The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About10141-10155RESOLUTION NO. 10155 (2010 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO TO INCREASE EDUCATION AND ENFORCEMENT PROGRAMS FOCUSING ON REGULATING RETAIL ALCOHOL OUTLETS WITH GRANT FUNDING PROVIDED THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL WHEREAS, the San Luis Obispo Police Department through the City of San Luis Obispo desires to undertake programs to increase education and enforcement to focus on regulating retail alcohol outlets in the community; and WHEREAS, grant funds are available through the Grant Assistance Program (GAP) administered by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo that the City Manager of the City of San Luis Obispo is authorized to execute all grant related documents including the State of California Standard Agreement contract, any extensions or amendments thereof, and any subsequent contract with the State in relation thereto. IT IS AGREED that any liability arising out of the performance of this contract, including civil court actions for damages, shall be the responsibility of the grant recipient and the authorizing agency. The State of California and-ABC disclaim responsibility for any such liability. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that grant funds received hereunder shall not be used to supplant expenditures controlled by this body. IT IS ALSO AGREED that this award is not subject to local hiring freezes. Upon motion of Council Member Settle, seconded by Vice Mayor Carter, and on the following vote: AYES: Council Members Ashbaugh, Marx and Settle, Vice Mayor Carter and Mayor Romero NOES: None ABSENT: None R 10155 Resolution No. 10155 (201 Series) Page 2 The foregoing resolution was adopted this 16`h day of March 2010. Mayorb�avid F. Romero ATTEST: Elaina Cano City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Dietrick City Attorney 0 0 RESOLUTION NO. 10154 (2010 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO CERTIFYING THE FINAL PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE ORCUTT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN, ADOPTING THE ORCUTT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN, AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS TO IMPLEMENT THE LAND USES APPROVED IN THE SPECIFIC PLAN (SP, ER 209 -98) WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo met in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California on March 2, 2010, for the purpose of considering a recommendation made by the Planning Commission to certify the Final Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP), adopt the OASP, and approve associated General Plan amendments to implement the land uses shown in the GASP; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommendation was based on public input received over the course of eight public hearings, and the advice and recommendations of other City advisory bodies including the Parks and Recreation Commission, the Bicycle. Advisory Committee, the Cultural Heritage Committee and the Architectural Review Commission; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, the potential environmental impacts of the project have been evaluated in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and the City's Environmental Review Guidelines; and WHEREAS, development of the Orcutt Area is expected to occur over a twenty to thirty year horizon, and therefore requires an intergenerational look at infrastructure requirements and planning for long -term City goals; and WHEREAS, development of the Orcutt Area will be better served by City infrastructure, including police, fire, water and sewer service, and City streets, and described in the OASP; and WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff presented at said meeting. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. EIR Certification. The City Council does hereby certify the EIR based on the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations included in Exhibit A, and subject to a Mitigation Measure Monitoring Plan maintained on file in the Community Development Department. R 10154 Resolution No. 10154 (20 10 Series) Page 2 SECTION 2. Adoption of the OASP. The City Council does hereby adopt the Planning Commission Draft of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan and directs the Community Development Director to begin implementation of the Plan by working with property owners to develop a boundary map for a one -time, City- sponsored annexation, with the following changes: 1. References in the document to Skinner as a prior owner of the Righetti Ranch Housing property shall be replaced with the correct surname, Jacobson. 2. Chapter 5, Transportation, Policy 5.1c shall be revised as follows: New individual driveway access onto Orcutt Road shall be prohibited under the Specific Plan. Existing driveways with access onto Orcutt Road may be used either for the existing number of units already constructed on land under one ownership or up to a total of two units for each existing ownership if not now constructed. Additional units above these thresholds shall require new road and intersection improvements as provided in this Specific Plan. Exceptions to this provision may be approved by the City Council for interim facilities approved as part of a subdivision phasing plan or development plan. 3. Appendix A shall be revised with updated property information for the Taylor Property, as shown in Exhibit B. 4. Section 3.2.6 of the OASP shall be updated, as shown in Exhibit C, except the following sentence shall be inserted as the third to last sentence of the last paragraph: The City does not support Site C. 5. Chapter 8 shall be revised to incorporate a 50% obligation for the Orcutt Area to pay for the grade- separated railroad crossing at Industrial Way, with direction to City staff to pursue grants to fund the remaining 50% of the facility cost. SECTION 3. Airport Land Use Commission. The adoption of the OASP shall become effective immediately following a determination by the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) that the OASP is consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP). An ALUP consistency hearing is scheduled for March 17, 2010. In the event the ALUC conditions its determination of consistency on amendments to the OASP, the Community Development Director is authorized to make minor changes to the OASP to respond to concerns expressed by members of the ALUC relative to airport compatibility during the hearing. If the ALUC determines that substantial changes to the OASP are needed to achieve consistency with the Airport Land Use Plan, the adoption of the OASP shall not become effective until such time as the City Council has reviewed and approved those changes at a noticed public hearing. SECTION 4. General Plan Amendments. The City Council does hereby amend the General Plan Land Use Map to implement the land use designations approved as part of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan, as shown in Exhibit D. Figure 2 of the Land Use Element shall be revised amending the location of the Urban Reserve Line, as shown in Exhibit E. These General Plan amendments are approved based on the following findings: Resolution No. 10154 (201100 Series) O Page 3 1. The proposed amendments to the General Plan Land Use Map implement the Orcutt Area Specific Plan, by updating the General Plan with the land uses identified in the specific plan for Orcutt Area properties. 2. The land uses proposed for the Orcutt Area are consistent with the General Plan, which identifies the Orcutt Area as a residential expansion area. 3. The proposed amendments are necessary to implement the General Plan, which says that development in any part of the Orcutt Area may not occur until a specific plan has been adopted for the whole area. 4. The proposed Urban Reserve Line (URL) expansion is justified because the revised URL incorporates relatively flat land on the north side of Righetti Hill that is suitable for development, and excludes a similarly sized area on the upper slopes of the west side of Righetti Hill, which is not suitable for development. Upon motion of Vice Mayor Carter, seconded by Council Member Ashbaugh, and on the following vote: AYES: Council Members Ashbaugh and Settle, Vice Mayor Carter, and Mayor Romero NOES: None ABSENT: None RECUSED: Council Member Marx The foregoing resolution was adopted this 2nd day of March 2010. Mayor David F. Romero ATTEST: Elaina Cano City Clerk APPROVED AS TO istine Dietrick City Attorney i Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION The City of San Luis Obispo (City) has decided to approve the Orcutt Area Specific Plan (project). The City is the lead agency under the California. Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has certified a program environmental impact report (EIR) for the project. Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations [CCR]) and Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code require a lead agency to adopt findings for each significant environmental impact disclosed in an EIR. Specifically, for each significant impact, the lead agency must find that: Changes or alterations have been incorporated into the project to avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR; — Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and should be adopted by that agency; or — Specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations make the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the ER infeasible. In addition to making a finding for each significant impact, if the lead agency approves a project without mitigating all of the significant impacts, it must prepare a statement of overriding considerations, in which it balances the benefits of the project against the unavoidable environmental risks. The statement of overriding considerations must explain the social, economic, or other reasons for approving the project despite its environmental impacts (14 CCR 15093, Pub. Res. Code 21081). This document contains the findings and statement of overriding considerations for the approval of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan and reflects the City's independent judgment. This document incorporates by reference the program EIR. The EIR, specific plan, and other portions of the administrative record are available for review at: City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Contact: Michael Codron (805)781 -7175 SECTION 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A PROTECT OBJECTIVES As required by the City General Plan, the specific plan is intended to contain policies and standards that will facilitate appropriate development of land, protection of open space, and provision of adequate public facilities. The specific plan is more detailed than the general plan but less precise than subdivision maps or construction plans. The overall objective of the City of San Luis Obispo A December 2009 Findings of Fact and Statement Overriding Considerations v Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A project is to adopt a specific plan for the Orcutt area, pursuant to the City General Plan. Orcutt Area Specific Plan objectives include: 1. Develop a new residential neighborhood to meet the City's housing needs and that designates sufficient land for neighborhood serving commercial uses to reduce vehicle trips and provide for the convenience of area residents. 2. Provide a variety of housing types and costs to meet the needs of renters and buyers with a variety of income - levels, including inclusionary affordable housing for residents with moderate, low and very -low income levels. 3. Protect and enhance Righetti Hill, creek /wetland habitats, and visual resources in open space areas. 4. Provide a variety of park and recreational facilities for residents of the Orcutt Area, such as parks, recreational facilities, public squares, plazas and green spaces. 5. Phase the proposed development so that public facilities are developed concurrently with each new phase in a rational and cost effective fashion. 6. Encourage the use of bicycles and walking within the Plan Area by including specific policies or development standards that will result in subdivision and building designs that facilitate bike use and pedestrian access. Incorporate all classes of bike lanes and include bike and pedestrian paths through the parks and open space areas. 7. Protect the new residents from railroad noise through a variety of measures consistent with Noise Element Policies 1.8.2, Mitigating Outdoor Noise Exposure, and 18.3 Mitigating Indoor Noise Exposure. 8. Create a regional detention system to facilitate drainage solutions for future subdivisions. B. PROPOSED PROTECT The proposed project includes implementation of the goals and policies contained in the Orcutt Area Specific Plan. The Orcutt Area Specific Plan is a specific plan that would guide the annexation and development of the Plan Area. The Plan Area is 231 acres of property east of the southern portion of the City. The proposed Specific Plan designates the land.for 113 acres of residential, 0.25 acres of neighborhood commercial, 81 acres of open space, 21 acres of parks, and a 5 acre school site. Urban infrastructure to support this development would also be included in the near term. Infrastructure requirements include roads, water and wastewater conveyance systems, and stormwater conveyance systems. The Specific Plan proposes an adjustment of the Urban Reserve Line (URL) to include the entire Plan Area within the City's Urban Reserve Area. SECTION 3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT A. BACKGROUND The program EIR was prepared in compliance with CEQA and State CEQA Guidelines. As such, the EIR contains analysis, at a program level, of the basic issues that will be used in conjunction with subsequent tiered environmental documents for specific projects related to the City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 2 Findings of Fact and StatemenOverriding Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A Orcutt Area Specific Plan. Once the Orcutt Area Specific Plan is adopted by the City, the basic policy issues will not need to be revisited by subsequent (second -tier) documents. The DEIR, dated December 2007, was circulated to appropriate public agencies, organizations, and interested groups and individuals for a period of 60 days (through February 28, 2008). Between February and June 2008, the Planning Commission held six public hearings to discuss the Public Hearing Draft of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan and the Draft EIR for the project. Based on comments received during this period, portions of the DEIR were revised to address technical issues raised in several letters. The City recirculated these portions of the Revised DEIR, which included the Agricultural Resources section, Water and Wastewater section, as well as the Executive Summary. The City extended the public review period through June 2008 and received several additional comments on the Revised DEIR. B. IMPACT ANALYSIS Three categories of impacts are identified in the Environmental Impact Report: Class I. Class I impacts are significant and unavoidable. To approve a project resulting in Class I impacts, the CEQA Guidelines require decision makers to make findings of overriding consideration that "specific legal, technological, economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR" Class R. Class II impacts are significant but can be mitigated to a level of insignificance by measures identified in this EIR and the project description. When approving a project with Class II impacts, the decision- makers must make findings that changes or alternatives to the project have been incorporated that reduce the impacts to a less than significant level. Class III. Class III impacts are adverse but not significant. SECTION 4. FINDINGS FOR LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT The City Council has concluded that the following effects are not considered significant. A. AGRICULTURE 1. Impact AG -1 Although the proposed project would permanently' convert soils that have been defined by the City as prime agriculture lands, the value of the Orcutt Area's agricultural land resources, as measured by the LESA Model, is not considered significant. Therefore, the project would result in Class III, less than significant, impacts related to agricultural conversion. a. Mitigation: None City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 3 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overrlding Considerations O Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A b. F din : The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. B. AIR QUALITY 1. Impact AQ -2 Specific Plan traffic generation, together with other cumulative traffic associated with foreseeable development would not result in CO "hotspots ". Therefore, the Specific Plan's potential to generate CO "hotspots" is considered to be a Class III, less than significant impact. a. Mitigation: None b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant.. C. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 1. Impact B -1 Development under the proposed Specific Plan would result in the conversion of non -native annual grassland habitat to urban uses. This is considered a Class III, less than significant impact. a. Mitt ag tion: None b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. D. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS 1. Impact G -1 Seismically induced ground shaking could destroy or damage structures and infrastructure developed for the project site, resulting in loss of property or risk to human health. This is considered a Class III, less than significant impact. a. Mitigation: None b. Fes: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. E. NOISE 1. Impact N -2 Specific plan - generated traffic would incrementally increase noise levels along roads in the Specific Plan vicinity. The effect of this noise on off -site sensitive receptors in the area, and also within the Specific Plan area, is considered a Class III, less than significant impact. a. Mitigation: None b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 4 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 0 Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A 2. Impact N -3 Although noise associated with airport operations would affect sensitive receptors in the Plan Area, the impact would be considered Class III, less than significant. a. Miti ag tion: None b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. F. PUBLIC SERVICES 1. Impact PS -1 Annexation and development of the Orcutt Area would increase the number of residents served by the City of San Luis Obispo Police Department. Additional service needs would decrease the amount of patrol unit available time. This is considered a Class III, less than significant impact. a. Mitigation: None b. Fes: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. G. WATER AND WASTEWATER 1. Impact W -1 The project would increase demand on City of San Luis Obispo potable water supplies by an estimated 260 AFY. Impacts to the City's water supply are considered Class I11, less than significant, with payment of Water Impact Fees.. c. Miti a'g tion: None d. Findin g: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. 2. Impact W -2 Buildout of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan would generate an estimated 162;856 gallons of wastewater per day, which would be treated by the City's Water Reclamation Facility. Because this facility has sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed project, this impact is considered Class III, less than significant. c. Mitigation: None d. Fes: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. SECTION 5. FINDINGS FOR SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT THAT HAVE BEEN MITIGATED TO A LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVEL This section presents the project's significant environmental impacts and feasible mitigation measures. Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations [CCR]) and Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code require a lead agency to make findings City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 5 Findings of Fact and Statement Overriding Considerations v Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A for each significant environmental impact disclosed in an EIR. Specifically, for each significant impact, the lead agency must find that: — Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR. — Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adapted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. — Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. Each of these findings must be supported by substantial evidence in the administrative record. This section identifies impacts that can be fully avoided or reduced to a less - than- significant level through the incorporation of feasible mitigation measures into the project, as identified in the program EIR. The impacts identified in this section are considered in the same sequence in which they appear in the draft EIR. A. AESTHETICS 1. Impact AES -3:. Light and glare produced from the proposed project would extend the area of night light across the project site, altering the nighttime sky due to lighting and daytime glare associated with plaster -type walls and /or brightly painted surfaces. This may affect the residences in the vicinity of the site and views from local roadways. This is considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact. a. Mitigation: The proposed Specific Plan includes the following goals, policies and programs which are intended to address potential impacts associated with this issue: Goal 4.4, Policies 4.4.1 through 4.4.3, and Program 4.4.3a. Implementation of these provisions of the Specific Plan would reduce impacts to some extent. However, impacts would remain significant. The following mitigation measures are required to fully mitigate potential light and glare impacts. — Mitigation Measure AES -3(a) Minimize Lighting on Public Areas. Lighting shall be shielded as shown in the Specific Plan and directed downward. Lighting shall not be mounted more than 16 feet high. Streetlights, where they are included, shall be primarily for pedestrian safety, and shall not provide widespread illumination unless necessary to comply with safety requirements, as determined by the Public Works Director. Street lighting should focus on intersections and should be placed between intersections only when it is necessary to comply with safety requirements, as determined by the Public Works Director. Trail lighting shall be at a scale appropriate for pedestrians, utilizing bollards, although overhead lighting may be used where vandalism of bollard lights is a concern. Prior to development of individual lots, proposed lighting shall be indicated on site plans and shall demonstrate that spill-over of lighting would not affect nearby residential areas. City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 6 Findings of Fact and Statement of Considerations O Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment - Exhibit A b. Finding: The City finds that the mitigation measure is feasible and has been adopted. Implementation of the applicable provisions of the Specific Plan, in combination with the proposed mitigation measure, would reduce project - specific impacts to a less than significant level. B. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES 1. Impact AG -2: Development may result in land use conflicts between existing residential uses and agricultural operations on -site as well as off -site on adjacent properties. This is considered a Class H, significant but mitigable, impact. a. Mitigation: The proposed Specific Plan incorporates the following provisions intended to help reduce agricultural impacts: Policy 3.2.25, Program 3.2.25a, and Program 3.2.25b. Implementation of the above provisions would reduce impacts between agriculture and adjacent planned residential uses, however the notification requirements specified in Program 3.2.25a would place an unnecessary burden on agriculture, rather than protecting it. The existing requirements of the County's Right -to -Farm Ordinance are more fair to agriculture, while still providing reasonable notice to future residents. The following mitigation measures are required to fully mitigate potential impacts related to this issue. — Mitigation Measure AG -2(a) Maintain 100 -Foot Agricultural Buffer. If adjacent land is still used for grazing purposes at the time of subdivision, a minimum 100 - foot buffer between the Righetti family ranch home site. The buffer shall occur on any parcel proposed for development that is adjacent to the northern boundary of the Righetti home site (See Figure 4.2 -3). — Mitigation Measure AG -2(b) Right -to -Farm Notification Requirements. To prevent unnecessary burdening of agricultural operations, proposed Specific Plan Program 3.2.25a shall be revised as follows: Program 3.2.25a. In accordance with the County Right to Farm Ordinance (No. 2050), upon the transfer of real property in the Specific Plan area, the transferor shall deliver to the prospective transferee a written disclosure statement that shall make all prospective homeowners in the proposed project aware that although potential impacts or discomforts between agricultural and non - agricultural uses may be lessened by proper maintenance, some level of incompatibility between the two uses would remain. b. Findin The City finds that the mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the implementation of the Specific Plan's proposed goals and policies, as well as the mitigation measures described above, agricultural- related land use compatibility impacts resulting would be reduced to a less than significant level. City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 7 Findings of Fact and Statement of Considerations 0 Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A C. AIR QUALITY 1. Impact AQ -1: Vehicular operations associated with development under the Specific Plan would result in the emission of levels of air pollutants that would exceed recommended significance thresholds and are therefore considered to have a Class II, significant but mitigable, impact. a. Mitigation: The Specific Plan includes bikeways, pedestrian walkways, and access to public transit routes that will reduce the need for vehicle transportation and therefore reduce the amount of emissions (Specific Plan Goal 5.3 and associated policies and programs). The Specific Plan also encourages the use of solar energy sources for residential and commercial uses (Specific Plan Policies 4.7.1 and 4.7.2). Finally, bike lanes have been designed to provide continuous connections through the Specific Plan area, consistent with regional goals related to reducing dependence on motorized vehicle travel. The following standard site design and discretionary energy efficiency mitigation measures are recommended: — Mitigation Measure AQ -1(a) Energy Efficiency. The building energy efficiency rating shall be 10% above what is required by Title 24 requirements for all buildings within the Specific Plan Area. The following energy- conserving techniques shall be incorporated unless the applicant demonstrates their unfeasibility to the satisfaction of City Planning and Building Department staff: increase walls and attic insulation beyond Title 24 requirements; orient buildings to maximize natural heating and cooling; plant shade trees along southern exposures of buildings to reduce summer cooling needs; use roof material with a solar reflectance value meeting the EPA /DOE Energy Star rating; build in energy efficient appliances; use low energy street lighting and traffic signals; use energy efficient interior lighting; use solar water heaters; and use double -paned windows. Mitigation Measure AQ -1(b) Transit. Bus turnouts and shelter improvements with direct pedestrian access shall be installed at all bus stops. — Mitigation Measure AQ -1(c) Shade Trees. All parking lots shall include shade trees within the parking area. There shall be at least one shade tree for every six vehicle parking spaces. — Mitigation Measure AQ -1(d) Telecommuting. All new homes within the Specific Plan area shall be constructed with internal wiring /cabling that allows telecommuting, teleconferencing, and teleleaming to occur simultaneously in at least three locations in each home. — Mitigation Measure AQ -1(e) Pathways. Where feasible, all cul -de -sacs and dead - end streets shall be links by pathways to encourage pedestrian and bicycle travel. City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 8 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A — Mitigation Measure AQ -1(f) Pedestrian Signalization. All new signalized intersections shall include signalization to accommodate pedestrian crossings. Pedestrian signalization shall allow pedestrians to call for a traffic signal change. b. Finding: The City finds that the mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. Implementation of the above mitigation would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. 