š¦]Š|Œ¦e…€€“¦B$$¦hZh<R¦hcFFe¦cFUZoFD¦¦cF]R<BFD+¦“€€’¦“¦}€¦€‹–€¦|Œ¦€ŽŠ|~€¦—†“…¦E–€„€€Œ¦\€|¦hZkR¦XFp¦hcFFe,,¦i“|Š¦Œ€—¦“€€’› 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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age 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<3 723 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 ( <    6)“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“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