2. Impact AQ -3: Development under the proposed Specific Plan has the potential to generate construction related emissions as the site develops. Although these emissions cannot be quantified at the Program EIR level, since San Luis Obispo County is currently non- attainment for PMlo, development under the Specific Plan would contribute to this existing significant condition. Therefore, construction related emissions are considered to be Class II, significant but mitigable. a. Mitigation: Because all construction projects can produce nuisance dust emissions, dust mitigation measures are required for all construction activities. The following mitigation measures are recommended to minimize emissions and to reduce the amount of dust that drifts onto adjacent properties. These measures would apply to both tract grading and development of individual lots. — Mitigation Measure AQ -3(a) Application of CBACT. The following measures shall be implemented to reduce combustion emissions from construction equipment where a project will have an area of disturbance greater than 1 acre, or for all projects, regardless of the size of ground disturbance, when that disturbance would be conducted adjacent to sensitive receptors. Specific Plan applicants shall submit for review by the Community Development Department and APCD staff a grading plan showing the area to be disturbed and a description of construction equipment that will be used and pollution reduction measures that will be implemented. Upon confirmation by the Community Development Department and APCD, appropriate CBACT features shall be applied. The application of these features shall occur prior to Specific Plan construction. Specific Plan applicants shall be required to ensure that all construction equipment and portable engines are properly maintained and tuned according to manufacturer's specifications. Specific Plan applicants shall be required to ensure that off -road and portable diesel powered equipment, including but not limited to bulldozers, graders, cranes, loaders, scrapers, backhoes, generator sets, compressors, auxiliary power units, shall be fueled exclusively with CARB motor vehicle diesel fuel (non -taxed off -road diesel is acceptable). Specific Plan applicants shall be required to install diesel oxidation catalysts on off -road construction equipment and on -road haul trucks projected to generate the greatest emissions. The number of catalysts required shall be determined in consultation with APCD prior to the start of construction. Installations must be prepared according to manufacturer's specifications. City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 9 Findings of Fact and Statement of Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A • Maximize, to the extent feasible, the use of diesel construction equipment meeting ARB's 1996 and newer certification standard for off -road heavy -duty diesel engines. • Maximize, to the extent feasible, the use of on -road heavy -duty equipment and trucks that meet the ARB's 1998 or newer certification standard for on -road heavy -duty diesel engines. • All on and off -road diesel equipment shall not be allowed to idle for more than 5 minutes. Signs shall be posted in the designated queuing areas and on job sites to remind drivers and operators of the 5 minute idling limit. — Mitigation Measure AQ -3(b) Dust Control. The following measures shall be implemented to reduce PM10 emissions during all Specific Plan construction: • Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible. • Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Water shall be applied as soon as possible whenever wind speeds exceed 15 miles per hour. Reclaimed (nonpotable) water should be used whenever possible. • All dirt- stock -pile areas shall be sprayed daily as needed. • Permanent dust control measures shall be identified in the approved Specific Plan revegetation and landscape plans and implemented as soon as possible following completion of any soil disturbing activities. • Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading shall sown with a fast- germinating native grass seed and watered until vegetation is established. • All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD. • All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc., to be paved 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. • Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site. • All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil or other loose materials shall be covered or shall maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with CVC Section 23114. • Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site. • Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water shall be used where feasible. — Mitigation Measure AQ -3(c) Cover Stockpiled Soils. If importation, exportation, or stockpiling of fill material is involved, soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation. Trucks transporting material shall be tarped from the point of origin. City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 10 Findings of Fact and Statement of Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A — Mitigation Measure AQ -3(d) Dust Control Monitor. On all projects with an area of disturbance greater than 1 acre, the contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering as necessary to prevent transport of dust off -site. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. b. Finding: The City finds that the above mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. Air quality impacts associated with construction of the Specific Plan would be adverse but not significant after mitigation measures are applied. D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 1. Impact B -2: Development under the proposed Specific Plan could potentially impact special- status plant species and plant communities of special concern within the Plan Area. This is considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact. a. Miti ag tion: The proposed Specific Plan includes the following goals, policies, and programs, which are intended to address potential impacts associated with this issue: Goal 2.2a through Goal 2.2c. Implementation of these provisions of the Specific Plan would reduce impacts to some extent. However, the following mitigation measures are required to further reduce impacts to biological resources. — Mitigation Measure B -2(a) Seasonally -Timed Botanical Surveys. When an applicant requests entitlements from the City under the Specific Plan, the City shall require the submittal of seasonally timed directed floral surveys based on the target list of plant species identified in Table 4.4 -2 to be completed in the spring and summer to determine the presence or absence of these species. The following table lists each potential on -site special - status plant species and where to survey for the species: Special- status plant species Habitat • Adobe sanicle • grassland, isolated seeps on Righetti Hill • Cambria morning -glory • grassland • Jones' layia • grassland • Marsh sandwort • fresh water emergent wetland • Obispo Indian paintbrush • grassland • Rayless ragwort • rocky slopes of Righetti Hill, grassland where weeds are scarce • Saline clover • grassland, wetland • San Luis Obispo sedge • grassland, coastal scrub, isolated seeps on Righetti Hill The survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist verified by the City. Up to three separate survey visits may be required to capture the flowering period of the target species. The location and extent of any rare plant occurrences observed on the site should be documented in a report and accurately mapped onto site - specific topographic maps and aerial photographs. If special- status plants are identified, the development pursuant to the Specific Plan shall submit written proof that the CDFG has been contacted. San Luis Obispo December 2009 11 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A — Mitigation Measure B -20) Special- Status Plant Buffer. Where special - status plants are found, site development plans shall be modified to avoid such occurrences with a minimum buffer of 50 feet. The applicant seeking entitlement shall establish conservation easements for such preserved areas, prior to issuance of the first building permit for subsequent tracts. The Specific Plan shall be amended at that time to place these areas formally into open space, possibly as an overlay area. If total avoidance is economically or technologically infeasible then plants shall be salvaged and relocated under direction of an approved botanist, in accordance with Mitigation Measures 13-2(c) through 13-2(f). If total avoidance can be achieved, Mitigation Measures 13-2(c) through B-2(f) would not be required. (It should be noted that avoidance is likely to be more cost effective in the long run compared to mitigation in the form of salvage and relocation). If total avoidance of special- status plant species can be achieved through Mitigation Measure 13- 2(b), Mitigation Measures B -2(c) through B -2(f) would not be required. — Mitigation Measure B -2(c) Incidental Take Permit. In the event that state listed species are discovered, the applicant seeking entitlements shall submit to the City signed copies of an incidental take permit and enacting agreements from the CDFG regarding those species as necessary under Section 2081 of the California Fish and Game Code prior to the initiation of grading. If a plant species that is listed under the federal Endangered Species Act is discovered, the applicant seeking entitlements shall provide proof of compliance with the federal Endangered Species Act, inclusive as necessary of signed copies of incidental take permit and associated enacting agreements, to the City prior to the initiation of grading. — Mitigation Measure B -2(d) Special- Status Species CDFG- Approved Mitigation Plan. If total avoidance of the species occurrences is economically or technologically infeasible, a mitigation program shall be developed by the City in consultation with CDFG as appropriate. A research study to determine the best mitigation approach for each particular species to be salvaged shall be conducted. The special - status plant species mitigation program may include the following: • The overall goal and measurable objectives of the mitigation and monitoring plan; • Specific areas proposed for revegetation and their size. Potential sites for mitigation would be any suitable site within proposed open space depending on the species that is appropriately buffered from development. For a list of suitable habitats for the mitigation of each species refer to the list in Mitigation Measure 13-2(a). • Specific habitat management and protection concepts to be used to ensure long- term maintenance and protection of the special - status plant species to be included (i.e.: annual population census surveys and habitat assessments; establishment of monitoring reference sites; fencing of special- status plant species preserves and signage to identify the environmentally sensitive areas; a seasonally -timed weed abatement program; and seasonally -timed seed and /or City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 12 Findings of Fact and Statement Overriding Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A topsoil collection, propagation, and reintroduction of special- status plant species into specified receiver sites); • Success criteria based on the goals and measurable objectives to ensure a viable population(s) on the project site in perpetuity; • An education program to inform residents of the presence of special - status plant species and sensitive biological resources on -site, and to provide methods that residents can employ to reduce impacts to these species/ resources m protected open space areas; • Reporting requirements to ensure consistent data collection and reporting methods used by monitoring personnel; and • Funding mechanism. — Mitigation Measure B -2(e) Special- Status Plant Monitoring Frequency. Monitoring shall occur annually and shall last at least five years to ensure successful establishment of all re- introduced or salvaged plants and no-net -loss of the species or its habitat. In the case of annual plants it is difficult to determine if there has been a net loss or gain in a five year period. Therefore an important component of the mitigation and monitoring plan shall be adaptive management. The adaptive management program shall address both foreseen and unforeseen circumstances relating to the preservation and mitigation programs. The plan shall include follow up surveys every five years in perpetuity or until a qualified biologist can demonstrate that the target special - status species has not experienced a net loss. It shall also include remedial measures to address negative impacts to the special - status plant species and their habitats (i.e.: removal of weeds, addition of seeding/ planting efforts) if the species is suffering a net loss at the time of the follow up surveys. — Mitigation Measure B -2(J) Special- Status Species Habitat Replacement. The primary goal of the mitigation and monitoring plan is to ensure a viable population and no-net -loss of special - status species habitat within the project site. To ensure the no-net -loss of a species, the applicant shall create two acres of occupied special - status species habitat for every one acre of habitat impacted by project development. If resource agencies require a higher replacement ratio than 2:1, their requirements would prevail. The creation of habitat can occur in conjunction with the mitigation/ relocation of wildflower field habitat if the research study indicates that the wildflower field and specific special - status plant species can be relocated and cohabitate. — Mitigation Measure B -2(g) Bunchgrass Survey. When an applicant requests entitlements from the City under the Specific Plan, the City shall require the submittal of a survey to identify any native perennial bunchgrass occurrences (this can be conducted simultaneously with special- status plant species surveys required in Mitigation Measure B -2(a) above). If occurrences of native perennial bunchgrass habitat of 0.5 acre or greater containing at least 10% or greater coverage of native perennial bunchgrass are found that area shall be placed in open space and a deed restriction placed over the area to protect it in perpetuity. If the area cannot be avoided for economical or technological reasons, then native grasses including City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 13 Findings of Fact and Statement or Overriding Considerations Orcutt Area Speck Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A perennial bunchgrasses shall be incorporated into the landscaping plant palette and the erosion control plan to replace the lost habitat: The most effective areas to receive native grass seed are graded areas that will be revegetated adjacent to open space. The acreage ratio of lost native perennial bunchgrass habitat to habitat replaced shall be no less than 1:1. Native perennial bunchgrass material shall come from locally collected seed stock to avoid contamination of the local gene pool. Because perennial bunchgrasses grow slowly at first, a "nurse" crop consisting of Nuttall's fescue (Vulpia microstachys), California brome (Bromus carinatus), and pinpoint clover (Trifolium gracilentum) shall be added to the mix to stabilize any graded areas while the bunchgrasses become established. No non -native invasive plant species shall be used in landscaping. California Invasive Plant Council (Cal - IPC) maintains a list of the most important invasive plants to avoid. This list shall be used when creating a plant palette for landscaping. Planting equipment (i.e.: hydroseeding tank and dispensing mechanism) shall be cleaned of remaining seed from previous applications prior to use on -site. The hydroseed applicator shall be responsible for ensuring tanks have been properly cleaned of any seed that is not a part of the specified mix. b. Finding: The City finds that the mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. Implementation of the above mitigation would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. 2. Impact B -3: Development under the proposed Specific Plan could affect locally- designated protected trees. This is considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact. a. Mitigation: The proposed Specific Plan includes the following program, which is intended to address potential impacts associated with this issue: Program 4.3.4a. In addition to the above provisions indicated, the applicants under the Specific Plan will be required to comply with the City's Tree Regulations (City of San Luis Obispo, 1997). The following mitigation measure is also required to ensure compliance with the City's Tree Regulations and to reduce potential impacts to trees to a less than significant level. — Mitigation Measure 13-3(a) Construction Requirements. Development under the Specific Plan shall abide by the requirements of the City Arborist for construction. Requirements shall include but not be limited to: the protection of trees with construction setbacks from trees; construction fencing around trees; grading limits around the base of trees as required; and a replacement plan for trees removed including replacement at a minimum 1:1 ratio. b. Finding: The City finds that the mitigation measure is feasible and has been adopted. Implementation of the Specific Plan's program as described above along with the above mitigation measure would reduce impacts on trees to a less than significant level. 3. Impact B4: Development under the proposed Specific Plan would affect riparian woodland and wetland habitat. This is considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact. City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 14 Findings of Fact and Statement Overriding Considerations { Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A a. Mitigation: The Specific Plan has incorporated goals, policies, and programs to alleviate impacts to biological resources. The goals, policies, and programs are as follows: Goal 2.2a, Goal 2.2b, Policy 2.2.1, Policy 2.2.2, Program 2.2.2a -c, Policy 2.2.3, Program 2.2.3a, Program 2.2.3b, Policy 2.2.4, Program 2.2.4a, Program 2.2.4b, Policy 2.2.5, Program 2.2.5a, Program 2.2.5b, Policy 2.2.6, Goal 2.2c, Policy 2.2.7, Policy 2.2.8, Goal 2.2.d, Policy 2.2.9, Program 2.2.9a, Program 2.2.9b, Policy 2.2.10, Program 2.2.10a. The following mitigation measures are required in addition to the above Specific Plan provisions to assure compliance with the City's Creek Setback Ordinance (Section 17.16.025 of the City's Zoning Regulations) and reduce impacts to riparian and wetland habitat to a less than significant level. Mitigation measures from the Drainage and Water Quality section below would further reduce - potentially significant impacts to wetlands. Also refer to Mitigation Measures under Impact B-5 that apply to setbacks with respect to special- status species. — Mitigation Measure B -4(a) Trail Setbacks. Trails shall be setback out of riparian habitat and out of the buffer area. The trail shall be a minimum distance of 20 feet from top of bank or from the edge of riparian canopy, whichever is farther. Trails shall be setback from wetland habitat at a minimum distance of 30 feet and shall not be within the buffer. Native plant species that will deter human disturbance shall be planted in the area between the trail and the wetland /riparian habitat including plants such as California rose (Rosa californica) and California blackberry (Rubus ursinus). No passive recreational use shall be allowed in the riparian or wetland habitats or drainage corridors. — Mitigation Measure 134(b) Development Setbacks. Development that abuts riparian and wetland mitigation areas shall also be setback at least 20 feet, and be buffered by an appropriately -sized fence and /or plants that deter human entry listed in B -4(a). — Mitigation Measure B-4(c) Riparian/ Wetland Mitigation. If riparian and /or wetland habitat are proposed for removal pursuant to development under the Specific Plan, such development shall apply for all applicable permits and submit a Mitigation Plan for areas of disturbance to wetlands and /or riparian habitat. The plan shall be prepared by a biologist familiar with restoration and mitigation techniques. Compensatory mitigation shall occur on -site using regionally collected native plant material at a minimum ratio of 2:1 (habitat created to habitat impacted) in areas shown on figure 4.4 -2 as directed by a biologist. The resource agencies may require a higher mitigation ratio. If the Orcutt Regional Basin is necessary as a mitigation site for waters of the U.S. and State it shall be designed as directed by a biologist taking into consideration hydrology, soils, and erosion control and using the final mitigation guidelines and monitoring requirements (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2004). As noted above, the trail shall be setback out of the buffer area for riparian and wetland habitat. The plan shall include, but not be limited to the following components: City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 15 Findings of Fact and Statement Overriding Considerations O Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A 1) Description of the project /impact site (i.e.: location, responsible parties, jurisdictional areas to be filled/ impacted by habitat type); 2) goal(s) of the compensatory mitigation project (type(s) and area(s) of habitat to be established, restored, enhanced, and /or preserved, specific functions and values of habitat type(s) to be established, restored, enhanced, and /or preserved); 3) description of the proposed compensatory mitigation -site (location and size, ownership status, existing functions and values of the compensatory mitigation - site); 4) implementation plan for the compensatory mitigation -site (rationale for expecting implementation success, responsible parties, schedule, site preparation, planting plan); 5) maintenance activities during the monitoring period (activities, responsible parties, schedule); 6) monitoring plan for the compensatory mitigation -site (performance standards, target functions and values, target hydrological regime, target jurisdictional and non - jurisdictional acreages to be established, restored, enhanced, and /or preserved, annual monitoring reports); 7) completion of compensatory mitigation (notification of completion, agency confirmation); and 8) contingency measures (initiating procedures, alternative locations for contingency compensatory mitigation, funding mechanism). In addition, erosion control and landscaping specifications included in the mitigation plan shall allow only natural -fiber, biodegradable meshes and coir rolls, to prevent impacts to the environment and to fish and terrestrial wildlife. b. Finding: The City finds that the mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. Implementation of the Specific Plan's goals, policies and programs, along with these required mitigation measures would reduce impacts to riparian woodland and wetland habitat to a less than significant level and ensure that the project is in compliance with the regulatory agencies and the Creek Setback Ordinance as contained in the Zoning Regulations (2004). 4. Impact B -5: Development under the proposed Specific Plan could potentially impact special - status wildlife species and their habitats within the Plan Area. This is considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact. a. Mitigation: The Specific Plan establishes permanent open space for the creek area, and when combined with the buffering setbacks required by the City, impacts would be reduced substantially. Compliance with Federal and State regulations governing the wetland and riparian habitat types on -site (described in Impact B -3) would also reduce impacts to these important biological resources. Specific Plan policies would also require any development proposal pursuant to the Specific Plan that would remove riparian or wetland areas to mitigate for such impacts. However, the following additional mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts to all special- status wildlife species to a less than significant level. City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 16 Findings of Fact and StatementurOveniding Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A — Mitigation Measure B -5(a) Bird Pre - Construction Survey. To avoid impacts to nesting special - status bird species and raptors including the ground- nesting burrowing owl, all initial ground- disturbing activities and tree removal shall be limited to the time period between September 15 and February 1. If initial site disturbance, grading, and tree removal cannot be conducted during this time period, a pre - construction survey for active nests within the limits of grading shall be conducted by a qualified biologist at the site no more than 30 days prior to the start of any construction activities (for ground- nesting burrowing owl survey see below). If active nests are located, all construction work must be conducted outside a buffer zone of 250 feet to 500 feet from the nests as determined in consultation with the CDFG. No direct disturbance to nests shall occur until the adults and young are no longer reliant on the nest site. A qualified biologist shall confirm that breeding /nesting is completed and young have fledged the nest prior to the start of construction. — Mitigation Measure B -5(b) Burrowing Owl Survey. When an applicant requests entitlements from the City under the Specific Plan a qualified biologist shall conduct surveys for burrowing owls during both the wintering and nesting seasons (unless the species is detected on the first survey) in potentially suitable habitats prior to construction in accordance with the guidelines described in the CDFG Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (1995). Winter surveys shall be conducted on the entire project site between December 1 and February 1, and the nesting season survey shall be conducted between April 15 and July 15. If burrowing owls are detected within the proposed disturbance area, CDFG shall be contacted immediately to develop and implement a mitigation plan to protect owls and their nest sites. — Mitigation Measure B -5(c) Monarch Pre - Construction Survey. If initial ground- breaking is to occur between the months of October and March a pre - construction survey for active monarch roost sites within the limits of grading shall be conducted by a qualified biologist at the site two weeks prior to any construction activities. If active roost sites are located no ground- disturbing activities shall occur within 50 feet of the perimeter of the habitat. Construction shall not resume within the setback until a qualified biologist has determined that the monarch butterfly has vacated the site. — Mitigation Measure B -5(d) VPFS Sampling Surveys. Prior to development in areas shown as potential VPFS habitat on Figure 4.4 -2, current USFWS protocol level sampling surveys shall be conducted in all such areas. A report consistent with current Federal, State, and local reporting guidelines shall be prepared to document the methods and results of surveys. If VPFS are found, the report shall include a map that identifies the VPFS locations. Should the presence of additional special - status wildlife species be determined including California linderiella, a map identifying locations in which these species were found shall be prepared and included in the report. City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 17 Findings of Fact and Statement Overriding Considerations Orcutt Area Speck Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A — Mitigation Measure B -5(e) FESA Consultation and Mitigation Regarding VPFS. If any VPFS individuals are located on -site pursuant to Mitigation Measure B -5(d), substantial setbacks from their identified habitat shall be implemented to avoid take of a Federally listed species. If complete avoidance is not economically or technically feasible, then Section 10 of the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) shall be used to authorize incidental take when no other Federal agency such as the Corps is involved. This process includes development of a Habitat Conservation Plan for protecting and enhancing the Federally listed species at a specific location in perpetuity. Species take can also be authorized under Section 7 of the FESA if a Federal agency is involved in the project (e.g., Corps Section 404 permitting for impacts to waters of the U.S. and /or Federal funding) and agrees to be the lead agency requesting Section 7 consultation. This consultation process takes at a minimum 135 days from the official request by the Federal lead agency. The compensatory mitigation ratio shall be determined by the appropriate resource agencies. Suitable replacement habitat shall be constructed either within the site boundaries or off -site. Figure 4.4 -2 identifies areas that could be appropriate for on- site VPFS mitigation. Figure 4.4 -2 is not intended to preclude development but shall be used as a starting point for incorporating VPFS mitigation sites into the development plan. While the Orcutt Regional Basin included in the potential VPFS mitigation sites may need regular maintenance and may be seasonally flooded, depressions could be created on the upper edges of the terrace in such a manner that they are protected from flooding. VPFS mitigation areas shall be approved by a biologist familiar with VPFS habitat "creation" techniques. Enhancement of the on- site seasonal freshwater wetland habitat that is undisturbed by project activities may also be a part of the mitigation program. Alternatively, fairy shrimp cysts could be collected during the dry season from the existing habitat and placed into storage. Topsoil could also be removed and stored in conditions suitable to retain cysts. Wetland habitat could be enhanced /created in the areas shown on Figure 4.4 -2 by grading depressions in the landscape and "top dressing" the depressions with the preserved topsoil. Preserved cysts would be added to the recreated wetlands in December or January, after sufficient ponding has occurred. It is important to note that VPFS habitat mitigation is still considered experimental. VPFS habitat mitigation is ambitious as it is costly, labor intensive, and difficult to ensure success. Habitat may be "created" only in an existing vernal pool landscape that provides suitable soils and a number of other specific ecological factors (USFWS, 2004). An alternative to on -site mitigation is the purchase of mitigation bank credits. Credits can be purchased by the acre as suitable mitigation for VPFS. There is currently no known mitigation bank with VPFS habitat occurring within San Luis Obispo County, however, mitigation banks may be available in the future. b. Finding: The City finds that the mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. Implementation of the above mitigation measures would reduce impacts to special- status wildlife species and their habitats to a less than significant level. City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 18 Findings of Fact and Statement Considerations v Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A 5. Impact B-6: Development under the proposed Specific Plan would reduce the populations and available habitat of wildlife in general. The loss of wildlife habitat is considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact. a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures are required to fully reduce impacts to a less than significant level. — Mitigation Measure B -6(a) Minimized Roadway Widths. Roadway widths adjacent to riparian and wetland habitats shall be reduced to the minimum width possible, while maintaining Fire Department Requirements for emergency access, with slower speed limits introduced. Posted speed limits should be 25 mph. — Mitigation Measure B -6(b) Culvert Design. Although closed culverts are to be the drainage conveyance method of last resort per the City Waterways Management Plan, where they are required, culverts connecting the Plan Area drainage corridors with upstream and downstream drainage corridors shall be evaluated during the suitability analysis pursuant to Mitigation Measure B -5(a) to determine their importance to wildlife who could use them to travel to and from the site. If culverts are found to be of importance to wildlife, the culverts shall be evaluated for their potential for improvement (i.e. retrofitting, maintenance, or specific improvements depending on the types of species using them). The development pursuant to the Specific Plan and the City shall develop a plan for the improvement of the culverts. Preservation of the wildlife corridors that are present on the project site can be achieved with sufficient setbacks from riparian and wetland habitats. Refer to B-4 for mitigation regarding riparian and wetland habitat setbacks. — Mitigation Measure B -6(c) Educational Pet Brochure. Any development pursuant to the Specific Plan shall prepare a brochure that informs prospective homebuyers and Home Owners Association (HOA) members about the impacts associated with non -native animals, especially cats and dogs, to the project site; similarly, the brochure must inform potential homebuyers and all HOA members of the potential for coyotes to prey on domestic animals. — Mitigation Measure B -6(d) Landscaping Plan Review. To ensure that project landscaping does not introduce invasive non -native plant and tree species to the region of the site, the final landscaping plan shall be reviewed and approved by a qualified biologist. The California Invasive Plant Council (Cal -IPC) maintains several lists of the most important invasive plants to avoid. The lists shall be used when creating a plant palette for landscaping to ensure that plants on the lists are not used. The following plants shall not allowed as part of potential landscaping plans pursuant to development under the Specific Plan: ■ African sumac (Rhus lancea) • Australian saltbush (Atriplex semibaccata) • Black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia) • California pepper (Schinus molle) and Brazilian pepper (S. terebinthifolius) City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 19 Findings of Fact and Statemeni,ui Overriding Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A • Cape weed (Arctotheca calendula) • Cotoneaster (Cotoneaster pannosus), (C. lacteus) • Edible fig (Ficus carica) • Fountain grass (Pennisetum setaceum) • French broom (Genista monspessulana) • Ice plant, sea fig (Carpobrotus edulis) • Leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) • Myoporum (Myoporum spp.) • Olive (Olea europaea) • Pampas grass (Cortaderia selloana), and Andean pampas grass (C. jubata) • Russian olive (Elaeagnus angusticifolia) • Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius) and striated broom (C. striatus) • Spanish broom (Spartium junceum) • Tamarix, salt cedar (Tamarix chinensis), (T. gallica), (T. parviflora), (T. ramosissima) • Blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus) ■ Athel tamarisk (Tamarix aphylla) With the exception of poison oak, only those species listed in the Specific Plan's Suggested Plant List (Appendix E) shall not be planted anywhere on -site because they are invasive non - native plant species. Poison oak is a native plant species and could be used to deter human entrance to an area such as a mitigation /enhancement area. b. Finding: The City finds that the mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. Implementation of the above mitigation measures would reduce impacts to wildlife habitat in general to a less than significant level. E. CULTURAL RESOURCES 1. Impact CR -1: There is the potential that project construction will disturb previously unidentified buried archeological deposits and /or human remains. This is considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact. a. Mitigation: The Specific Plan has incorporated the following goals, polices, and programs to alleviate impacts to cultural resources: Goal 2.5, Policy 2.5.1, Policy 2.7.1a, and Program 2.7.1a. In addition to these provisions incorporated in the Specific Plan, the following mitigation measures would further reduce impacts related to cultural resources to less than significant levels. — Mitigation Measure CR -1(a) Areas Not Surveyed. All areas that were not surveyed by Conejo, as indicated in Figure 4.5 -1, that will be subject to project- related earth disturbance shall be subject to archaeological survey prior to any such disturbances. This shall include APNs 076 - 481 -014, 076 -481 -012, 076 - 491 -003, 075 -491 -004, and 076- 491- 001, any planned trails or other developments within the areas designated as open space. City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 20 Findings of Fact and Statement Overriding Considerations O Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A — Mitigation Measure CR -1(b) Righetti Hill. Even though it is located within an area designated as open space, the top of Righetti Hill should be subject to archaeological survey. The City is responsible for the survey as part of any project to create a trail system that would provide access to the top of the hill by the general public. — Mitigation Measure CR -1(0 Vegetation Clearance Monitoring. Due to poor ground surface visibility, vegetation clearance /initial grading of the areas shown on Figure 4.5 -2 should be monitored by an archaeologist. The archaeologist shall have the power to temporarily halt or redirect project construction in the event that potentially significant archaeological resources are exposed. Based on monitoring observations the lead archaeologist shall have the authority to refine the monitoring requirements as appropriate (i.e., change to spot checks, reduce the area to be monitored) in consultation with the lead agency. If potentially significant prehistoric or historic resources are exposed the lead archaeologist shall be responsible for evaluating the nature and significance of the find. If no archaeological resources are observed following the vegetation clearance /initial grading then no further monitoring shall be required. A monitoring report shall be provided to the City of San Luis Obispo and the CCIC. — Mitigation Measure CR -1(d) Archaeological Resource Construction Monitoring. At the commencement of project construction, an orientation meeting shall be conducted by an archaeologist for construction workers associated with earth disturbing procedures. The orientation meeting shall describe the possibility of exposing unexpected archaeological resources and directions as to what steps are to be taken if such a find is encountered. An archaeologist shall monitor construction grading within 50 meters (164 feet) of the two isolated finds. In the event that prehistoric or historic archaeological resources are exposed during project construction, all earth disturbing work within 50 meters (164 feet) of the find must be temporarily suspended or redirected until an archaeologist has evaluated the nature and significance of the find. After the find has been appropriately mitigated (e.g., curation, preservation in place, etc.), work in the area may resume. The City should consider retaining a Chumash representative to monitor any field work associated with Native American cultural material. If human remains are exposed, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. b. Findin g: The City finds that the mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. Implementation of the Specific Plan's provisions and the required mitigation measures would reduce disturbance of archeological deposits and human remains to less than significant levels. City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 21 Findings of Fact and Statemenfor'Overriding Considerations O Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A 2. Impact CR -2: Project development will result in earth disturbance at several locations considered sensitive for archaeological resources. This is considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact. a. Miti ag tion: The following mitigation measures would reduce potential impacts related to identified archaeological resources to a less than significant level. — Mitigation Measure CR -2(a) Subsurface Archaeological Testing. If avoidance of an archaeological site(s) is not possible, a Subsurface Archaeological Resource Evaluation (SARE) shall be completed prior to issuance of a Land Use Permit. A SARE should be undertaken for Orcutt-1 with the following goals: a) Determine if there are intact subsurface deposits associated unth this site; b) Determine the site's boundaries; c) Assess the site's integrity, i.e., is it intact or highly disturbed; and d) Evaluate the site's importance or significance. The City should consider retaining a Chumash representative to monitor any subsurface testing /excavation at Orcutt-1. Results of the Phase 2 Evaluation will determine the need or lack thereof for additional data recovery and /or construction monitoring in the archaeological site area. When feasible, avoidance of impacts through project redesign is the preferred method for mitigating impacts to significant archaeological resources. The archaeological excavation(s) shall be based on a written explicit research design that includes a statement or research objectives and a program for carrying out these objectives. All cultural materials collected shall be curated at a qualified institution that has proper facilities and staffing for insuring research access to the collections. — Mitigation Measure CR -2(b) Construction Monitoring. An archaeologist should monitor construction grading in the vicinity of the two isolated finds. b. Findnne: The City finds that the mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. Impacts would be reduced to less than significant with implementation of proposed mitigation. 3. Impact CR -3: Implementation of the proposed project could result in indirect impacts to identified archaeological resources. This is considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact. a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measure would reduce potential indirect impacts related to identified archaeological resources to a less than significant level. — Mitigation Measure CR -3(a) Prohibition of Archaeological Site Tampering. Off - road vehicle use, unauthorized collecting of artifacts, and other activities that could destroy or damage archaeological or cultural sites shall be prohibited. Signs shall be City of San Luis Obispo December 22 Findings of Fact and Statemenf or Overriding Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A posted on the property to discourage these types of activities and warn of trespassing violations and imposed fines. b. Finding: The City finds that the mitigation measure is feasible and has been adopted. Impacts would be reduced to less than significant with implementation of proposed mitigation. 4. Impact CR-4: Implementation of the proposed project could result in indirect impacts to historical resources. This is considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact. a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measure would reduce potential indirect impacts related to historical resources to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measure CR -4(a) Historical Evaluation. Prior to development, a qualified historian should be retained to conduct a historical evaluation of the 50+ year old structures within the Orcutt Area using the City's Historic Preservation Program Guidelines. Any structure determined to be an important /significant historic resource shall be mitigated as appropriate prior to its demolition or relocation. The historic structure evaluation should include the history of the Skinner /Righetti Ranch and the ranch complex should be recorded on appropriate DPR forms. Finally, the historian shall determine if project development will have any significant direct or indirect impacts on the Bettencourt /Rodriguez. Adobe, a city historic landmark located immediately adjacent to the Orcutt Area. b. Finding: The City finds that the mitigation measure is feasible and has been adopted. Impacts would be reduced to less than significant with implementation of proposed mitigation. F. DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY 1. Impact D -1: During construction of the proposed project, the soil surface would be disrupted and potentially become subject to erosion, with potential off -site sedimentation and pollutant discharges. Alterations in drainage patterns and grading during the construction period could result in construction- related erosion problems. This is considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact. a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures address the above requirements for construction and post - construction scenarios: — Mitigation Measure D -1(a) Erosion Control Plan. Prior to issuance of the first Grading Permit or approval of improvement plans, the applicant shall submit to the Directors of Community Development and Public Works for review and approval a detailed erosion control plan (ECP) to mitigate erosion and sedimentation impacts during the construction period. The detailed ECP shall be accompanied by a written narrative and be approved by the City Engineer. At a minimum, the ECP and City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 23 Findings of Fact and Statement Overriding Considerations O Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A written narrative should be prepared according to the guidelines outlined in the DDM and should include the following: • A proposed schedule of grading activities, monitoring, and infrastructure milestones in chronological format; • Identification of critical areas of high erodibility potential and /or unstable slopes; • Soil stabilization techniques such as short-term biodegradable erosion control blankets and hydroseeding should be utilized. Silt fences should be installed downslope of all graded slopes. Straw bales should be installed in the flow path of graded areas receiving concentrated flows, as well as around storm drain inlets; • Description of erosion control measures on slopes, lots, and streets; • Contour and spot elevations indicating runoff patterns before and after grading; • Filter systems at catch basins (drop inlets) in public streets as a means of sediment control; and • The post - construction inspection of all drainage facilities for accumulated sediment, and the clearing of these drainage structures of debris and sediment. — Mitigation Measure D -1(b) Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. The applicant shall comply with NPDES General Construction Activities Storm Water Permit Requirements established by the CWA. Pursuant to the NPDES Storm Water Program, an application for coverage under the statewide General Construction Activities Storm Water Permit (General Permit) must be obtained for project development. It is the responsibility of the project applicant to obtain coverage prior to site construction. The applicant can obtain coverage under the General Permit by filing a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the State Water Resource Control Board's (SWRCB) Division of Water Quality. The filing shall describe erosion control and storm water treatment measures to be implemented during and following construction and provide a schedule for monitoring performance. These BMPs will serve to control point and non -point source (NPS) pollutants in storm water and constitute the project's SWPPP for construction activities. While the SWPPP will include several of the same components as the ECP, the SWPPP will also include BMPs for preventing the discharge of other NPS pollutants besides sediment (such as paint, concrete, etc.) to downstream waters. • Notice of Intent. Prior to beginning construction, the applicant shall file a Notice of Intent (NOI) for discharge from the proposed development site. • Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. The applicant shall require the building contractor to prepare and submit a SWPPP to the City forty-five (45) days prior to the start of work for approval. The contractor is responsible for understanding the State General Permit and instituting the SWPPP during construction. A SWPPP for site construction shall be developed prior to the initiation of grading and implemented for all construction activity on the project site in excess of one acre. The SWPPP shall include specific BMPs to control the discharge of material City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 24 Findings of Fact and Statement of OverTiding Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A from the site. BMP methods may include, but would not be limited to, the use of temporary detention basins, straw bales, sand bagging, mulching, erosion control blankets, silt fencing, and soil stabilizers. Additional BMPs should be implemented for any fuel storage or fuel handling that could occur on -site during construction. The SWPPP must be prepared in accordance with the guidelines adopted by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The SWPPP shall be also submitted to the City along with grading /development plans for review and approval. • Notice of Completion of Construction. The applicant shall file a notice of completion of construction of the development, identifying that pollution sources were controlled during the construction of the project and implementing a closure SWPPP for the site. b. Finding: The City finds that the mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. Implementation of an Erosion Control Plan and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan would reduce impacts from construction erosion to less than significant levels. 2. Impact D -2: Increased runoff on -site could deteriorate on -site streambank conditions, leading to long -term erosion on -site. Impacts are considered Class II, significant but mitigable. a. Mitigation: The proposed Specific Plan includes the following goals, policies, and programs, which are intended to address potential impacts associated with this issue: Policy 2.2.4, Program 2.2.4a, and Program 2.2.4b. The following mitigation measures are recommended. — Mitigation Measure D -2(a) Vegetative and Biotechnical Approaches to Bank Stabilization. Vegetative or biotechnical (also referred to as soil bioengineering) approaches to bank stabilization are preferred over structural approaches. Bank stabilization design must be consistent with the SLO Creek Stream Management and Maintenance Program Section 6. Streambank stabilization usually involves one or a combination of the following activities: • Regrading and revegetating the streambanks to eliminate overhanging banks and create a more stable slope; • Deflecting erosional water flow away from vulnerable sites; • Reducing the steepness of the channel bed through installation of grade stabilization structures; • Altering the geometry of the channel to influence flow velocities and sediment deposition; • Diverting a portion of the higher flow into a secondary or by -pass channel; • Armoring or protecting the bank to control erosion, particularly at the toe of slopes. The bank stabilization design will: City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 25 Findings of Fact and Statement or Overriding Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A • Be stable over the long term; • Be the least environmentally damaging and the "softest" approach possible; • Not create upstream or downstream flooding or induce other local stream instabilities; • Minimize impacts to aquatic and riparian habitat; • Specify that only natural -fiber, biodegradable meshes and coir rolls be used, to prevent impacts to the environment and to fish and terrestrial wildlife. — Mitigation Measure D -2(b) Constructed Natural Channel. Where the creeks within the Orcutt Plan Area may need to be modified to create sufficient conveyance capacity and mitigate geomorphic instability, (i.e. floodable terraces within the proposed linear park), design guidelines from Section 5.3 of the SLO Creek Drainage Design Manual shall be applied. The waterways are to be designed in accordance with all provisions of the design criteria applicable to Constructed Natural Channels. Typically, this would include construction of a compound channel utilizing an in- channel bench or terrace whenever feasible, considerations of stable channel planform geometry, use of setbacks and buffer strips at top of bank, planting using native plants, and slope stabilization using biotechnical erosion control methods. — Mitigation Measure D -2(c) Riparian Zone Planting. The GASP proposes riparian enhancement of creek corridors. Section 11 guidelines of the SLO Creek Drainage Design Manual shall be followed for riparian areas that are modified, created and /or managed for flood damage reduction, stream enhancement, and bank repair. Linear park terrace vegetation, streambank repair and channel maintenance projects may require stream channel modifications that include shaping, widening, deepening, straightening, and armoring. Many channel management projects also require building access roads for maintenance vehicles and other equipment. These construction activities can cause a variety of impacts to existing sensitive riparian and aquatic habitat that, depending on the selected design altemative, range from slight disturbances to complete removal of desirable woody vegetation and faunal communities. In urban areas within the SLO creek watershed, riparian vegetation often provides the only remaining natural habitat available for wildlife populations. b. Finding: The City finds that the mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. Implementation of the mitigation measures above will ensure appropriate bank stabilization, channel modification, and riparian revegetation methods to mitigate the contribution of on -site sediments to the detention basin system. 3. Impact D -3: Regional detention basin storage has the potential to have downstream erosion impacts from longer durations of downstream flows. This impact is considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact. a. Mitigation: The Specific Plan incorporated the following design criteria for the proposed basins within the Plan area: • Reduce 100 -year post development peak runoff to 25 -year pre - development rate. • Reduce 50 -year post development peak runoff to 20 year pre - development rate. City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 Findings of Fact and Statement or Overriding Considerations O Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A • Limit 10 -year post development peak runoff to 10 -year pre - development rate. • Limit 2 -year post development peak runoff to within 5 percent of the 2 year pre - development rate. In addition to the above criteria proposed, the following mitigation measure is recommended to further reduce impacts caused by downstream flow and erosion: — Mitigation Measure D -3(a) Payment of Fair Share Fees for Area Drainage Improvements. The City/Zone 9 Waterway Management Plan (WMP, Questa, 2002) provides for imposition of a Drainage Impact Fee on new development projects that would result in adverse hydrological impacts. The Drainage Impact Fee can only be used to pay for drainage improvements made necessary by the hydrologic impacts of a project. The applicant shall pay their "fair share" of any mitigation fee established by the City of San Luis Obispo for drainage improvements made necessary by cumulative project development. These fair share fees may be used to fund components of the City's Storm Drain Master Plan (Boyle Engineering, 2000), or other improvements as identified by the City. Components of the City's Storm Drain Master Plan preferred alternative downstream of the Orcutt Plan Area include: • A new concrete box culvert at Broad Street on Orcutt Creek, • A new concrete slab bridge at Santa Fe Road on the East Branch of SLO Creek, and • A modified channel for improved conveyance capacity from Santa Fe to Buckley Road on the East Branch of SLO Creek. b. Finding: The City finds that the mitigation measure is feasible and has been adopted. In association with the Specific Plan's design criteria, implementation of the proposed mitigation measure would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. 4. Impact D -4: Development of the proposed project could result in an increase in peak discharges at downstream locations. This impact is considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact. a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures are recommended to ensure proper design and safety of detention facilities: — Mitigation Measure D -4(a) Compliance with City's Drainage Design Manual. All drainage improvements must be constructed in accordance with Section 9 of the City's Drainage Design Manual. Either subregional facilities shall be constructed with the first phase of development or interim (on -site) drainage control shall be constructed. Interim facilities can be abandoned once regional facilities are available. The applicant shall submit a detention system plan to the Director of Public Works for review and approval. The detention basins shall be designed to comply with applicable City drainage design standards and at a minimum have the following features: City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 27 n � Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A • Each basin should include an outlet structure to allow the basin to drain completely within 48 hours. The amount of outflow can be regulated with a fixed outfall structure. Such a structure must include an outfall pipe of a size and length that will give positive control on the outfall head. The principal outlet .regulates the design discharge from the watershed above at a water level in the basin that does not exceed a certain maximum elevation. • Regional, or larger on -site facilities can pose significant hazards to public safety in the event of failure. In addition to the outlet control structure, an emergency overflow spillway (secondary overflow) must be provided. This spillway must satisfy the following requirements: — The spillway must be designed to pass the 100 -year design storm event if the outlet works fail or if a runoff event exceeds the design event. The spillway design will be based on peak runoff rates for developed site conditions, assuming that the basins fill to the crest of the spillway prior to the beginning of the design event. — The spillway must be located so overflow is conveyed safely to the downstream channel. • Each basin shall be designed with an emergency spillway that can pass the 100 - year storm event with 2 -foot freeboard between the design water surface elevation and the top of the embankment. At a minimum the basin must contain the 10 -year flow without release to emergency spillway: If flows over the emergency spillway do occur, provisions must be made or be in place that will convey such flows safely. • The design volume of the basin must be sized to include the capacity for a five (5) year accumulation of sediment. Generally, the basin should be cleared out when it is half -full, as determined on a marked staff in the bottom of the basin, or a mark on a riser pipe. The amount of potential sedimentation in the basin shall be determined by a soils engineer or hydrologist, using the procedures such as those outlined in the Association of Bay Area Government's (ABAG) Manual of Standards for Erosion and Sediment Control (May 1995) or as approved by the City Engineer or County Public Works Director. • The basin and its outfall must be sized so that approximately 85% of the total stormwater storage, excluding sediment storage in the basin, can be recovered within twenty-four hours of the peak inflow. A basin overflow system must provide controlled discharge (emergency spillway) for the 100 -year design event without overtopping the basin embankment and maintain adequate freeboard. The design must provide controlled discharge directly into the downstream conveyance system or safe drainage way. The principal outlet must be able to drain the detention facility within 48 hours of the end of the 100 -year storm by gravity flow through the principal outlet. • Any detention basin design must be accompanied by a soils report. This report should address allowable safe basin slopes with respect to liquefaction, rapid draw down, wave action and so forth. Additionally, the report should also address sedimentation transport from areas above the basin and allowable City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 28 Findings of Fact and Statement Overriding Considerations O Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A bearing pressures where structures are to be placed. The soils report must address the level of the water table and the effects of the basin excavation on the water table. — Mitigation Measure D-4(b) Final Drainage Detention System Verification. Final detention basin system designs for project - specific EIRs within the Orcutt Plan Area shall be submitted to the Public Works Department. Per the Wastewater Management Plan, the project shall not cause more than a 5% increase of peak run off rates for the 2 -, 50 -, and 100 -year 24 hour storm event.. Final basin designs shall provide stage- storage- outflow curves and outfall structure details for all detention basins. The San Luis Obispo SLO /Zone 9 HEC -HMS hydrology model may be used to model final detention basin system cumulative downstream impacts should specific projects propose substantial changes to conceptual design, at the discretion of the City Engineer. b. Finding: The City finds that the mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. In association with the Specific Plan's design criteria, implementation of the proposed mitigation measure would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. While the proposed detention system is not predicted to have significant downstream impacts on peak discharge rates, the current design of detention structures is still conceptual for the OASP. The implementation of Mitigation Measure D -4(a) would ensure that project impacts associated with proposed OASP development would be less than significant. 5. Impact D -5: During long -term operation of the proposed project, runoff from the site could affect the water quality in creeks within the Specific Plan Area. Project development could result in an increase in non -point source (NPS) pollutants to receiving waters. Impacts are considered Class II, significant but mitigable. a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures are recommended: — Mitigation Measure D -5(a) Biofilters. The applicant shall submit to the Director of Community Development for review and approval a plan that incorporates grassed swales (biofilters) into the project drainage system where feasible for runoff conveyance and filtering of pollutants. A preferred alternative to concrete drainage swales to transport the runoff to roadside ditches, these swales shall be lined with grass or appropriate vegetation to encourage the biofiltration of sediment, phosphorus, trace metals, and petroleum from runoff prior to discharge into the formal drainage network. General design guidelines relevant to optimizing the pollutant removal mechanisms of grassed swales are: 1) a dense, uniform growth of fine- stemmed herbaceous plants for optimal filtering of pollutants; 2) vegetation that is tolerant to the water, climatological, and soil conditions of the project site is preferred; 3) grassed swales that maximize water contact with the vegetation and soil surface have the potential to substantially improve removal rates, particularly of soluble pollutants; and 4) pollutant removal efficiency is increased as the flow path length is increased. General maintenance guidelines for biofilters are discussed in Mitigation Measure D -5(b). City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 29 Findings of Fact and Statement Overriding Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A A Best Management Practice (BMP) filter device shall be installed to intercept water flowing off of proposed parking lot and roadway surfaces. Water quality BMPs shall be those identified in the California Stormwater Quality association's BMP handbook. Whenever feasible, the preferred approach to treating surface runoff will be the use of drainage swales rather than mechanical devices. The chosen method for treating runoff shall be a proven and documented pollution prevention technology device that removes oil and sediment from stormwater runoff, and retains the contaminants for safe and easy removal. The chosen device shall possess design features to prevent re- suspension of previously collected contaminants and materials, and contain a built -in diversion structure to divert intense runoff events and prevent scouring of the previously collected sediments. The filter devices shall be designed and sized to treat the run -off from the first 25 mm (1 inch) of rainfall. The storm water quality system must be reviewed and approved by the City Director of Public Works. — Mitigation Measure D -5(b) SWPPP Maintenance Guidelines. Prior to issuance of the first grading permit or approval of improvement plans, the applicant shall submit to the Director of Community Development and Director of Public Works for review and approval a long -term storm water pollution prevention plan ( SWPPP) to protect storm water quality after the construction period. The SWPPP shall include the following additional BMPs to protect storm water quality: • Proper maintenance of parking lots and other paved areas can eliminate the majority of litter and debris washing into storm drains and thus entering local waterways. Regular sweeping is a simple and effective BMP aimed at reducing the amount of litter in storm drain inlets (to prevent clogging) and public waterways (for water quality). The project applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City of San Luis Obispo to ensure this maintenance is completed prior to approval of improvement plans or final maps. • Proper maintenance of biofilters is essential to maintain functionality. The maintenance of biofilters on the project site will be the responsibility of a homeowner's association for the proposed project. Biofilter maintenance would include: 1) Regular mowing to promote growth and increase density and pollutant uptake (vegetative height should be no more than 8 inches, cuttings must be promptly removed and properly disposed of); 2) Removal of sediments during summer months when they build up to 6 inches at any spot, cover biofilter vegetation, or otherwise interfere with biofilter operation; and 3) Reseeding of biofilters as necessary, whenever maintenance or natural processes create bare spots. • Proper maintenance of detention basins is necessary to ensure their effectiveness at preventing downstream drainage problems and promoting water quality. Necessary detention basin maintenance includes: 1) regular inspection during the wet season for sediment buildup and clogging of inlets and outlets; 2) regular (appro)dmately every 2 -3 years) removal of basin sediment; and 3) if an open detention basin is used, mowing and maintenance of basin vegetation (replant or reseed) as necessary to control erosion. A maintenance plan must be developed and provided along with the design documents. Long -term detention basin City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 30 Findings of Fact and Statement or Overriding Considerations 0 Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A maintenance plans must clearly delineate and assign maintenance and monitoring responsibilities for local and regional detention basins. Maintenance reports shall be submitted annually to City's Public Works Department. • For basins greater than 5,000 m3 (4 ac -ft) storage (i.e. the Upper Fork regional detention basin), vehicular access for maintenance of the basin and outlet works, removal of sediment, and removal of floating objects during all weather conditions must be provided. An access road must be provided to the basin floor of all detention facilities. This road must have a minimum width of 3.7 m (12 ft) and a maximum grade of 20 %. Turnarounds at the control structure and the bottom of the basin must have a 12 -m (40 -ft) minimum outside turning radius. • The applicant shall prepare informational literature and guidance on residential BMPs to minimize pollutant contributions from the proposed development. This information shall be distributed to all residences at the project site. At a minimum the information should cover: 1) general information on biofilters and detention basins for residents concerning their purpose and importance of keeping them free of yard cuttings and leaf litter; 2) proper disposal of household and commercial chemicals; 3) proper use of landscaping chemicals; 4) clean-up and appropriate disposal of yard cuttings and leaf litter; and 5) prohibition of any washing and dumping of materials and chemicals into storm drains. • The stormwater BMP devices shall be inspected, cleaned and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's maintenance specifications. The devices shall be cleaned prior to the onset of the rainy season (i.e. November 1st) and immediately after the end of the rainy season (i.e. May lst). All devices will be checked after major storm events. The results of the inspection and maintenance report shall be submitted to the City of San Luis Obispo Public Works Department. — Mitigation Measure D -5(c) Pervious Paving Material. Consistent with Land Use Element Policy 6.4.7, the applicant shall be encouraged to use pervious paving material to facilitate rainwater percolation. Parking lots and paved outdoor storage areas shall, where feasible, use pervious paving to reduce surface water runoff and aid in groundwater recharge. — Mitigation Measure D -5(d) Low Impact Development Practices. In addition to the low impact development (LID) practices described in the above measures, the Specific Plan shall incorporate the following as requirements of future development within the area, to the extent appropriate for type and location of development: • Reduced and disconnected impervious surfaces • Preservation of native vegetation where feasible • Use of tree boxes to capture and infiltrate street runoff • Roof leader flows shall be directed to planter boxes and other vegetated areas • Soil amendments shall be utilized in landscaped areas to improve infiltration rates of clay soils. • Incorporate rain gardens into landscape design City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 31 Findings of Fact and Statement Overriding Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A These LID practices shall be utilized wherever feasible and appropriate to ensure that the pre - development stormwater runoff volume and pre - development peak runoff discharge rate are maintained, and that the flow frequency and duration of post - development conditions are identical (to the extent feasible) to those of pre - development conditions. LID practices are subject to the review and approval of the Regional Water Quality Control Board, as part of the City's, National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Permit compliance. b. Finding: The City finds that the mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. Implementation of the identified mitigation measures would reduce project impacts associated with NPS pollutants to a less than significant level. 6. Impact D-6: During long -term operation of the proposed project, runoff from the site could affect the water quality of creeks downstream of the Orcutt Plan Area. Project development could result in an increase in non -point source (NPS) pollutants to receiving waters. Impacts are considered Class II, significant but mitigable. a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measure is recommended: — Mitigation Measure D -6(a) Wetland Habitat Function. A wetland habitat enhancement project is proposed as a feature of the linear park /regional detention basin. The wetland habitat would function as a permanent pond within the detention basin. Therefore:. • The volume of the permanent pond shall not be counted towards the total storage volume of the regional detention basin; • Basin outlets shall be located above the desired permanent water surface, to prevent the basin from draining completely; • Mitigation Measure D -5(b) requires regular maintenance and monitoring of detention basin sediment accumulation. b. Finding: The City finds that the mitigation measure is feasible and has been adopted. The mitigation measure above would ensure that proposed detention basins would have less -than- significant impacts on water quality downstream in the long -term. G. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS 1. Impact G -2: Seismic activity could produce sufficient ground shaking to result in liquefaction at the project site. This is considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact. a. Mitigation: The proposed Specific Plan includes the following program which is intended to reduce potential impacts associated with liquefaction for the Plan area: Program 3.4.1a. To clarify this policy, the following mitigation measure is required, which is intended to more fully address methodologies that could be implemented to reduce liquefaction impacts. City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 32 O Findings of Fact and Statement `of Overriding Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A — Mitigation Measure G -2(a) Geotechnical Study Parameters. As stated in Program 3.4.1.a. of the proposed Specific Plan, a geotechnical study shall be prepared by a State - registered engineering geologist for the project site prior to site development. This report shall include an analysis of the liquefaction potential of the underlying materials according to the most current liquefaction analysis procedures. This study shall also: evaluate the potential for soil settlement beneath the project site; evaluate the potential for expansive soils beneath the project site; and assess the stability of all slopes in the areas where construction is to occur. This evaluation shall determine the potential for adverse soil stability and discuss appropriate mitigation techniques. Appropriate set backs from unstable slopes and areas below potential rockfall zones shall be implemented. No development of residential structures is to occur in areas where rockfall hazards could damage buildings. The following suitable measures to reduce liquefaction impacts could include but need not be limited to: • specialized design of foundations by a structural engineer; • removal or treatment of liquefiable soils to reduce the potential for liquefaction; • drainage to lower the groundwater table to below the level of liquefiable soil; • in -situ densification of soils or other alterations to the ground • characteristics; or • other alterations to the ground characteristics. b. Finding The City finds that the mitigation measure is feasible, and has been adopted. Implementation of the Specific Plan's policies and related mitigation measure in project design would address impacts related to seismically induced liquefaction to the extent of industry standards; therefore impacts would be less than significant. 2. Impact G -3: The Specific Plan area is located in an area defined as having a high potential for settlement. This is considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact. a. Mitigation: The following measures would reduce settlement hazard impacts to less than significant levels: — Mitigation Measure G -3(a) Soil Settlement Engineering. If the project site is identified to be in a high potential for settlement zone (through the Geotechnical Study required in Mitigation Measure G -2(a)) the building foundations, transportation infrastructure and 'subgrades shall be designed by a structural engineer to withstand the existing conditions, or the site shall be graded in such a manner as to address the condition. Suitable measures to reduce settlement impacts could include but need not be limited to: City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 33 Findings of Fact and StatemenOverriding Considerations ) Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A • excavation and recompaction of on -site or imported. soils; • treatment of existing soils by mixing a chemical grout into the soils prior to recompaction; or • foundation design that can accommodate certain amounts of differential settlement such as posttensional slab and /or ribbed foundations designed in accordance with Chapter 18, Division III of the Uniform Building Code(UBC). b. Finding:, The City finds that the mitigation measure is feasible and has been adopted. Implementation of the above measure would ensure that impacts related to soil settlement would be reduced to a less than significant level. 3. Impact G-4: The Specific Plan area is located in an area defined as having moderate to high potential for the expansion or contraction of soils. This is considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact. a. Mitigation: The following measure would reduce soil expansion /contraction hazard impacts to a less than significant level: — Mitigation Measure G-4(a) Expansive Soils Grading. If the project site is identified as having expansive soils (through the Geotechnical Study required in Mitigation Measure G- 2(a)), the foundations and transportation infrastructure shall be designed by a structural engineer to withstand the existing conditions, or the site shall be graded in such a manner as to address the condition. Suitable measures to reduce impacts from expansive soils could include but need not be limited to: • excavation of existing soils and importation of non - expansive soils; and • foundation design to accommodate certain amounts of differential expansion such as posttensional slab and /or ribbed foundations designed in accordance with Chapter 18, Division III of the UBC. b. Finding: The City finds that the mitigation measure is feasible and has been adopted. Implementation of the above measure would ensure that impacts related to soil expansion would be reduced to a less than significant level. 4. Impact G -5: Soil stability conditions contributing to landslides, debris flows, or rock falls exist within the Plan Area. This is considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact. Development near areas of rockfall are considered a Class II,, significant but mitigable impact. a. Mitigation: i Implementation of the following measure is required. — Mitigation Measure G -5(a) Slope Engineering. If the Specific Plan area is identified as having unstable slopes within the development envelope (through the Geotechnical Study required in Mitigation Measure G- 2(a)), either the development of San Luis Obispo December 2009 34 Findings of Fact and Statement Overriding Considerations C Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A envelope shall be modified so as to avoid these unstable slopes, or the slopes will have to be engineered so as to no longer be unstable. The design of slopes to withstand any unstable conditions shall be performed by a Geotechnical Engineer or Engineering Geologist, and the mitigation must be approved by the City of San Luis Obispo building department before the issuance of grading permits. b. Finding: The City finds that the mitigation measure is feasible and has been adopted. Areas having unstable slopes shall be engineered so as to remove or recontour the slopes and stabilize the slopes prior to grading. This mitigation is designed to reduce potential effects to a less than significant level. 5. Cumulative Impacts: Cumulative impacts related to fault rupture, seismically related ground shaking, liquefaction, expansive soils, and soil compaction would be similar to what is described for project - specific impacts, and would be dealt with on a project by project basis. a. Mitigati on: The Specific Plan contains goals and policies (listed above) which would reduce cumulative impacts related to geologic hazards. In addition, implementation of Mitigation Measures G -2(a), G -3(a), G -4(a), and G -5(a) would ensure that project - specific impacts remain less than significant. No other mitigation measures are necessary to address cumulative impacts. b. Finding: The City finds that the mitigation measures proposed above are feasible and have been adopted to reduce the proposed project's contribution to cumulative geologic impacts. With incorporation of the above measures, cumulative impacts relating to geologic hazards would be less than significant. H. NOISE 1. Impact N -1: Construction under the Specific Plan would temporarily generate high noise levels on -site. Because noise could exceed thresholds in the City General Plan Noise Element; impacts are considered Class II, significant but mitigable. a. Mitigation: Implementation of the following policy and programs included in the Specific Plan would reduce impacts to noise generated from temporary construction: Goal 4.5, Program 4.5.11, Policy 4.5.2, and Program 4.5.2d. In addition to the policies and programs identified above, the following mitigation measures are required to reduce construction noise impacts on nearby residences: — Mitigation Measure N -1(a) Compliance with City Noise Ordinance. Construction hours and noise levels shall be compliant with the City Noise Ordinance [Municipal Code Chapter. 9.12, Section 9.12.050(6)]. Methods to reduce construction noise can include, but are not limited to, the following: City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 35 Findings of Fact and Statement-t Overriding Considerations U Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A • Equipment Shielding. Stationary construction equipment that generates noise can be shielded with a barrier. • Diesel Equipment. All diesel equipment can be operated with closed engine doors and equipped with factory- recommended mufflers. • Electrical Power. Whenever feasible, electrical power can be used to run air compressors and similar power tools. • Sound Blankets. The use of sound blankets on noise generating equipment. b. Finding: The City finds that the mitigation measure is feasible and has been adopted. With implementation of the provisions within the Specific Plan and the required mitigation above, noise impacts due to construction would be reduced to less than significant levels. 2. Impact N4: The proposed Specific Plan would place additional sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the Union Pacific Railroad tracks, exposing them to noise levels that could potentially exceed City noise standards. This is considered a Class II, significant but mitigable, impact. a. N iti ag tion: The Orcutt Area Specific Plan includes goals, policies, and programs that. are intended to reduce noise impacts caused by the nearby railroad, as follows: Goal 4.5, Policy 4.5.1, and Programs 4.5.1a through Program 4.5.1e. In addition to the provisions proposed in the Specific Plan, the following mitigation measures are required to reduce UPRR noise impacts on nearby residences: — Mitigation Measure N4(a) Specific Plan Revision. The Specific Plan shall be revised to meet the noise standards of the City General Plan Noise Element. Policy 4.5.1a shall be revised to require that outdoor noise levels for residences not exceed 60 dB (Ldn) and indoor noise levels for residences and schools not exceed 45 dB (Ldn). Program 4.5.2a shall also be revised to ensure that these standards are met. Indoor noise levels can be reduced using the design and materials techniques described in Specific Plan Programs 4.5.1a, 4.5.1b, 4.5.1c, 4.5.1d, 4.5.1e, 4.5.1f, 4.5.2a, 4.5.2b, and 4.5.2c. Outdoor noise levels can be reduced in the following ways: 1) Locate all proposed residential and school development outside of the 60 Ldn contour line (352 feet from the centerline of the railroad); or 2) For any residential or school development located within 352 feet of the railroad centerline, a combination of barrier methods specified in the Noise Element must be implemented. Residential or school project applicants in this area shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department that proposed development will not be exposed to outdoor noise levels that exceed Noise Element standards. Because of the varying topography of the site relative to the railroad tracks, and the fact the development design has not been determined, the specific attenuation methods cannot be definitively determined. Options could include one or more of the following approaches: City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 36 Findings of Fact and Statement v, Overriding Considerations C Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A • Berm or wall along the railroad right -of -way, which would likely vary in height from about 8 to 20 feet, based on preliminary noise models included in this EIR; • Design of individual homes such that structures block the line -of -sight from useable backyards to the railroad tracks; • For homes with backyards not blocked by intervening structures, backyard fencing of sufficient height to block line -of sight to railroad tracks. The design of noise barriers and backyard layouts and walls shall be examined by an approved noise consultant, to determine if they provide sufficient mitigation to comply with Noise Element standards related to outdoor noise exposure. b. Finding: The City finds that the mitigation measure is feasible and has been adopted. With implementation of the programs contained in the Specific Plan and the above mitigation measures, impacts would be less than significant. L PUBLIC SAFETY 1. Impact S -1: Development under the Specific Plan has the potential to expose residents to potentially harmful electric or magnetic fields. This is a Class II, significant but mitigable impact. a. Mitigation: The City Safety Element includes policies intended to reduce the exposure of people to EMFs. Since the proposed Specific Plan includes residential uses adjacent to the exiting transmission line easement the following mitigation is also required. — Mitigation Measure S -1(a) EMF Exposure. State or Federal electric or magnetic exposure levels, if established, are to be followed. In the absence of these exposure standards, no residential structures or residential yards, schools, active parks, or recreational facilities are to be built within the utility' corridor right -of -way or easement. b. Finding: The City finds that the mitigation measure is feasible and has been adopted. Proposed mitigation would reduce potential impacts related to the exposure to electric and magnetic fields generated by the transmission lines to a less than significant level. 2. Impact S -2: Development under the Orcutt Area Specific Plan would increase activity levels in the vicinity of the San Luis Obispo Airport Planning Area. The draft Specific Plan is inconsistent with certain safety- related provisions of the Airport Land Use Plan. Revisions to the Specific Plan and density adjustments from the Airport Land Use Commission are required to make the Specific Plan consistent. If the Airport Land Use Commission determines that the Orcutt Area Specific Plan is consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan, this would be considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact. a. Mitigation: Adherence to State requirements for new school sites and Zoning Regulation would reduce the ALUP inconsistencies and associated safety. The City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 37 ^'a Findings of Fact and Statement Overfiding Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A following goals, policies, programs and performance standards are derived from the Orcutt Area Specific Plan and would reduce impacts created by or produced by the San Luis Obispo County Airport. They are as follows: Goal 3.5, Policy 3.5.1, Policy 3.5.2, Policy 3.5.3, and Performance Standards 3.5.2a -h. In addition to the policies and programs described above, the following mitigation measures are required related to airport safety impacts. — Mitigation Measure S -2(a) Residential Density. Prior to Specific Plan approval by the City Council, the proposed project must be referred to the ALUC for a consistency determination with the ALUP. The ALUC must determine that the proposed residential density is consistent with the ALUP; or, the applicant shall submit a revised Specific Plan that shows a reduction in proposed residential density, consistent with ALUP requirements. — Mitigation Measure S -2(b) Disclosure. Prior to recordation of final map, the applicant shall develop Covenants, Codes, and Restrictions (CC &R's) that disclose to potential buyers or leasers that aircraft over - flights occur, and that such flights may result in safety hazard impacts should an aircraft accident occur. In addition, prior to recordation of final map, avigation easements shall be recorded over the entire project site for the benefit of the SLO County Regional Airport. — Mitigation Measure S -2(c) Special Function Land Uses. Prior to Specific Plan approval by the City Council, the project must be referred to the ALUC for a consistency determination with the ALUP. The ALUC must determine that the proposed Special Function Land Use is consistent with the ALUP; or, the applicant shall submit revised plans showing that the proposed school has been eliminated from the proposal. b. Finding: The City finds that the mitigation measures above are feasible, and have been adopted. Implementation of the above measures along with adherence to State requirements for new school sites and Zoning Regulation would mitigate airport safety impacts to a less than significant level. 3. Impact S -3: The Union Pacific Railroad corridor adjacent to potential development under the Specific Plan could create a public safety hazard because of the possibility of accidents. This is a Class H, significant but mitigable impact. a. Mitigation: Transport of hazardous materials on the railway will be required to comply with all federal, state, and local laws pertaining to the handling of hazardous materials. In addition, any school developed pursuant to the Specific Plan would require compliance with Department of Education safety study requirements. This analysis, however, would be conducted through separate review outside the CEQA process. To reduce the potential safety hazard of trespassers on the railroad tracks the following mitigation measures are recommended: — Mitigation Measure S -3(a) Pedestrian /Bicycle Passage. A safe and accessible pedestrian/bicycle crossing shall be provided across the UPRR between Orcutt Road City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 38 Findings of Fact and Statement'bt "Overriding Considerations O Orcutt Area Speck Plan Attachment 6 - and Tank Farm Road. This crossing shall be connected with the proposed bicycle and pedestrian path, and integrated into the bicycle path and sidewalk system. This crossing shall be designed to allow pedestrians and bicyclists to safely travel across the tracks from the Plan Area to the neighborhood on the west side of the tracks. The crossing shall be approved by the City Engineer. — Mitigation Measure S -3(b) Signage. Signage that directs people to the pedestrian/bicycle railroad crossing shall be placed in obvious and appropriate locations along the western edge of the Plan Area and along the bike path that runs parallel to the railroad tracks on the west side of the Plan Area. — Mitigation Measure S -3(c) Fencing. The Specific Plan shall be revised to include fencing along the western boundary of the Specific Plan area, adjacent to the railroad tracks. Coordination with the UPRR and the City is required to determine the appropriate height and type of fencing. This fencing can be integrated with barriers that are required to meet noise attenuation standards (See impact N4 above). b. Finding: The City finds that the above mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. Implementation of the above measures would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. 4. Impact S-4: Suspect recognized environmental conditions that may pose a risk to human health and safety have been observed on portions of the Orcutt Area. This is considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact. a. Mitigation: The Orcutt Area Specific Plan has identified the following goals, polices, programs, and performance standards, which are intended to reduce public safety impacts to less than significant levels: Goal 3.4, Policy 3.4.2, Program 3.4.2a, Program 3.4.2b, and Performance Standard 3.5.2d. In addition to the above stated policy and programs within the Specific Plan, the following proposed mitigation would further ensure less than significant impacts related to public safety. — Mitigation Measure S -4(a) Areas not surveyed. Prior to development in areas not surveyed for the Limited Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment (Rincon Consultants, Inc., 2004) a Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment shall be conducted to identify the presence of recognized environmental conditions associated with soil and groundwater contamination at the site. If recognized conditions are encountered then a Phase H Environmental Site Assessment shall be performed to determine if soil or groundwater have been affected. — Mitigation Measure S -4(b) Righetti Hill Abandoned Mine. Prior to allowing public access in the vicinity of the abandoned mine, soils samples shall be taken around the entrance and down gradient and analyzed for heavy metals by CCR Title 22 metals. — Mitigation Measure S -4(c) Farmhouses. Prior to issuance of any entitlement for development that will require the demolition of farmhouses identified in Figure 4.9- 1, a qualified Environmental Scientist shall enter the farmhouses and determine if City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 39 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Orcutt Area Speck Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A there may have been any hazardous material releases associated with the storage or use of hazardous materials. If it is determined that there may have been hazardous materials release, a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment shall be performed to determine if soil or groundwater has been affected. — Mitigation Measure S4(d) 55- Gallon Drums. Prior to development on the property where 55 -Gallon drums were identified as shown in Figure 4.9 -1, soils samples shall be taken in the vicinity of the drums and analyzed for total extractable petroleum hydrocarbons (TEPH) by EPA method 8015, heavy metals by CCR Title 22 metals, and solvents by EPA method 8260B. If levels of contaminants are found to exist in concentrations that exceed regulatory thresholds, further sampling may be needed to determine the extent of contamination. Once the extent of contamination is delineated, an appropriate remediation method should be implemented according to the size of the area contaminated and the contaminant involved. b. Finding: The City finds that the above mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. Impacts would be less than significant with implementation of the Specific Plan provisions and the required mitigation measures. PUBLIC SERVICES 1. Impact PS -2: The project would increase the number of residents served by the San Luis Obispo Fire Department. The increase would affect the personnel, equipment and organization of the Fire Department by increasing the burden on Fire Department services and potentially placing residences, outside of the target four minute response time. This would be considered a Class II, significant but mitigable, impact. a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures are required. — Mitigation Measure PS -2(a) Road Widths, Fire Hydrants. Road widths and internal circulation, as well as the placement of fire hydrants, shall be designed with the guidance of the Fire Department. A road system that allows unhindered Fire Department access and maneuvering during emergencies shall be provided. The San Luis Obispo Fire Department shall review all improvement plans for proposed development in the Orcutt Area to ensure compliance with City standards and the Uniform Fire Code. — Mitigation Measure PS -2(b) Non - combustible exteriors. Buildings that are in areas of moderate fire hazard and which are close to areas of high or extreme fire hazard shall have non - combustible exteriors. — Mitigation Measure PS -2(c) Defensible Space. Accessible space free of highly combustible vegetation and materials shall be provided in the area 30 feet around all structures located within the moderate wildland fire hazard areas. City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 40 Findings of Fact and Statement'u, Overriding Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A b. Fes: The City finds that the above mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With proposed mitigation measures, impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level. 2. Impact PS -3: The project would increase the number of residents served by the SLCUSD. The increase would result in a Class II, significant but mitigable impact to the school system. a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures are intended to reduce project related impacts: — Mitigation Measure PS -3(a) Buildout Date Notification. The applicant shall notify the San Luis Coastal Unified School District of the expected buildout date of each phase of the project to allow the District time to plan in advance for new students. — Mitigation Measure PS -3(b) Statutory School Fees. The applicant shall pay the statutory school fees in effect at the time of issuance of building permits to the appropriate school districts. b. Finding The City finds that the above mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. Mitigation Measure PS -3(b) would require the full development fees be charged to a developer by the school districts. Currently the mitigation fee is $2.63 per square foot of residential development and $0.42 per square foot of commercial or industrial development. These fees would contribute funding for new school facilities for the students potentially generated by the project. Pursuant to Section 65995 (3)(h) of the California Government Code (Senate Bill 50, chaptered August 27, 1998), the payment of statutory fees "...is deemed to be full and complete mitigation of the impacts of any legislative or adjudicative act, or both, involving, but not limited to, the planning, use, or developed of real property, or any change in governmental organization or reorganization." Therefore, subsequent to payment of statutory fees, school impacts would be considered less than significant. K. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 1. Impact T -1: The addition of traffic generated by the Specific Plan to Baseline traffic volumes would cause one study roadway segment and one intersection to operate at unacceptable levels during peak hours. This would result in a Class II, significant but mitigable, impact. a. Mitigation: The Specific Plan includes the following goals, policies and programs, which are intended to address safe and efficient circulation within the Specific Plan area: Goal 5.1, Goal 5.2, Policy 5.1.a, Program 5.1.2, Program 5.1.3, and Policies 5.1.b -e. In addition to these Specific Plan provisions, the following mitigation measures are also required to further reduce impacts to roadway segments and intersections. — Mitigation Measure T -1(a) Orcutt Road/Tank Farm Road. The additional traffic generated by the Specific Plan will degrade operations at this intersection to an City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 41 Findings of Fact and Statement or Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A unacceptable level (LOS E), and the peak -hour signal warrant will be met. The addition of a 200' right -tum lane on the southbound approach would mitigate this impact, reducing overall delay to 14.8 seconds (LOS B). With the new right turn lane, the southbound approach would experience a delay of 25.5 seconds (LOS D). The vehicle delay for the northbound approach would be 28.2 seconds (LOS D). Prior to issuance of occupancy permits, the applicants shall complete the improvements identified within this mitigation measure subject to review, inspection and permit issuance by the City. b. Finding: The City finds that the above mitigation is feasible and has been adopted. With implementation of the provisions within the Specific Plan and the required mitigation, impacts to roadways and intersection operations would be reduced to less than significant levels. 2. Impact T -2: The addition of traffic generated by the Specific Plan to Buildout traffic volumes would cause one study roadway segment and five intersections to operate at unacceptable levels during peak hours. This would result in a Class II, significant but mitigable, impact. a. Miti ag tion: The following mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts to roadway segments and intersections to a less than significant level. — Mitigation Measure T -2(a) Broad StreetlSouth Street -Santa Barbara Road. In order to mitigate Buildout level traffic conditions the intersection will need to be widened to provide a 100 foot southbound right -turn lane. Alternatively, acceptable operations could be achieved by improving the westbound approach to include two left turn lanes and a shared through /right turn lane. Either of these two improvements may result in secondary right -of -way impacts. This specific plan is currently not included in the City's TIF program. The applicant shall be responsible for paying a "fair share" mitigation fee as determined by the Director of Public Works, associated with the estimated intersection improvements. — Mitigation Measure T -2(b) Broad Street /Tank Farm Road. The addition of a second southbound left -turn lane and a second northbound left -turn lane is necessary to mitigate Buildout level traffic conditions. This improvement may result in secondary right -of -way impacts. This specific plan is currently not included in the City's TIF program. The applicant shall be responsible for paying a "fair share" mitigation fee as determined by the Director of Public Works, associated with the estimated intersection improvements. — Mitigation Measure T -2(c) Orcutt RoadlJohnson Avenue. The installation of a single -lane roundabout is necessary to mitigate Buildout level traffic conditions. Installation of a single -lane roundabout would improve intersection operations to City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 42 Findings of Fact and Statement br Overriding Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A LOS A. This improvement would be needed as soon as the northeastern portion of the Specific Plan is developed. This specific plan is currently not included in the City's TIF program. The applicant shall be responsible for paying a "fair share" mitigation fee as determined by the Director of Public Works, associated with the estimated intersection improvements. — Mitigation Measure T -2(d) Orcutt Road/Tank Farm Road. The additional traffic generated by the Buildout of the General Plan will trigger the need for a traffic signal at this intersection. Installation of a traffic signal will improve intersection operations to LOS C. This specific plan is currently not included in the City's TIF program. The applicant shall be responsible for paying a "fair share" mitigation fee as determined by the Director of Public Works, associated with the estimated intersection improvements. — Mitigation Measure T -2(e) Broad StreetlPrado Road Extension. The additional traffic generated by the Buildout of the General Plan will trigger the need for a second northbound left -turn lane. Prior to issuance of occupancy permits, specific plan applicants shall make "fair share" contributions to the City's Orcutt Area Specific Plan mitigation fee program for the addition of a second northbound left- turn lane at the intersection of Broad Street and Prado Road. b. Finding: The City finds that the above mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With implementation of these improvements, roadways and intersections would operate at acceptable levels. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. 3. Impact T -3: If improperly designed, site access and internal circulation roads can result in safety hazards for all users including bicyclists, pedestrians, and transit patrons. The Specific Plan includes site access, emergency access, and internal access road standards to accommodate Specific Plan traffic. Class II, significant but mitigable, impacts would result. a. Mitigation: The proposed Specific Plan includes the following–goals, policies, and programs, which are intended to address potential impacts associated with site access and circulation: Policy 5.2.a, Policy 5.2.b, Programs 5.2.1 through 5.2.8, and Policies 5.3.a through 5.3.c. The Specific Plan includes the following goals and programs to create safe and efficient bicycle facilities in the Specific Plan area: Goal 5.3, Program 5.1.1, and Program 5.3.1. The Specific Plan includes the following goal, policy and program concerning transit facilities: Goal 5.4, Policy 5.4.a, and Program 5.4.1. Implementation of the above policies and programs would reduce impacts to some extent. However, implementation of the following mitigation measure is required to reduce impacts related to vehicle and transit facilities to less than significant levels. (No additional mitigation is required for bicycle and pedestrian facilities). — Mitigation Measure T -3(a) Vehicle Facilities. The proposed specific plan will have a potentially significant impact on vehicle facilities due to the potential for excessive City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 43 Findings of Fact and Statement of Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A on -site vehicle speeds. The typical street cross - sections should be adjusted as follows: Bullock Lane - Remove the southbound (west) parking lane (on the UPRR side). Other collector roadways Traffic control, such as all-way stops, should be implemented at intersections where cross traffic volumes are large enough to warrant installation. Local roadways should be configured in an interconnected pattern with short block lengths. The Project, in coordination with the City, will identify appropriate locations and relevant traffic calming treatments and install the necessary devices. This mitigation measure may require modification of proposed Specific Plan Program 5.2.6 to accommodate these provisions. — Mitigation Measure T -3(b) Transit Facilities. Bus stops locations and amenities should be developed in consultation with the City to mitigate potential Specific Plan impacts. Additional bus stops may be required in or adjacent to the specific plan area, and bus stop locations may need to be moved to accommodate development patterns and new bus routings. In addition, special paving, bus bays, benches, and shelters may be necessary at some locations. The specific plan, in coordination with the City and SLO Transit, will plan and construct future bus stop locations and amenities. - A service plan for the project site should be developed as part of the City's Short- Range Transit Plan (SRTP) update process. With either option presented above or a routing plan developed as part of the SRTP process, bus stops should be located approximately every one - quarter mile. The primary on -site bus stop(s) will be located near the intersection of "A" and "B" Streets. — Mitigation Measure T -3(c) Bicycle Path Connection. The Class I bicycle path along the UPRR tracks should be maintained across the creek to provide consistency with the City's bicycle plan, and the path should connect to existing facilities at Orcutt Road and Tank Farm Road even though the streets are outside of the project site. The potentially significant impacts would be mitigated if the specific plan is developed with the proposed facilities in place, a continuous Class I facility along the UPRR tracks, and connections to existing facilities. — Mitigation Measure T -3(d) Site Access. The adequacy of vehicular on -site circulation needs to be reviewed when a plan showing all roadway locations has been prepared. The locations of the proposed collector streets appear adequate. Based on the projected traffic volumes, a one -lane roundabout will be adequate at the Bullock Lane / "B" Street / "C" Street intersection. As described above, the bicycle network is adequate. Pedestrian circulation needs to be reviewed when a plan showing all local residential streets has been prepared. Pedestrian paths may be required in some locations, dependent upon the connectivity of the proposed roadway network. b. Finding: The City finds that the above mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With implementation of the Specific Plan's identified provisions and the required mitigation measures, impacts to public transportation would be reduced to less than significant levels. City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 44 Findings of Fact and Statement'or Overriding Considerations J Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A L. LAND USE AND PLANNING 1. Impact LU -1: The Specific Plan includes establishing open space and low density residential land uses outside of the current City Urban Reserve Line (URL). Development under City jurisdiction outside of the URL would be potentially inconsistent with the growth management goals of preserving open space and agriculture on land surrounding the City. However, these impacts are considered Class II, significant but mitigable. a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measure would be needed, primarily to achieve consistency with several General Plan policies. — Mitigation Measure LU -1(a) General Plan Amendment. The City shall amend its General Plan to include a revised Urban Reserve Line that contains all of the property proposed for development within the Orcutt Specific Plan Area b. Finding: The City finds that the above mitigation is feasible and has been adopted. The implementation of the above mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. 2. Impact LU -2: The Specific Plan includes land use designations that potentially allow for 750 to 1,000 dwelling units, 50 to 300 units more than is planned for the Orcutt Area in the General Plan. This impact is considered Class II, significant but mitigable. a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measure is required. — Mitigation Measure LU -2(a) General Plan Amendment. The City shall amend its General Plan to reflect the increased buildout potential of the Orcutt Area and decreased potential of the Margarita Area. The estimated buildout for Orcutt shall be between 500 and 1,000 dwelling units and, for Margarita, between 800 to 1,200 dwelling units. b. Finding The City finds that the above mitigation measure is feasible and has been adopted. Implementation of the above mitigation measure would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. 3. Impact LU -3: The proposed development would be potentially inconsistent with City urban design goals described in to the City's Community Design Guidelines, and could result in compatibility issues between certain commercial and residential uses. This is considered a Class II, significant but mitigable, impact. a. Mitigation: The following design - oriented mitigation would be required to ensure consistency with City policies: of San Luis Obispo December 45 Findings of Fact and Statement v Overriding Considerations ) Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6- Exhibit A — Mitigation Measure LU -3(a) Modified Design Elements. The Specific Plan shall include one or more of the following approaches to achieve consistency with the City's Community Design policies: • The Specific Plan can be modified to include more commercial area that is not allowed to be converted to housing. • Provide a pedestrian and bicycle underpass below the railroad tracks (or a bridge over the tracks) that connect the Orcutt Area to the western end of Industrial Way. This will allow residents of the Orcutt Area to reach Marigold Center via Industrial Way, making the distance approximately 0.5 mile from the railroad track underpass. — Mitigation Measure LU -3(b) Mixed Use Incompatibility. Individual uses in the Mixed Use zone such as nail salons, cleaners, or coffee roasters that may generate substantial odors shall be carefully evaluated for compatibility with nearby residential uses at the discretion of the Community Development Director, prior to issuance of an APCD use permit. b. Fes: With the implementation of the mitigation measure listed above, impacts related to mixed use incompatibility and consistency with the Community Design Guidelines will be reduced to less than significant. It should be noted that establishing a pedestrian right -of -way under the railroad track, if this approach is used, should be done in such a manner to preclude the possibility of further right -of -way acquisition so that no roadway could be extended through this area. This would avoid potential impacts related to traffic and land use that could otherwise result from a roadway extension at this location. 4. Impact LU-4: The proposed Specific Plan would permit development that is potentially inconsistent with the ALUP. This is considered a Class II,.significant but mitigable, impact. a. Mitigation: Mitigation measures S -2(a), S -2(b), S -2(c), and S -2(d), from the Public Safety section above, would be required. b. Fes: The City finds that the above mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. Mitigation measures S -2(a), S -2(b), S -2(c), and S-2(d) would make the Specific Plan consistent with the ALUP, reducing impacts to a less than significant level. M. GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS 1. Impact: Growth Inducement resulting from development anticipated by the General Plan would be significant but mitigable. a. Mitigation: Mitigation measure LU -1(a) (above) requires the City to adjust the URL to include all of the area proposed for development in the Specific Plan, therefore, with implementation of this measure, impacts would be reduced to less than significant. City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 46 Findings of Fact and Statement (it Overriding Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A b. Finding: The City finds that the above mitigation measure is feasible and has been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measure, the URL would be adjacent to open space within the City Limits and no growth inducing impacts would occur. 2. Impact: Growth inducement resulting from road extensions proposed by the project would be significant and unavoidable. a. Miti ag tion: No feasible mitigation is available that would reduce the project's potential to induce growth due to roadway extensions. b. Finding: The City finds that no feasible mitigation is available, and that this impact is significant and unavoidable. A statement of overriding considerations for this impact is made in Section 6. N. GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE 1. Impact: The proposed OASP would result in significant but mitigable impacts to global climate change. Determination of the significance of operational GHG emissions impacts is predicated upon a project's consistency with a GHG reduction plan or, in the absence of such a plan, compliance with AB 32 [refer to Section 7.3(a) of the EIR]. Because the Climate Action Plan has not yet been completed for San Luis Obispo County, the following mitigation measures are required: a. N iti ag tion — GCC -1(a) GHG Emissions Reduction Planning. To ensure that future development under the Specific Plan meets the GHG emissions reduction requirements in AB 32 and SB 375, the following policies shall be added to the Specific Plan: • The City shall participate in regional planning efforts with SLOCOG and the APCD to reduce basin -wide GHG emissions in compliance with SB 375. • The City's participation in regional planning efforts to reduce basin -wide GHG emissions is anticipated to include City assistance in developing a GHG emissions inventory, and identifying reduction measures related to site design, energy conservation, and trip reduction. • Once the Resource Agency adopts guidelines for the mitigation of GHG emissions pursuant to SB 97, all projects under the Specific Plan shall mitigate GHG emissions as required. — GCC -1(b) Consideration of Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Measures. Through the CEQA environmental review process for discretionary permit applications, development under the Specific Plan shall consider all feasible GHG emissions reduction measures to reduce direct and indirect emissions associated with project vehicle trip generation and energy consumption. City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 47 Findings of Fact and Statement 6 Overriding Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A b. Finding: The City finds that the above mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. The above mitigation measures would ensure compliance with regional efforts to meet GHG emissions targets in AB 32. Determining the significance of the impact of the project on global climate is still speculative. Nonetheless, the project's contribution to the problem of global climate change would be reduced with implementation of OASP policies and programs, and applicable mitigation measures listed in Tables 7.3 and 7.4 of the EIR, respectively. The project also must be carried out in a manner consistent with the goals, policies and programs of the City's Conservation Open Space Element. In addition, the recommended project design features suggested above can be incorporated into the OASP to further reduce the GHG emissions at build -out. Mitigation measures GCC -1(a) and GCC -1(b) would ensure less than significant impacts. SECTION 6. SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT FOR WHICH SUFFICIENT MITIGATION IS NOT AVAILABLE This section presents the project's significant environmental impacts and feasible mitigation measures. Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations [CCR]) and Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code require a lead agency to make findings for each significant environmental impact disclosed in an EIR. Specifically, for each significant impact, the lead agency must find that: — Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR. — Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. — Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. Each of these findings must be supported by substantial evidence in the administrative record. This section identifies impacts that can be reduced, but not to a less - than- significant level, through the incorporation of feasible mitigation measures into the project, and which therefore, remain significant and unavoidable, as identified in the program EIR: The impacts identified in this section are considered in the same sequence in which they appear in the draft EIR. Where adoption of feasible mitigation measures is not effective in avoiding an impact or reducing it to a less - than- significant level, the feasibility of adopting alternatives to the proposed project is considered in Section 7 of this document. City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 48 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A A. AESTHETICS 1. Impact AES -1: The proposed development would affect the aesthetic character of the site vicinity through alteration of viewsheds from Orcutt and Tank Farm Roads. This is considered a Class I, significant and unavoidable impact. a. Mitigation: The proposed Specific Plan includes the following goals, policies, and programs, which are intended to address potential impacts associated with this issue: Goal 2.4, Policy 2.4.1, and Programs 2.4.1a through 2.4.1e. No other mitigation measures are feasible. b. Finding: The City finds that no feasible mitigation is available. Implementation of these provisions of the Specific Plan would reduce impacts to some extent. However, impacts to the character of the site due to the change from rural to urban development will remain significant and unavoidable. A statement of overriding considerations for this impact is made in Section 8. 2. Impact AES -2: The proposed development would affect the aesthetic character of the Specific Plan Area and impede views of Righetti Hill. This is considered a Class I, significant and unavoidable impact. a. Mitigation: There are no feasible mitigation measures that are consistent with the objectives of the proposed project. b. Finding: The City finds that no feasible mitigation is available, and that impacts to the character of the site due to the change from rural to urban development will remain significant and unavoidable. A statement of overriding considerations for this impact is made in Section 8. 3. Cumulative Impacts: New development in and around the City will affect the aesthetic character of the City by adding new urban elements such as streets, buildings, signs, and landscaping, as well as light sources. This is especially true for new development in rural areas around the City edge. As the City grows at its edges, greenbelt and rural areas surrounding the City are lost. In addition to the proposed project, the City is currently reviewing Specific Plans for the Margarita and Airport Areas which include proposed development of currently rural areas. Cumulative development of these proposed developments would result in a significant cumulative loss of open space and would irrevocably alter the character of these areas throughout the City from rural to urban. Implementation of the proposed Specific Plan would incrementally contribute to this change in aesthetic character of the site and the surrounding areas. Cumulative aesthetic impacts are therefore considered Significant and Unavoidable (Class I). a. Mitigation: The Specific Plan contains goals and policies which would reduce cumulative aesthetic impacts. In addition, implementation of Mitigation Measure AES - 3(a), would further reduce impacts. No other feasible mitigation is available that would meet the project objectives. City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 49 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A b. Findings: The City finds that no additional feasible mitigation is available for cumulative aesthetic impacts, which would remain significant and unavoidable. A statement of overriding considerations for this impact is made in Section 8. B. AIR QUALITY 1. Impact AQ-4: The proposed Specific Plan is consistent with population assumptions of the General Plan and San Luis Obispo County Clean Air Plan (CAP). However, the Specific Plan proposes low density residential development outside of the current Urban Reserve Line (URL) which will require an adjustment of the URL to be consistent with the General Plan. The 2001 CAP encourages development to occur within the URL of cities, therefore, the Specific Plan is inconsistent with the 2001 Clean Air Plan (CAP). This is considered to be a Class I, significant and unavoidable impact. a. Mitigation: The incorporation of Mitigation Measures AQ -1(b) though AQ -1(f), and T- 3(b) through T -3(d), are recommended to improve consistency with the CAP. The following additional measure is also required: — Mitigation Measure AQ -4(a) Development and Distribution of Alternative Transportation Information. The applicant shall create a Multi-Modal Access Guide, which includes maps and other information on how to walk and cycle to nearby destinations. In addition, the applicant shall provide an on -site bulletin board specifically for the posting of bus schedules and notices of availability for car- pooling and /or shall distribute such information to property owners upon occupancy. The applicant shall be responsible for maintaining this board and updating it every two months. b. Finding: The City finds that the mitigation measure is feasible and has been adopted. However, short of limiting growth to within the current URL boundaries, this inconsistency cannot be fully mitigated. A statement of overriding considerations for this impact is made in Section 8. 2. Cumulative Impacts: The OASP is inconsistent with the CAP policy of containing urban development within the URL of cities and exceeds the SLOAPCD Tier II thresholds of significance. As a result, the OASP is considered to be potentially inconsistent with long- term regional air quality planning efforts, and the Specific Plan is expected to have significant and unavoidable impacts on air quality. a. Mitigation: The Specific Plan contains goals and policies which would reduce cumulative agricultural impacts. In addition, implementation of Mitigation Measures AG- 1(a -f), AQ- 3(a -d) and AQ4(a), would further reduce impacts. No other feasible mitigation is available that would meet the project objectives. b. Finding: The City finds that no additional feasible mitigation is available for cumulative air quality impacts, which would remain significant and unavoidable. A statement of overriding considerations for this impact is made in Section 8. City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 50 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A C. NOISE 1. Impact N -5: The proposed Specific Plan, in combination with cumulative development at General Plan buildout would add to roadway corridor noise levels already above the 60 dBA Ldn City threshold. This is considered a Class I, significant and unavoidable impact. a. Mitigation: As discussed under Impact N -2 above, the Specific Plan contains goals, policies, and programs that will reduce noise exposure of new sensitive receptors within the Orcutt Area to meet City standards. In addition, implementation of the following measure would further reduce cumulative noise impacts for the Specific Plan area and other development areas to a feasible extent. — Mitigation Measure N -5(a) Fair Share of Cumulative Noise Improvements. Applicants under the Specific Plan must contribute their fair financial share, as determined by the City, to the implementation of one or more of the mitigation approaches listed in policy 9 of the Noise Element (refer to Appendix E of the EIR). The Specific Plan has been revised to include a specific program to contribute to mitigating cumulative impacts. Implementation of the program must occur prior home occupancy for development pursuant to the Specific Plan. b. Finding: The City finds that the mitigation measure is feasible and has been adopted. Use of such techniques on all new development in the area and the retrofitting of existing development would reduce cumulative impacts to the extent feasible. However, implementation of these techniques would not necessarily ensure that cumulative noise experienced at sensitive receptors would be reduced to less than significant levels at all locations. No additional mitigation measures are feasible due to economic and physical constraints. Therefore, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. A statement of overriding considerations for this impact is made in Section 8. City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 51 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A SECTION 7. FINDINGS FOR ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT A. INTRODUCTION As identified in Section 6 of this document, the proposed project will cause the following significant and unavoidable environmental impacts to occur: • Impact AES-1: Aesthetic character and alteration of viewsheds from Orcutt and Tank Farm Roads • Impact AES-2: Aesthetic character and impact to views of Righetti Hill • Cumulative aesthetic impacts • Cumulative impacts to agricultural resources • Impact AQ-4: Clean Air Plan (CAP) consistency • Cumulative air quality impacts • Impact N -5: Cumulative roadway noise • Growth Inducement Because the proposed project will cause significant and unavoidable environmental impacts to occur as identified above, the City must consider the feasibility of any environmentally superior alternatives to the project, as proposed. The City must evaluate whether one or more of these alternatives could substantially lessen or avoid the unavoidable significant environmental effects. As such, the environmental superiority and feasibility of each alternative to the project is considered in this section. Specifically, this section evaluates the effectiveness of these alternatives in reducing the significant and unavoidable impacts of the proposed project. B. DESCRIPTION OF THE ALTERNATIVES The program EIR for the project evaluates the following four alternatives to the project: (1) a no project alternative; (2) an alternative neighborhood center design; (3) an alternative that incorporates all mitigation required for the proposed Specific Plan; and (4) a project with reduced residential density. 1. Alternative 1: No-Project. As required by CEQA, this EIR evaluates the environmental consequences of not proceeding with the project. This alternative assumes that the Specific Plan is not adopted, and that the site remains in its current state of farm and ranchlands, single - family homes and storage, although it would not preclude future development that may be proposed under the County's subdivision ordinance. This site is zoned and designated under the General Plan as Residential Single Family and Agricultural (AG). 2. Alternative 2: Neighborhood Center. This alternative would result in development clustered toward the center of the site and around a commercial core. The intensity of development in the Plan Area is similar to the proposed project but the Neighborhood City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 52 Findings of Fact and Statement o Overriding Considerations n Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A Center alternative includes potential for a greater amount of commercial uses than the proposed project. This alternative is substantially similar to the proposed project in that the overall number of dwelling units and expected population under this alternative are the same. The development pattern places a higher density of people in a concentrated area but also leaves more area as open space. This alternative, like the proposed Specific Plan includes development outside of the current URL. 3. Alternative 3: Mitigated Project. The Mitigated Project Alternative would include a Specific Plan revised to incorporate mitigation measures that are recommended for the proposed Specific. Plan. The Mitigated Project Alternative would include the same number of residences but at slightly higher densities than in the proposed Specific Plan. This is because there would be an increased amount of parkland, a potential fire station site, and there would not be any development outside of the current Urban Reserve Line (URL). 4. Alternative 4: Reduced Project. This alternative considers a development area that would be the same as the proposed project but with lesser residential density within that area. The development pattern, circulation, and open space areas would be similar to the proposed project. This alternative would accommodate up to 650 new dwelling units (about 330 fewer than under the proposed project) and a school in the same site as in the proposed Specific Plan. The commercial development potential would remain the same as the proposed project. C. EFFECTIVENESS OF ALTERNATIVES IN AVOIDING SIGNIFICANT PROTECT IMPACTS This section evaluates the effectiveness of the alternatives in reducing the significant and unavoidable impacts of the proposed project. 1. Significant and Unavoidable Aesthetic Impacts. The proposed project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts related to the aesthetic character of the site, and blockage of scenic views. Alternative 1 (No Project) is the only alternative that would avoid both of the significant impacts related to aesthetic character and view blockage. Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 would result in changes to the existing aesthetic character of the site similar to the proposed project. Under Alternative 2, views from Orcutt Road on the east side of the Orcutt Area would not be impacted to the extent that they would with the proposed project, however impacts would remain significant. Alternative 3 would reduce the impact to scenic views to a less than significant level by requiring a 50' setback from the Orcutt Road and Tank Farm. Road right -of -ways. However, under Alternative 3, the impacts to visual character could be greater than the proposed project due to higher residential densities and the addition of a fire station. Although the overall density of development under Alternative 4 would be less, impacts to aesthetic character and view blockage would remain significant. 2. Significant and Unavoidable Cumulative Air Quality Impacts. The proposed project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts related to Clean Air Plan (CAP) inconsistency, which is considered a cumulative air quality impact. Under Alternative 1 City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 53 Findings of Fact and Statement or Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A (No Project), no additional vehicle trips would be generated, and no development would be allowed outside of the ULL, therefore cumulative air quality impacts would be substantially reduced. Under Alternative 2, additional vehicle trips would result in increased emissions compared to the proposed project, which would cumulatively impact air quality. Because Alternatives 2 and 4 would allow development outside of the Urban Limit Line (ULL), impacts related to CAP consistency would be similar to the proposed project. Alternative 3 would not allow development outside of the existing ULL, and would therefore be consistent with the CAP. The pedestrian/bicycle underpass proposed in Alternative 3 would also result in fewer vehicle trips and associated cumulative vehicle emissions. Alternative 4 would also result in fewer trips and emissions, and includes less dwelling units and expected population than the proposed project; however, the significant cumulative impacts would not be avoided. 3. Significant and Unavoidable Cumulative Noise Impacts. The proposed project would contribute to significant and unavoidable cumulative roadway noise impacts caused by the addition of vehicle trips. Alternative 1 would not. add additional vehicle trips to the roadway network, and therefore, would avoid the cumulative impact relating to roadway noise. Alternative 2 would result in a greater number of vehicle trips and therefore have greater roadway noise impacts than the proposed project. The bicycle /pedestrian overpass proposed in Alternative 3 may reduce vehicle trips associated with the project. However, the addition of a fire station within the specific plan may result in periodic increases in roadway noise, although trips would be infrequent, and associated noise is unlikely to exceed the City's thresholds. The fire station would be subject to subsequent project -level environmental review. Alternative 4 would result in fewer vehicle trips and associated roadway noise than the proposed project, and with implementation of mitigation measure N -5(a) Fair Share of Cumulative Noise Improvements, the contribution to the cumulative roadway noise impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level. 4. Significant and Unavoidable Growth Inducing Impacts. The proposed project includes roadway extensions that would result in significant and unavoidable growth inducing impacts. Alternative 1 (No Project) would avoid this impact. Extension of the roadways within the Specific Plan area under Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 would result in growth inducement. D. ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE AND FEASIBILITY OF PROTECT ALTERNATIVES 1. Finding: Alternative 1 (No Project) is environmentally superior overall, since no development would occur under the City jurisdiction and any new development would be required to be consistent with the County General Plan and Zoning Ordinance which allows residential development at a much lesser density. However, the existing Land Use Element establishes the Orcutt Area as a City Expansion Area and requires that a Specific Plan be adopted prior to urban development. Alternative 1 fails to meet the City's objectives for the project area, and thus is infeasible as a means of satisfying those objectives. The City, therefore, finds this alternative to be infeasible to implement. City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 54 Findings of Fact and Statement Overriding Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A 2. Finding: Alternative 2 (Neighborhood Center) would be inferior to the proposed Specific Plan. With a more compact and higher density design, this alternative requires less disturbed area but it includes more disturbance for roads in riparian areas. The amount of commercial area proposed would exceed the demand from the local neighborhood and would draw traffic from outside the plan area. In addition, the density proposed is inconsistent with the residential density limitations of the Airport Land Use Plan. Alternative does not avoid any of the Class I impacts associated with the proposed project. The City, therefore, finds that since this alternative is not environmentally superior to the proposed project, a feasibility determination is not necessary. 3. Finding: Alternative 3 (Mitigated Project) is considered environmentally superior to the Specific Plan for several issues. Alternative 3 also avoids the Class I impacts related to scenic view blockage, CAP consistency and cumulative roadway noise. However, this alternative would result in greater impacts to the visual character of the site. In addition, the proposed fire station may periodically increase roadway noise, due to the sirens associated with emergency vehicles, although this project component would be subject to subsequent environmental review. The City, therefore, finds that this alternative is not entirely superior to the proposed project; therefore, a feasibility determination is not necessary. 4. Finding: Alternative 4 (Reduced Project) is also superior to the proposed Specific Plan in most environmental issue areas since there are fewer residents on the site that could be impacted. Alternative 4 avoids the Class I impact related to cumulative roadway noise. However, Alternative 4 would not fully satisfy the project objectives of 1) provision of a variety of housing types for all income levels or 2) provision of new jobs. Alternative 4 would result in fewer total residential units than the proposed project (330 vs. 1000) and with less housing overall, would be inferior to the proposed project in terms of its ability to provide a variety of housing types for all income levels. In addition, with less residential development compared to the proposed project, Alternative 4 would provide fewer construction- related jobs, and would create less of a demand for goods and services in the area. The City, therefore, finds that Alternative 4 is inferior to the proposed project, and therefore infeasible to implement. SECTION 8. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS A. INTRODUCTION The program EIR for the project identifies the following significant and unavoidable impacts of the project: 1. The proposed development would affect the aesthetic character of the site vicinity through alteration of viewsheds from Orcutt and Tank Farm Roads. 2. The proposed development would affect the aesthetic character of the Specific Plan Area and impede views of Righetti Hill. City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 55 Findings of Fact and Statement or "Overriding Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A 3. Cumulative development of these proposed developments would result in a significant cumulative loss of open space and would irrevocably alter the character of these areas throughout the City from rural to urban. Implementation of the proposed Specific Plan would incrementally contribute to this change in aesthetic character of the site and the surrounding areas. 4. The proposed Specific Plan is consistent with population assumptions of the General Plan and San Luis Obispo County Clean Air Plan (CAP). However, the Specific Plan proposes low density residential development outside of the current Urban Reserve Line (URL) which will require an adjustment of the URL to be consistent with the General Plan. The 2001 CAP encourages development to occur within the URL of cities, therefore, the Specific Plan is inconsistent with the 2001 Clean Air Plan (CAP). 5. The GASP is inconsistent with the CAP policy of containing urban development within the URL of cities and exceeds the SLOAPCD Tier II thresholds of significance. As a result, the OASP is considered to be potentially inconsistent with long -term regional air quality planning efforts, and the Specific Plan is expected to have significant and unavoidable impacts on air quality. 6. The proposed Specific Plan, in combination with cumulative development at General Plan buildout would add to roadway corridor noise levels already above the 60 dBA Ldn City threshold. 7. Extensions of the roadways proposed by the Specific Plan may have significant impacts related to growth inducement. For projects which would result in significant environmental impacts that cannot be avoided, CEQA requires that the lead agency balance the benefits of these projects against the unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the projects. If the benefits of these projects outweigh the unavoidable impacts, those impacts may be considered acceptable (CEQA Guidelines Section 15093[a]). CEQA requires that, before adopting such projects, the public agency adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations setting forth the reasons why the agency finds that the benefits of the project outweigh the significant environmental effects caused by the project. This statement is provided below. B. REQUIRED FINDINGS The City has incorporated all feasible mitigation measures into the project. Although these measures will significantly lessen the unavoidable impacts listed above, the measures will not fully avoid these impacts. The City has also examined a reasonable range of alternatives to the project and has incorporated portions of these alternatives into the project in order to reduce impacts. The City has determined that none of these alternatives, taken as a whole, is both environmentally superior and more feasible than the project. Alternative 1 (No Project) would avoid all of the significant impacts of the project, but is not considered feasible. Alternative 2 is considered to be environmentally inferior to the proposed project. Alternative 3 would be superior to the project in some aspects, but would result in greater impacts to the visual character of the site. Alternative 4 is superior to the proposed of San Luis Obispo December 56 Findings of Fact and Statement t Overriding Considerations Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A project in that it avoids the Class I impact related to cumulative roadway noise. However, Alternative 4 is inferior to the proposed project in terms of its ability to meet all of the project objectives, including 1) Provision of a Variety of Housing Types for all Income Levels or 2) Provision of New jobs. In preparing this Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has balanced the benefits of the proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks. For the reasons specified below, the City finds that the following considerations outweigh the proposed project's unavoidable environmental risks: 1. Provision of new Residential and Commercial Uses. The Orcutt Area Specific Plan will develop a new residential neighborhood to meet the City's housing needs and that designates sufficient land for neighborhood serving commercial uses to reduce vehicle trips and provide for the convenience of area residents. 2. Provision of a Variety of Housing Types for all Income Levels. The Orcutt Area Specific Plan provides a variety of housing types and costs to meet the needs of renters and buyers with a variety of income - levels, including inclusionary affordable housing for residents with moderate, low and very-low income levels. 3. Open Space and Natural Resource. Protection: Implementation of the proposed project would result in the creation of 47 acres of permanently- protected open space on Righetti Hill, and 34 acres of creek and wetland corridors and setback areas. The Specific Plan would protect and enhance Righetti Hill, creek /wetland habitats, and visual resources in open space areas. 4. Provision of Park and Recreational Facilities. The Orcutt Area Specific Plan will provide parks, recreational facilities, public squares, plazas and green spaces for residents of the Orcutt Area. 5. Well - Planned Neighborhood Would Reduce Vehicle. Trips: The Orcutt Area Specific Plan would develop a new residential neighborhood to meet the City's housing needs and that designates sufficient land for neighborhood serving commercial uses to reduce vehicle trips and provide for the convenience of area residents. In addition, the Specific Plan encourages the use of bicycles and walking within the Plan Area by: (a) including specific policies and development standards that will result in subdivision and building designs that facilitate bike use and pedestrian access; (b) incorporating all classes of bike lanes and include bike and pedestrian paths through the parks and open space areas; and (c) providing parks, recreational facilities, public squares, plazas and green spaces for residents of the Orcutt Area. 6. Provision of New jobs. The project would create new construction- related and permanent jobs in the project area. Planned commercial development in the Airport Area and Margarita area will provide new jobs that are needed to support a household within the Orcutt Area. City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 57 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Orcutt Area Speck Plan Attachment 6 - Exhibit A 7. Implementation of the General Plan: As required by the City General Plan, the Orcutt Area Specific Plan contains policies and standards that will facilitate appropriate development of land, protection of open space, and provision of adequate public facilities. Accordingly, the City finds that the project's adverse, unavoidable environmental impacts are outweighed by these considerable benefits. Dated: 2010 David F. Romero Mayor, City of San Luis Obispo City of San Luis Obispo December 2009 58 ---- - - - -.. B B Ple-nofe tlteollong ornatifln_and make �hangesto tas andf guresat note I'' ea� Per the Parcel Map COAL 91060, recorded 5 -26 -1992 at BK 49 PM Page 52: Parcel 1 is 2.0 acres, AP 4076 481016, current owners Nick Muick, Patti Taylor, Rick Taylor Parcel 2 is 10.0 acres, AP #076 481017, current owners Nick Muick, Patti Taylor The following need to be revised: Table A -1: add Rick Taylor to AP #076 481 016 Table A -2: add Taylor to last name change 11.98 Acres to 12.0 Acres Table A -3: add AP #076 481 016 change 11.98 to 12.0 Acres s 3.2.6 Elementary School The San Luis Coastal Unified School District (SLCUSD) is the primary provider of educational services for the City of San Luis Obispo as well as other smaller communities along the coast such as Morro Bay and Los Osos. As a K- 12 unified district, SLCUSD operates ten elementary schools (including two magnet schools), two middle schools, and three high schools. The Orcutt Area Specific Plan is designed to accommodate a new elementary school site. The school's location was initially planned adjacent to the neighborhood park, however, proximity to the railroad tracks and aircraft over -flight reduces the feasibility of this location. To facilitate the decision - making process regarding the school site location, both the SLCUSD and the California Department of Education (CDE) prepared separate studies of four locations within the Orcutt Area, and one location just outside the specific plan's boundaries. The CDE study was prepared by the School Facilities Planning field representative and completed on April 8, 2009, while the SLCUSD study was prepared by Oasis Associates, Inc. and completed on April 28, 2009. Both studies are on file in the Community Development Department. SLCUSD has indicated that a new school would not be needed until significant portions of the Orcutt Area and Margarita Area are developed. However, early planning for the site is needed to facilitate its development and ensure that appropriate infrastructure is in place to serve the facility. The five sites evaluated by SLCUSD are shown in Figure 3.1 and include: Site A & E: Two different locations are identified adjacent to the Neighborhood Park Site B: 3811 Orcutt Road (Garay) Site C: Righetti Ranch House Site (outside the Urban Reserve Line) Site D: Wixom Ranch (outside of GASP and Urban Reserve Line) After reviewing both the SLCUSD and the CDE studies, the Board of Education ultimately determined that Site C would be the most suitable location for the new school site. Site C is located on land designated Conservation/Open Space outside of the City's Urban Reserve Line. Site B was considered by the Board of Education to be the next best option in terms of locating a school. This site is designed Low - Density Residential (R -1) and schools are a conditionally allowed use in this zone. SLCUSD is a superior agency to the City of San Luis Obispo and is encouraged, but not required, to go through the City's entitlement process prior to establishing a school site. In general, the City's preference is to locate the school site within the street network that will be established by future GASP development. This would facilitate walking and biking to school by children living in the Orcutt Area and would be consistent with the original concept of locating the school near the neighborhood park. w �1' e— •e V W W VI/ J t +D D • 1!�r 1/ i I� 1 � j + + I ++ + i r' + 1 + I + .i I + •4.o4.b.�oa�a` v� ±+ ++} I aQa°un °apeoQOvdo° i `1 °00 °D D_ pip 4d ° 4OO p° fly + + } + p°° °pp ° a p i +++ + + } } °a °a De °apoaD_paO.D._ °4e 1 !, + + + J + t } + } + °a c n 00°0 o 71- 7' -7I` I i + °° `v Y d J C N � 5 t a E E O � V 0 O v L y, 0� 0 o a:r m C o y _0 E E O v •� ��e c a u z, V N A C 7 n 3 >1 v d N -W E a E O v O � .D i a= V vii m CL m n o `0 0 O O J = _ o N O o C C E E E E O T O O 07 Ol IO C C E v V C y L C a O 10 V O •Q L `/ Y Y 'c a O7 G: 'o E iL N 1/1 t.a v � m 'N •�L 0 _ A � �0 C v— + °° `v Y 3 o � a E E O � V 0 O v L y, a:r m C o y _0 E E O v •� > c a u z, V N A C 7 n 3 >1 v d N -W E a E O VO O � .D i a= V vii J W '{d V ES 5Q J SIM W M Lm 110, r; IN l / r I � v `fib `• i 1 � P, �� all �i � o � T((1 ��`��`��£.. �%� �•t WA r 1 ��- \ `1d �� j/ �� Vl`�Y i'i �UT4i�Y55�M �\�1�� \✓ i \>�(�{ `.I )l� i �.�'�� (✓ i T�,� ��pi0p°� 3�� r 7i 1C�3` uj I O O 'R O M O N O O 0 01 i Ic J h.J v c y J C d J a N � N d c � a c m 7 a a 7 E v •• 0 C cu CL v a` u RESOLUTION NO. 10153 (2010 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ADDING THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 116 CHORRO STREET TO THE MASTER LIST OF HISTORIC RESOURCES AND REMOVING IT FROM THE CONTRIBUTING PROPERTIES LIST, CHC 118 -09 WHEREAS, applicants Bob and Andrea Kamm, on November 3, 2009, submitted an application to add their Contributing residence to the Master List of Historic Resources; and WHEREAS, the Cultural Heritage Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo at a public hearing held in the Council Meeting Room of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on January 25, 2010, recommended the Council add the property located at 116 Chorro Street to the Master List of Historic Resources; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on March 2, 2010, for the purpose of considering adding the property located at 116 Chorro Street to the Master List of Historic Resources and removing it from the Contributing Properties List (CHC 118 -09); and WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicants, interested parties, the records of the Cultural Heritage Committee hearing, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. The Council makes the following findings of consistency with Historic Preservation Program Guidelines eligibility criteria for Master List Historic Resources: 1. The house is eligible for the Master List of Historic Resources because it is a good example of French Provincial and Normandy styles. 2. The house is eligible for the Master List of Historic Resources because it was built in 1930 and is relatively old in the context of Anglo- American history in San Luis Obispo. 3. The house is eligible for the Master List of Historic Resources because it is in a highly visible location on Chorro Street and stands as a good example of revival architecture popular in the 1930s. The house is compatible with neighboring structures in the Anholm Tract that are also examples of revival architecture. 4. The house is associated with individuals who helped shape San Luis Obispo's history because notable past residents have made significant contributions to the City through their association with business development. Resolution No. 10153 (20�) Series Page 2 SECTION 2. Action. The Council of the City of San Luis Obispo does hereby add the property located at 116 Chorro Street to the Master List of Historic Resources as the historic "Michael C. Halpin House" and remove it from the Contributing Properties List. SECTION 3. Environmental Determination. The City Council has determined that the above actions do not constitute a project, as defined by Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act and are exempt from environmental review. Upon motion of Council Member Settle, seconded by Council Member Marx, and on the following vote: AYES: Council Members Ashbaugh, Marx and Settle, Vice Mayor Carter and Mayor Romero NOES: None ABSENT: None The foregoing resolution was adopted this 2nd day of March 2010. Mayor David F. Romero ATTEST: Elaina Cano City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Christine Dietrick L14ity Attorney C1 C RESOLUTION NO. 10152 (2010 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO APPROVING THE 2010 CDBG PROGRAM, REALLOCATING $35,000 OF 2009 CDBG FUNDING; AND REALLOCATING $180,000 FROM THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING FUND FOR PROPERTY ACQUISITION ON 3592 AND 3594 BROAD STREET WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo is a participating jurisdiction in the San Luis Obispo Urban County, along with the cities of Arroyo Grande, Atascadero, Grover Beach, and Paso Robles and the County of San Luis Obispo; and WHEREAS, said cities and County cooperatively administer several federal grant programs under the provisions of the Cooperative Agreement approved by the San Luis Obispo City Council on July 13, 1999 and as amended on September 7, 1999, and under applicable U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Department (HUD) rules; and WHEREAS, pursuant to said agreement, the Urban County Public Participation Plan and HUD rules, the City Council held a public hearing on March 2, 2010, to consider funding recommendations by the Human Relations Commission (HRC), to review applications for federal grant funding, and to consider public comments on community needs and the use of such funds; and WHEREAS, the Council has considered applications for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds, public testimony, the Urban County's proposed One -Year Action Plan, the HRC and staff recommendations included in the agenda report; and WHEREAS, the Council has also considered previous years' CDBG funding allocations and determined that amendments are necessary to re- allocate unused funds from the Anderson Hotel window replacement project to projects with a more immediate need, including elevator repair at the Anderson Hotel; and WHEREAS, the Council normally considers Affordable Housing Fund awards at the same time as the CDBG program; and WHEREAS, the First -Time Homebuyers Program (FTHB) is no longer funded through the HOME program and the City has allocated $205,000 from the Affordable Housing Fund to be used for down payment assistance through the FTHB. These funds are now available to support property acquisition for affordable rental housing located on 3592 Broad Street and 3594 Broad Street, as proposed by Transitions Mental Health Association. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Environmental Determination. The Council hereby determines that the proposed funding actions are not "projects" as defined by Section 21065 of the California R 10152 I O Resolution No. 10152 (2010 Series) Page 2 Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), since they will not cause a direct or indirect physical change in the environment and do not involve the issuance of a lease, permit, license, certificate or other entitlement. Consequently, no further CEQA review is necessary. SECTION 2. 2010 Community Development Block Grant Program. The City's 2010 Community Development Block Grant Program is hereby approved, as shown in Exhibit A. The City Manager is authorized to approve final dollar amounts once HUD releases allocations with the direction to make up differences in the two amounts with funding for the 313 South Street, Property Acquisition project. SECTION 3. Community Development Block Grant Program Amendments. The 2009 CDBG Program is hereby amended to reallocate $25,250 from the Anderson Hotel Window Replacement project to the Anderson Hotel Elevator Repair project, and to reallocate the remaining $9,750 from the Anderson Hotel Window Replacement Project to the 313 South Street Property Acquisition project. SECTION 4. Board of Supervisors Consideration. The Council hereby forwards the above actions to the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors for consideration prior to the Board's final action on the Urban County's 2010 Consolidated Plan. SECTION 6. City Manager Authori ty. The City Manager is authorized to act on behalf of the City in executing grant agreements and other actions necessary to implement the approved Consolidated Plan and CDBG Program, including minor revisions to funding amounts for the 2010 CDBG Program if the City's actual CDBG allocation is different than expected. SECTION 7. Affordable Housing Fund Reallocation. The Council does hereby discontinue funding for the First -Time Homebuyer Program, which is currently allocated $205,000 of from the Affordable Housing Fund, and authorizes the use of $180,000 from the Affordable Housing Fund to acquire two, one - bedroom units located on 3592 Broad Street and 3594 Broad Street for the purpose of affordable housing for very-low income residents, with the following guidelines: 1. The total purchase price of the properties shall not exceed $271,800, to be paid with a combination of HOME Funds ($98,855) and Affordable Housing Funds ($172,945). 2. The remaining balance of Affordable Housing Funds shall only be used if necessary for contingency purposes to cover unexpected expenses associated with temporary ownership of the unit, to the approval of the Community Development Director. 3. The City Manager is authorized to act on behalf of the City in executing purchase agreements and accepting deeds in conjunction with this real property acquisition. 4. As provided for in the approved 2010 CDBG program, City staff is directed to work with Transitions Mental Health Association to facilitate their management and operation of the units until they are able to complete their acquisition as planned to occur in October 2010. Resolution No. 10152 (20 Series) Page 3 Upon motion of Council Member Settle, seconded by Council Member Ashbaugh, and on the following vote: AYES: Council Members Ashbaugh, Marx and Settle, Vice Mayor Carter and Mayor Romero NOES: None ABSENT: None The foregoing resolution was adopted this 2nd day of March 2010. ATTEST: Elaina Cano City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Dietrick City Attorney Mayor David F. Romero N r l0 U M Q Q C 0 Y V 0 m r C m Q. O m C 3 E O U O r O N l i d U c m O O f`6 a C ns G? d L N N N N N E O t 0 c C O O lE N c v LL ° m m C C N d � O m _ pp U N O -p :5 u R c 64 U Q O ° r G o .. N U C ` N � N O O d U y E a `�° c w m o o 1 0 a °x C7 0 0 1° c U c L m c o LL 'a m W E C C N C N > N CL C L Lu F� O e- N 6 O r O O O O O M O) N M Nr O It O O O O O to O N w Lo I- ' ' N O N O) ' ' ' ' O ' r ' Lo M CD N C to M EA 'a' 'i O O ED l0 0 Vf of Cn tO EO N C7 co r N O END LO U9 U3 . ` m C� co O 0 L cc 01 3 O O Of s0 Z O CD 0 O � co C 3 LO O) O LL � Off C) Z v r to O O O tO M m N p .•. N G' O' N LLO CO ON)_ m r m w to v O O Of In O N N C O N O EA r-_ M o 0 r*- LO N W U 2 V (n r.- O O O 0000 O 00 O C7 O) N N E) LO O O O O 0000 O 00 O LO O N ED C I� O) cc co O N 00 O O Lo rr Ln c") O) N y v O O O Or-: W to O L 1� O, 'cr U) r CD LO O •- ^ ^� N N Nco r � r co O O o 2 CD c L .-. O m 0 O m O O E L a w 0 0 6' co 64 C @ 7 Cl) C Q j o E > o y o p 0 c ci a m o n o a) O' 0 cc V ... m a CO y V y N N E Q °� o L m y c co O (=0 y s == Cl y (i m o rn m c y eo ffl x C 0 m 7 y E O_ C y O f4 4) y N y m X ° L O' @ 7 m d9 E C Q n g a) of m CD m Nw� c_ Eli O <T OJO m OL m .L. Cm N OQ C Op C O C 0 1°ff 'e y m a m m_ E m V O CN° N O t0 X° M e O c o° o e E o Q 0 ° E R U- , o m 0 a 69 m v Qxax Q U) o M: L) C a Z = a' o 'Ea Q 0 O CL y h y m 3 4? m O > 0 C C) 0 s a a) :. d = E a m =�a No �o °�0a aooQ rn 00 0 co m cn O LL � � E to to F" O V (n fn (n O W a � m O J O C~ C O w `>a O O O J2 CL 0 E CL Co Q4 7 aUU Q Q � 'N 0 LL 0 N O 2 ff° H� U Q UILL)Lu 7 U N U� U) a U U N G Lr�co m a ~ Z N 'LL CO O � r � Q d U c m O O f`6 a C ns G? d L N N N N N E O t 0 c C O O lE N c v LL ° m m C C N d � O m _ pp U N O -p :5 u R c 64 U Q O ° r G o .. N U C ` N � N O O d U y E a `�° c w m o o 1 0 a °x C7 0 0 1° c U c L m c o LL 'a m W E C C N C N > N CL C L Lu F� O e- N 6 l� 0 RESOLUTION NO. 10151 (2010 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AMENDING THE CITY'S MASTER FEE SCHEDULE FOR COMMEMORATIVE TREE PLANTING FEES WHEREAS, it is the policy of the City of San Luis Obispo to review service charges on an ongoing basis and to adjust them as required to ensure that they remain adequate to achieve adopted cost recovery goals; and WHEREAS, in accordance with this policy the Council has adopted a master fee schedule based on a comprehensive analysis of service costs and the City's cost recovery policy; and WHEREAS, the Council considered amendments to the master fee schedule at a public meeting on February 2, 2010 based on a detailed analysis of costs and funding requirements to meet adopted cost recovery goals. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo that the City's master fee schedule is hereby amended to set the fee for participants in the commemorative tree planting program at $410 per tree. Additionally, the City Public Works Department will initiate a new Commemorative Tree plaque program for public street trees in the Downtown area for a fee of $250.00. Upon motion of Council Member Settle, seconded by Council Member Ashbaugh, and on the following vote: AYES: Council Members Ashbaugh and Settle, Vice Mayor Carter and Mayor Romero NOES: None ABSENT: Council Member Marx The foregoing resolution was adopted on the 2 day of February 2010. Mayor David F. Romero ATTEST: Elaina Cano City Clerk APPROVED AS TO d. Christine Dietrick City Attorney R 10151 O RESOLUTION NO: 10150 (2010 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR STATEWIDE PARK PROGRAM GRANT FUNDS WHEREAS, the State Department of Parks and Recreation has been delegated the responsibility by the Legislature of the State of California for the administration of the Statewide Park Program, setting up necessary procedures governing the Application; and WHEREAS, said procedures established by the State Department of Parks and Recreation require the applicant to certify by resolution the approval of application(s) before submission of said application(s) to the State; and WHEREAS, the applicant will enter into a contract with the State of California to complete the grant scope project; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo hereby approves the filing of an application for the Santa Rosa Park Skate Park, and 1. Certifies that said applicant has or will have available, prior to commencement of any work on the project included in this application, the sufficient funds to complete the project; and 2. Certifies that the applicant has or will have sufficient funds to operate and maintain the project(s); and 3. Certifies that the applicant has reviewed, understands, and agrees to the General Provisions contained in the contract shown in the Grant Administration Guide; and 4. Delegates the authority to the City Manager to conduct all negotiations, sign and submit all documents, including, but not limited to applications, agreements, amendments, and payment requests, which may be necessary for the completion of the grant scope; and 5. Agrees to comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules, regulations and guidelines. R 10150 ID Resolution No. 10150 (20f O'Series) Page 2 Upon motion of Council Member Settle, seconded by Vice Mayor Carter, and on the following vote: AYES: Council Members Ashbaugh and Settle, Vice Mayor Carter and Mayor Romero NOES: None ABSENT: Council Member Marx The foregoing resolution was adopted this 2nd day of February 2010. ATTEST: S Elaina Cano City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: J. Attorney XTayor David F. Romero RESOLUTION NO. 10149 (2010 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO SUPPORTING THE LOCAL TAXPAYER, PUBLIC SAFETY AND TRANSPORTATION PROTECTION ACT OF 2010 WHEREAS, California voters repeatedly and overwhelmingly have passed separate ballot measures to stop State raids of local government funds, and to dedicate the taxes on gasoline to funding of transportation improvement projects; and WHEREAS, these local government funds are critical to provide the police, fire, and emergency response services, parks, libraries, and other vital local services upon which residents rely every day; and WHEREAS, gas tax funds are vital to maintain and improve local streets and roads, to make road safety improvements, relieve traffic congestion, and provide mass transit; and WHEREAS, despite the fact that voters have repeatedly passed measures to prevent the State from taking revenues dedicated to funding local government services and transportation improvement projects, the State Legislature has seized and borrowed billions of dollars in local government and transportation funds in the past few years; and WHEREAS, this year's borrowing and raids of local government, redevelopment and transit funds, as well as previous, ongoing raids of local government and transportation funds, have lead to severe consequences across the State, such as layoffs of police, fire and paramedic first responders, fire station closures, stalled economic development, healthcare cutbacks, delays in road safety improvements, public transit fare increases and cutbacks in public transit services; and WHEREAS, a coalition of local government; transportation and transit advocates recently filed a constitutional amendment with the California Attorney General, called the Local Taxpayer, Public Safety, and Transportation Protection Act of 2010, for potential placement on California's November 2010 statewide ballot; and WHEREAS, approval of this ballot initiative would close loopholes and change the Constitution to further prevent State actions that result in seizing, diverting, shifting, borrowing, transferring, suspending or otherwise taking or interfering with tax revenues dedicated to funding local government services, including redevelopment, or dedicated to transportation improvement projects and mass transit. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. The City of San Luis Obispo formally endorses the Local Taxpayer, Public Safety, and Transportation Protection Act of 2010, a proposed constitutional amendment. R 10149 Resolution No. 10149 (201u Series) Page 2 SECTION 2. The City Council hereby authorizes the listing of the City of San Luis Obispo in support of the Local Taxpayer, Public Safety, and Transportation Protection Act of 2010 and directs the City Clerk to fax a copy of this resolution to campaign offices at 916.442.3510. Upon motion of Council Member Settle, seconded by Vice Mayor Carter, and on the following vote: AYES: Council Members Ashbaugh and Settle, Vice Mayor Carter and Mayor Romero NOES: None ABSENT: Council Member Marx The foregoing resolution was adopted this 2nd day of February 2010. ar- S � Mw ATTEST: Elaina Cano City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Y Christine D City Attorney trey of s Luis OBISPO 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 -3249 EThe City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities. �` Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (865) 781 -7410. # of pages — 3 including cover sheet To: Campaign Offices From: City of San Luis Obispo Co.: Office of the City Clerk Sue Chippendale Fax #: (916) 442 -3510 (805) 781 -7174 EThe City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities. �` Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (865) 781 -7410. 02/09/2010 08:52 FAX �,I * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * ** ACTIVITY REPORT * ** ST. TIME DESTINATION NUMBER DESTINATION ID NO. MODE PGS.j RESULT *12/08 09:49 8057813025 5003 AUTO RX ECM 3 OK 00'46 *12/08 10:27 919093922703 0001 TRANSMIT ECM 2 OK 00'28 *12/08 10:44 918057817109 0002 TRANSMIT ECM 1 OK 00'12 *12/16 17:33 8316488241 5004 AUTO RX ECM 1 OK 00'16 *12/17 13:45 95440858 0003 TRANSMIT ECM 1 OK 00'16 *12/18 09:52 918474464280 0005 TRANSMIT ECM 1 OK 00'28 *12/18 09:53 98474464280 0004 TRANSMIT 0 NG 00'00 0 STOP *12/29 08:41 805 +238 +6856 5005 AUTO RX ECM 2 OK 00'39 *01/06 15:51 8057813025 5006 AUTO RX ECM 2 OK 00'37 *01/07 15:44 95440858 0006 TRANSMIT ECM 1 OK 00'16 *01/11 15:39 95440858 0007 TRANSMIT ECM 1 OK 00'16 *01/18 16:17 5007 AUTO RX G3 0 NG 00'49 0 #005 *01/21 17:17 919163223711 0008 TRANSMIT ECM 1 OK 00'19 *01/26 12:13 915102844061 0009 TRANSMIT ECM 1 OK 00'19 *01/29 14:47 917149399870 0010 TRANSMIT ECM 2 OK 00'26 *02/01 16:37 805 543 4295 5008 AUTO RX ECM 2 OK 01'01 02/04 08:48 8057813025 5009 AUTO RX ECM 3 OK 00'47 02/05 12:09 5010 AUTO RX ECM 1 OK 00'44 02/05 12:12 5011 AUTO RX ECM 1 OK 00'44 02/09 08:50 919164423510 0012 TRANSMIT ECM 310K 00'57 RESOLUTION NO. 10148 (2010 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AUTHORIZING THE LEAD COLLABORATIVE ENTITY TO APPLY FOR FUNDS ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo recognizes that it is in the interest of the regional, state, and national economy to stimulate the economy; create and retain jobs; reduce fossil fuel emissions; and reduce total energy usage and improve energy efficiency within our jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, State Energy Program (SEP) funds are available through the California Energy Commission's SEP for grants to eligible local governments for energy efficiency, energy conservation, renewable energy, and other energy related projects and activities authorized by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA); and WHEREAS, SEP allows for cities, counties, or groups of cities and counties in California to apply for SEP funds on behalf of eligible local governments; and WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo is eligible for SEP funding under the California Energy Commission's SEP; and WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo is proposing to collaborate with Sacramento County to implement a program for financing the energy efficiency, energy conservation, renewable energy, and other energy related projects and activities authorized by ARRA, which program is described in Exhibit A for the purpose of qualifying for SEP funds from the California Energy Commission; and WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo has considered the application of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to the approval of the program for financing energy efficiency, energy conservation, renewable energy, and other energy related projects and activities authorized by ARRA described in Exhibit A. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that in compliance with CEQA, the City of San Luis Obispo finds that the approval of the program for financing energy efficiency, energy conservation, renewable energy, and other energy related projects and activities authorized by ARRA described in Exhibit A is not a "project" under CEQA, because the program does not involve any commitment to a specific project which may result in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment, as contemplated by Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Section 15378(b)(4)). BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of San Luis Obispo authorizes Sacramento County to submit a collaborative application on its behalf to the California Energy Commission for up to $16,500,000 in SEP funds for the program for financing energy efficiency, R 10148 Resolution No. 10148 (201 Series) 1 1 �� Page 2 energy conservation, renewable energy, and other energy related projects and activities authorized by ARRA described in Exhibit A. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, if recommended for funding by the California Energy Commission, the City of San Luis Obispo authorizes Sacramento County to accept a grant award on its behalf and to enter into all necessary contracts and agreements, and amendments thereto, on its behalf to implement and carry out the program for financing the project/s described in Exhibit A. Upon motion of Council Member Settle, seconded by Vice Mayor Carter, and on the following vote: AYES: Council Members Ashbaugh and Settle, Vice Mayor Carter and Mayor Romero NOES: None ABSENT: Marx The foregoing resolution was adopted on the 2 "d day of February 2010. Mayor avid F. Romero ATTEST: Elaina Cano City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ;i J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney o EXHIBIT A California Energy Commission State Energy Program CalifomiaFIRST Collaborative Proposal Summary of Proposal Scope & Budget Framework Description of Program Proposal Under the lead applicant, Sacramento County, the 14 counties eligible to participate in the pilot stage of the CalifomiaFIRST Program are collaborating on a proposal to the California Energy Commission State Energy Program for a grant of up to $16.5 million. The grant funds will be used to offset initial fees associated with bond issuance, start-up costs for the 14 counties and all incorporated cities, an interest rate buy -down, local marketing /education/training/outreach, local coordination, and grant administration to support the launch of the CaliforniaFIRST municipal financing program. CaliforniaFIRST Program County Participants and Proposal Collaborators ✓ Alameda ✓ Sacramento ✓ San Mateo ✓ Ventura ✓ Fresno ✓ San Benito ✓ Santa Clara ✓ Yolo ✓ Kern ✓ San Diego ✓ Santa Cruz ✓ Monterey ✓ San Luis Obispo ✓ Solano Budget Basics 1. CaliforniaFIRST financing costs and fees ( —$6M) Guided by California Communities and the CalifomiaFIRST Program Administrator Renewable Funding, this program element will: • buy -down the interest rate on the initial round(s) of projects financed by the CalifomiaFIRST Program, • cover fixed costs associated with initial bond counsel, bond disclosure, fiscal agent and bond rating, • cover legal and validation costs, and • cover the deployment of technology (web portal) to support local programs. 2. Grant/Contract Administration & Steering Committee Liaison: (— $2.0NI) On behalf of the applicant agency, grant/contractor administration duties include gathering relevant reporting information from all partner jurisdictions and CaliforniaFIRST, financial oversight and invoicing, contract administration, tracking, monitoring, and oversight of deliverables. In addition, the grant administrator will serve as the partner liaison between all participating steering committees to maintain coordination and consistency on the local marketing efforts between parties as well as provide marketing and contract technical assistance, training, and advice to participating agencies. The Grant Administrator will also coordinate local efforts with those programs funded under the California Comprehensive Residential Building Retrofit Program. 6.111.119 3. Regional Program Coordination & Marketing: (— $8.5M) In line with the overall project goals, funding has.been budgeted on a regional basis to each of the six primary program regions in the following amounts, based on total number of Counties: • Capitol Region (Sacramento/Yolo): $1,800,000 • Central Valley Region (Fresno /Kern): $1,150,000 • Bay Area Region: (Alameda/San Mateo /Santa Clara/Solano): $2,300,000 • North Central Coast Region: (Monterey /Santa Cruz/San Benito): $1,725,000 • South Central Coast Region: (Ventura/San Luis Obispo): $1,150,000 • Southern California Region: (San Diego): $575,000 This final program element serves to provide each region with the resources necessary to help facilitate the rapid adoption of energy efficiency and renewable energy generation system installations throughout the target area by connecting property owners to any and all available on- the- ground or proposed resources, and services, providing a streamlined framework for easy navigation, reduced out -of- pocket expenses, and overall increased cost effectiveness for both participants and the program overall. The focus of the program will be to create region -wide (or county-wide, where appropriate) cooperative project design, implementation, marketing, and coordination to maximize economies of scale, take advantage of overlapping markets, and ultimately allow each dollar to go further to benefit all parties. Financing Costs and Fees A. Financing Costs As Program Administrator of the California Communities CaliforniaFIRST Program, Renewable Funding will coordinate and provide program administration, financing, and legal services to support a robust statewide municipal financing program. Specific financing costs are concentrated at the start of the program and result in increased fees to a program participant, and therefore a higher effective interest rate. In order to lower the interest rate, the SE P funds will be used to cover bond disclosure counsel, bond rating fees, and a bond fiscal agent. In addition, a direct interest rate buy -down will be employed to achieve a bond rate that is equivalent to an A- rated bond, which is likely to be the bond rating later in the program. B. Set -up Fees A funding request equivalent to the city and county set -up fees will be included in the proposal. The costs for initial legal work and validation proceedings will be covered by this request. Additionally, the costs of establishing county web portals, importing local assessor's data, and maintaining the website will be part of this funding request. 0 o EXHIBIT A Suggested Maior Marketing Program Coordination & Marketing Program Elements A. Agency Coordination / Steering Committee Participation In recognition of the additional coordination time required to get new programs off the ground, individual counties may elect to include a.modest amount of staff time for agency representatives to participate in the program steering committee and other activities to drive marketing program design, educational/marketing material development, form and protocol development, etc. By investing this time at the onset, we are able to develop a self - sustaining program for the long term. County agencies (that is, auditor /tax collector /controller) will receive a small percentage, incorporated into each loan, to cover regular ongoing program administration costs associated with maintaining the tax roll and collecting annual assessments in years beyond the grant term. Some jurisdictions may instead wish to contribute this time as project leveraged funds /resources to increase overall program cost effectiveness based on their individual needs and resources. Regional partnership may also elect to use a portion of the resources from this program element toward informal or formalized staff/personnel training within their jurisdictions. B. Education/Outreach/ Marketing Successful program adoption requires thoughtful design, convenient procedures, and a robust program education component to encourage and energize program participation. Achieving this goal, the project team will create clear, consistent, and thematic program branding imagery, educational and recruitment tools such as program brochures. The program will be supported by the CaliforniaFIRST web portal and links to new and existing partner and complementary websites, frequently asked questions, applications, and /or other program materials. In addition, the project will engage a wide - stretching network of partners to promote, recruit, and disseminate program information utilizing existing mechanisms of door -to -door outreach, community event tabling, workshops and presentations, or other appropriate energy efficiency and complementary program participation activities. Major elements might include: • Outreach Promotional Materials: Brochures, Door - hangers, Postcard Mailers, Bill Inserts, etc. • Program Marketing Advertisements: Print Ads, Radio/TV Ads, PSA Production • Promotional Outreach Events, Trade Shows or Community Workshops • Homeowner/Business/Contractor/Staff Training Seminars o Sustainability Site Signage • Green Building and/or LEED Certification Technical Assistance C. Community Coordinator / Partner Liaison / Supplies The community coordinator is envisioned to serve as the single point regional program coordinator to unify, inform, collaborate, and engage all program parties in relation to local coordination and marketing efforts; respond to public inquiries; facilitate the education, outreach, marketing, recruitment; and promote program adoption by the target community. In addition the coordinator is responsible for coordinating with the grant administrator, tracking/reporting necessary progress and metrics, meeting/exceeding grant milestones and targets, incorporating required complementary program components, and working with CaliforniaFIRST to assure N C EXHIBIT A QA/QC measures are applied to all participating properties. Specific tasks will be driven by the overall project goals as well as the specific needs of each region and may include: • Coordination with Grant Administrator /Steering Committee Liaison • Marketing Coordination with CaliforniaFIRST Municipal Finance District • Facilitation of local Regional Steering Committee Members and Partners • Assist with Implementation Strategy, Documents, Procedures & Protocols Development • Guide Promotion, Marketing, Education, Recruitment & Program Information Dissemination • Link Program Participants to Regional Energy Efficiency & Complementary Programs • Connect to Concurrent Complementary Workforce Development Training/Graduates • Administer Regional Program Budget, Competitive Bidding, Other Program Transparency Reqs • Track and/or compile, Monitor & Evaluate Program Progress, Energy Savings, GHG Reductions Achieved, Partner Leveraged Funds and Ancillary Environmental Benefits Sample County Budget A sample budget based on the above framework is provided below. Please note that these amounts are subject to change based on the actual needs of each participating jurisdiction as well as feedback obtained regarding funder and partner thresholds for competitiveness. Component % Overall Gross Benefit Per County Net Benefit Per County 1.CaliforniaFIRST Costs & Fees 39% $ 428;571.43 - 2. Grant Administration & Technical Assistance 10% $ 107,142.86 - 3A.Steering Advisory Committee 10% $ 115,000.00 $ 115,000.00 3B. Education, Outreach, Incentives, Marketing 23% $ 258,750900 $ 258,750.00 3C. Community Coordination 18% $ 201,250.00 $ 201,250.00 Total 100% $1,110,714.29 S 5 75, 000. 00 Grant Development Team: • County of Sacramento Lead Agency (Applicant), will oversee grant writing, provide final edits and required signatures, and submit finalized proposal on behalf of entire collaborative team based on the approved proposed program scope and budget framework • Ecology Action — Partner Grant Writer (Lead on Marketing), will develop narrative based on proposed program scope and budget framework, especially as it pertains to local coordination and marketing project administration, marketing/contract technical assistance, regional coordination, and marketing, to meet all grant requirements and maximize proposal competiveness. • Renewable Funding — Partner Grant Writer (Lead on Finance), will develop narrative based on proposed program scope and budget framework, especially for CaliforniaFIRST Program finance - related program elements, to meet all grant requirements and maximize proposal competiveness. RESOLUTION NO. 10147 (2010 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ADOPTING AN UPDATED HOUSING ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN WHEREAS, State law requires cities and counties to adopt a general plan. The general plan includes seven required elements, one of which is the housing element. The housing element must be updated every five (5) years or as otherwise provided by State law; and WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo has prepared an updated Draft General Plan Housing Element to address community wide housing needs, challenges and opportunities, and to meet State law; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and the City Council have held public hearings on the updated Housing Element in accordance with the California Government Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the input of diverse community interests and housing stakeholders in the preparation of the updated Housing Element to identify community needs and to recommend housing policies and programs; and WHEREAS, the potential environmental impacts of the updated Housing Element have been evaluated in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to an initial environmental study (City File Number ER 120 -08), and the Community Development Director has granted a negative declaration of environmental impact; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve the negative declaration of environmental impact and the updated Housing Element, and WHEREAS, by a separate resolution the City Council found that there is no evidence from which it can be fairly argued that the project will have a significant, adverse effect on the environment, and consequently certified and approved the negative declaration of environmental impact for the Updated Housing Element. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Record of Proceedings. The City Council has received and considered the Planning Commission recommendations, public testimony and correspondence, and the staff reports on the Housing Element Update. Copies of these items or testimony are on file in the office of the City Clerk and in the Community Development Department. The Planning Commission held seven public hearings to consider the Housing Element Update and related matters. The Human Relations Commission held two public hearings and the Airport Land Use Commission held one public hearing to consider the Housing Element Update and related matters. In addition, staff conducted three public workshops and attended numerous meetings with stakeholder groups to consider the Update and related matters. The minutes of those R 10147 Resolution No. 10147 (201 u Series) Page 2 hearings indicate Commission member comments on the Housing Element Update and are on file in the office of the City Clerk. SECTION 2. Public and Agency Review. Drafts of the proposed Housing Element Update have been made widely available for review and comment by interested agencies and individuals. Copies were posted on the City's website and were distributed to the San Luis Obispo City- County Library and to the California State Department of Housing and Community Development ( "HCD ") as required by law, and to governmental and non -profit housing agencies whose jurisdiction includes housing issues within the San Luis Obispo Area. An email list of interested parties has been kept abreast of hearings, proposed changes and updates to the Housing Element in addition to distribution required by law. SECTION 3. Findings. This Council, after considering the 2009 Final Draft Housing Element, the Planning Commission's recommendations, staff recommendations, public testimony and correspondence, and reports thereon, makes the following findings: 1. The Housing Element Update, as contained in the document titled "Council Hearing Draft General Plan Housing Element ", dated November 2009, Exhibit "A" on file in the Community Development Department (hereinafter "the Update "), is consistent with all elements of the General Plan. 2. The Update will promote public health, safety, and welfare by: preserving housing that is affordable to extremely -low, very-low, low- and moderate income households; encouraging variety in housing types, sizes, cost, and tenure; establishing programs to ensure that most new development incorporates affordable housing, pays an "in- lieu" fee toward the development of affordable housing, or otherwise contributes to the production of affordable housing; establishing incentives to encourage and help defray the costs of affordable housing development; affirmatively furthering fair housing opportunities; and by setting quantified objectives for housing production, rehabilitation, preservation and conservation. 3. Consistent with provisions of California Government Code Section 65583 (b)(2), San Luis Obispo has evaluated its ability to accommodate its Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA) number of 1,589 dwellings by July 2014 and has adopted quantified objectives that are the same as the RHNA number. There is sufficient land suitable for residential development to accommodate the RHNA number within the planning period. 4. The November 2009 Draft Housing Element was submitted to HCD for its review, as required by State law. The Update includes additional information and analysis in response to HCD comments. The Council has determined that the Update conforms to the statutory requirements of State housing element law (Article 10.6 of Government Code). 5. Council hereby finds that the Update will not operate to directly limit the total number of dwellings which may be constructed on an annual basis, since dwellings affordable to extremely -low, very-low, low -, and moderate income households, and dwellings constructed in the Downtown Core (C -D Zone), are exempt from Residential Growth Management Regulations. Resolution No. 10147 (209Series) 0 Page 3 SECTION 4. Approval of the 2009 Housing Element. Council hereby approves the 2009 Housing Element, as set forth in Exhibit A. SECTION 5. Publication and Availability. The Community Development Director shall cause the updated Housing Element to be published and provided to City officials, concerned agencies, public libraries, and to the public. The Director shall also transmit a copy of the Update to HCD for its final review, as required by State law. SECTION 6. Effective Date. The 2009 Housing Element shall become effective immediately upon adoption of this resolution. SECTION 7. Repeal of Previous Element. The Housing Element adopted March 30, 2004 and as subsequently amended, is repealed upon the effective date of the 2009 Housing Element. Upon motion of Council Member Settle, seconded by Vice Mayor Carter, and on the following vote: AYES: Council Members Ashbaugh, Marx and Settle, Vice Mayor Carter and Mayor Romero NOES: None ABSENT: None The foregoing resolution was adopted this 19th day of January, 2010. Mayor David F. Romero ATTEST: Elaina Cano City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: RESOLUTION NO. 10146 (2010 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO APPROVING AND CERTIFYING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR THE UPDATED HOUSING ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN WHEREAS, State law requires cities and counties to adopt a general plan. The general plan includes seven required elements, one of which is the housing element. The housing element must be updated every five (5) years or as otherwise provided by State law; and WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo has prepared an updated Draft General Plan Housing Element to address community wide housing needs, challenges and opportunities, and to meet State law; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and the City Council have held public hearings on the updated Housing Element in accordance with the California Government Code; and WHEREAS, the potential environmental impacts of the updated Housing Element have been evaluated in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to an initial environmental study (City File Number ER 120 -08), and the Community Development Director has granted a negative declaration of environmental impact; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve the negative declaration of environmental impact and the updated Housing Element; and WHEREAS, The City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the initial study and the negative declaration for ER No. 120 -08 prepared for this Housing Element Update. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Environmental Determination. This Council, as a result of its deliberations, Planning Commission recommendation, the initial environmental study, Exhibit A, and the evidence presented at hearings on this matter, determines that as required by the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA ") and the State CEQA Guidelines, a negative declaration adequately addresses the potential environmental impacts of the Housing Element Update. On the basis of this review, the City Council finds that there is no evidence from which it can be fairly argued that the project will have a significant, adverse effect on the environment, and hereby certifies and approves the negative declaration of environmental impact for the Updated Housing Element. SECTION 2. Effective Date. The approval and certification of the negative declaration of impact shall take effect immediately. R 10146 o Resolution No 10146 (2010 Series) Page 2 Upon motion of Council Member Settle, seconded by Vice Mayor Carter, and on the following vote: AYES: Council Members Ashbaugh, Marx and Settle, Vice Mayor Carter and Mayor Romero NOES: None ABSENT: None The foregoing resolution was adopted this 19'h day of January, 2010. i Mayor David F. Romero ATTEST: Elaina Cano City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: �A 3 11 ��ii�► I � iii I ► • INITIAL. STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM For ER # 120 -08 Project Title: General Plan Housing Element Update Lead Agency Name and Address: "Alp EXHIBIT Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Contact Person and Phone Number: Jeff Hook (805) 781 -7176 Project Location: Citywide; no specific address 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 6. General Plan Designation: Project applies to all General Plan land -use designations. 7. Zoning: Project applies to all City zones. 8. Description of the Project: The project consists of the September 2009 Draft Housing Element Update, a five -year plan which explains the City's housing goals, policies, and programs. It updates the current Housing Element which was adopted in 2004. Once adopted, the Housing Element becomes part of the General Plan and will guide public and private decisions regarding housing, development review, land use, City budgets and capital improvement programs. The Draft includes policies and programs intended to increase housing opportunities for extremely low, very-low, low- and moderate - income households, while accommodating growth in a manner consistent with goals and policies contained in the Land Use Element and other elements of the General Plan. The content of housing elements is prescribed under state housing law, and this draft has been prepared to include the required sections and information. This draft update addresses changes in State housing law and in regional housing needs. State, regional and local housing costs, supply and needs have changed since 2004, as evidenced by current information on real estate prices, affordable housing, and the widening "gap" between rental and purchase housing costs and consumers' incomes. Although the update retains many of the same policies and programs in the 2004 Housing Element, there are also new policies and programs that address these changing conditions. Some of the 2004 Housing Element policies I I � and programs that were accomplished have been removed, as discussed in more detail in the body of this Initial Study. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Settings: The City of San Luis Obispo is a community of about 44,000 persons, home to Cal Poly State University, and separated from other communities in the County by agricultural and open lands. it is the County seat and the County's largest incorporated city with about one -fifth of the County's total population. San Luis Obispo is a charter city and began as one of the chain of 21 missions founded by Spanish missionaries in the late 1700s. The City is the retail, employment, government and cultural center of the County, and is notable for the many scenic hillsides and `morros" that ring the City, and many creeks that wind through the community. The City is also noteworthy for the many historic homes and commercial buildings located downtown and in four other historic districts. 10. Project Entitlements Requested: General Plan Amendments approving the 2009 Housing Element. 11. Other public agencies whose approval is required: The Draft Housing Element Update must be referred to the California Department of Housing and Community Development for a determination of consistency with State housing law. Mffffia CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 2 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHEcKusT 2009 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. FISH AND GAME FEES Aesthetics X Geology /Soils Public Services Agricultural Resources Hazards & Hazardous Recreation Materials Air Quality Hydrology/Water Quality Transportation & Traffic Biological Resources Land Use and Planning Utilities and Service Systems Cultural Resources Noise Mandatory Findings of Significance Energy and M ineral Population and Housing 111-11 Resources FISH AND GAME FEES STATE CLEARINGHOUSE This environmental document must be submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review by one or more X State agencies (e.g. Cal Trans, California Department of Fish and Game, Department of Housing and Community Development). The public review period shall not be less than 30 days (CEQA Guidelines 15073(a)). CITY of SAN LUIS OBISPO 3 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2009 There is no evidence before the Department that the project will have any potential adverse effects on fish X and wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. As such, the project qualifies for a de minimis waiver with regards to the filing of Fish and Game Fees. 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 Game for review and comment. STATE CLEARINGHOUSE This environmental document must be submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review by one or more X State agencies (e.g. Cal Trans, California Department of Fish and Game, Department of Housing and Community Development). The public review period shall not be less than 30 days (CEQA Guidelines 15073(a)). CITY of SAN LUIS OBISPO 3 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2009 0 0 OETERNUNATION: 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. X 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, or the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet(s) have been added and agreed to by 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 have 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 of NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is r aired. Caitlin Morici w' I "L/Vto Kim Murry, Deputy C&iulunity Development Director October 15, 2009 Date for John Mandeville, Community Development Director �1ANM CITY OF SAN Luis OBISpo 4 tNMAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2009 • n 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 analysis in each section. 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. The explanation of each issue should identify the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question. 3. "Potentially Significant Impact is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is [Wade, an EIR is required. 4. "Potentially Significant Unless 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 17, "Earlier Analysis," 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) of the California Code of Regulations. Earlier analyses are discussed in Section 17 at the end of the checklist. 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. 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 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 address site- specific conditions for the project. MWTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 5 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2009 issues, Discussion and Supporting "Information Sources Sources . Potentiay Potentially Less Than No 2009 GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Significant Significant Significant Impact FR # 120-08 Issues Unless Mitigation impact Incorporated 1. AESTHETICS. Would the I7 1 X 8 1 1 1 X 7,12 1 1 1 1 X a) Policies in the Draft Housing Element Update encourage the development of housing in urbanized areas and in expansion areas planned and phased to accommodate residential growth. It follows Land Use Element (LUE) policies in directing growth into those areas and sites that can accommodate residential development based on size, shape, topography, zoning and environmental suitability. New residential development would be guided by existing development standards regarding building height, creek and property line setbacks, and protection of important site and environmental features, such as historic features or buildings, rock outcroppings, open space, and heritage trees. Conservation and Open Space Element, policy 9.2.1 addresses views to and from public places, including scenic roadways. This policy guides the City towards actions that will preserve and improve views of important scenic resources from public places. When proposed projects may include impacts to scenic resources, these impacts are routinely identified in the associated environmental documents and mitigation measures, including increased setbacks are lower buildings heights, are required to reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels. b) New residential development may alter the visual settings of suburban and rural areas outside of the City's Urban Reserve. These areas primarily consist of major expansion areas and minor annexation areas that require either specific plans or development plans showing form, layout and integration of new buildings with the site. Growth management policies, including Land Use Element Policy 1.0.1, state that the City should manage its growth to protect the natural environment and air quality. New development is subject to environmental and architectural review„ particularly where a sensitive or historically significant resource may be affected. These review steps help ensure that individual projects are modified through required conditions of approval or mitigation measures, as necessary, to meet General Plan policies and Community Design Guidelines that require the protection of important viewsheds. c) The General Plan contains goals and policies that address the visual character and quality of new development. Within the Community Design Guidelines, General Principle 2.1, Site Design, states that each project should be designed with careful consideration of the site character and constraints and minimize changes to natural features rather than altering a site to accommodate a stock building plan. The Architectural Review Commission uses this policy, among others, to determine if new development is acceptable as proposed or needs modification. The Community Design Guidelines include other principles that require new development to be designed in a manner that is consistent with its surrounding structures and environment. The Architectural Review Commission (ARC) and the development review process ensure, through required project modifications, conditions of approval or mitigation measures, that development plans are consistent with visual character and quality guidelines prior to project approvals. d) To minimize potential light and glare impacts, residential development projects will be required to comply with all policies governing light and glare outlined in the City's Municipal Code. In 2009, the City's night sky ordinance was adopted regulating development to prevent new sources of visual glare and light pollution. Within the Conservation and Open Space Element, Policy 9.2.3 says that outdoor lighting shall avoid operating at unnecessary locations, level and times; spillage to areas not needing or wanting illumination; glare (intense line of sight contrast); and frequencies (colors) that interfere with astronomical viewing. Conclusion: No impact. The City's adopted policies, standards and guidelines in the Community Design Guidelines and the General Plan will avoid or mitigate the potential aesthetic impacts of new residential development to less than significant levels. CITY OF SAN Luis Osispo 6 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2009 issues, Discussion and Supporting Inior� mation Sources Sources Potenhha� Patomially Less nan No 2009 GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Significant Significant Significant Impact .Unless hnpact ER # 120-08 Mitigation Mitigation Into orated z. AGRICULTURE 1,2 0.9 X i9 a) The City of San Luis Obispo is in the central portion of the County s coastal agricultural region. The City is, for the most part, urbanized with only a few small farms still engaged in agricultural production. Land Use Element Policy 1.8.1 calls for the preservation of economically viable agricultural operations and land, within the Urban Reserve and City limits. The Housing Element follows the General Plan Land Use Element (LUE) in terms of where housing should be developed and promotes compact urban form to reduce urban sprawl and loss of productive agricultural lands outside the Urban Reserve. Agricultural and Conservation/Open Space designated lands allow limited residential use at very low densities of one dwelling per five or more acres, which is only suitable for rural housing. The Draft Housing Element Update will not result in the conversion of prime or unique farmland or involve other changes that would lead to conversion of farmland to non- agricultural uses because it does not identify any new land that is subject to urbanization, iezoning from agricultural use to residential use or expansion of the City's Urban Reserve Line beyond that already anticipated in the General Plan. A residential development capacity inventory done in connection with the Housing Element Update identified approximately 146 acres of vacant or underutilized Interim Open Space within city limits, with a potential development capacity of 266 density units. This includes three properties: the 25 acre Sunset Drive -in property, and two parcels totaling about 1 I acres between Los Verdes Residential Condominiums and San Luis Obispo Creek (off Los Osos Valley Road) that were fanned in 2008. These parcels are located within a 100 -year flood zone and are not suitable for residential development until the flood hazard is mitigated without significant harm to San Luis Obispo Creek. Because this land is not yet suitable for residential development and provides open space benefits, it is considered a lower priority for development and is not included in the Draft Element's summary of residential development capacity. Development of Interim Open Space requires approval of a development plan or specific plan, showing how these flood hazards would be mitigated. b) The City has established an Agricultural land use designation (Ag) in its General Plan to help preserve important agricultural land No land within the current City limits is designated Ag. The General Plan has allocated sufficient land for urban uses to achieve the City's housing goals and meet the RHNA numbers without expanding the current Urban Reserve Line into agricultural lands in the unincorporated County area. Draft Housing Element Policy 6.14 states that the City will encourage residential development focused on infill development and densification within City Limits and designated expansion areas over new annexation of residential land to maximize housing potential in the City. c) No changes to land use or zoning designations on agricultural land or prime agricultural soils are anticipated with adoption of the draft Element. Conclusion: No impact. The Draft Housing Element prioritizes infill residential development and densifrcation within the existing City Limits. Agricultural resources will not be significantly impacted by development that is carried out in a manner consistent with the policies and programs contained in the Draft Housing Element. 13. AIR OUALITY. Would the aroiect: I 1,2,4 1 1 1 1 X 2,4 1 1 1 1 X X I Ii CITY OF SAN LUIS OBIsPo 7 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2009 C � Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources sources Potm64 Potentially I= Than No 2009 GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Significant Significant Significant Impact ER # 120-08 Issues Unless Impact Wtigation Incorporated a) The Draft Housing Element Update includes policies and programs to accommodate up to 1,589 in -city dwellings during the planning period from January 2009 to July 2015. Of these, 794 units will be affordable to extremely low, very low, low and moderate income households. As discussed under Housing and Population, Section 12, this level of growth is consistent with the residential growth anticipated in the General Plan Land Use Element and evaluated in the 1994 General Plan Land Use/Circulation final EIR. Based on added number of in city dwelling units and the average number of occupants per household (2.186 persons), the City can anticipate a maximum increase of 3,607 persons during this planning period. This anticipated population number within the planning period, and the rate at which it is attained, is within growth projections of the San Luis Obispo County 2001 Clean Air Plan (CAP). b) and c) The 2009 Housing Element Update will not conflict or obstruct implementation of the Clean Air Plan (CAP). The CAP calls for building compact communities to limit urban sprawl, mix complementary land uses, such as commercial services with higher density housing, increase residential and commercial densities along transit corridors, and increase pedestrian — friendly and interconnected streetscapes, helping to make alternative means of transportation more convenienL The Draft Housing Element Update is consistent with this plan. Policies 9.4 through 9.9 promote sustainable development that will help reduce green house gas emissions. Housing Element policies 7.4, 7.5, and 7.7 support walkable and bikeable neighborhoods, connected to shopping, schools and other neighborhoods. Community Design Standards and Noise Element Policies require setback buffers and HVAC systems for residences located along high traffic corridors. These mitigations also serve to separate residences from potential exposure to vehicle- related pollutants. d) New development within mixed -use projects are subject to impacts from odor; generated by restaurants and other business activities. The City of San Luis Obispo routinely confers with the local Air Pollution Control District regarding the acceptability of adjacent land uses and routinely prohibits certain odor - producing uses from mixed -use developments, including coffee roasters and nail salons. Limits on hours of operation also reduce conflicts between residents and customers in mixed-use developments. The City's use permit requitement and performance standards for mixed -use development enable the City to establish conditions of approval to reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels. e) The proposed project will not result in a significant impact to air quality. The Housing Element Update anticipates less population and housing growth than allowed under the General Plan land Use Element, and as evaluated earlier based on household size and maximum dwelling unit potential for this planning period. This is because average household size has been trending downward in the City, and because housing production has been significantly lower than anticipated. }residential growth will add to local and commuting automobile trips, a primary factor affecting air quality, but in lower levels than previously attributed to new housing development. As a "job rich" community, a key component of vehicle trips is employees commuting into San Luis Obispo for jobs. The City's trip reduction plan has increased efforts to include incentives for employees and businesses which utilize and promote rideshare, alternative transportation options and subsidies for students who use public transportation. Lower vehicle trip rates will cut the amount of auto emissions. The CAP based its air quality assumptions in part, on an estimated San Luis Obispo population of 48,499 by 2015, a 22% growth increase since 1995. However, current population projections account for an annual growth rate of .49% a significantly lower percentage. Specific control measures to reduce transportation - related emissions that affect air quality were also identified. The Draft Housing Element Update incorporates several of these measures as part of its overall "smart growth" strategy, including: Policies 4.1— 4.4 as well as 5.3 and 5.4 that promote planning compact communities and mixed use development. The Draft has numerous policies or programs designed to promote compact urban growth, encourage mixed use, promote housing within walking or biking distance of employment, and encourage downtown housing close to jobs, services, government, recreational and cultural opportunities. CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 8 INMAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2009 issues, Discussion and SupportihOnformation Sources Sources Potentiany porentiany Less Than No 2004 GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Significant Sigoificant Significant Impact UnInct ER # 120 -08 � Unless Mitigation Conclusion: No impact. The Draft Housing Element Update is consistent with General Plan growth policies and with prevailing countywide assumptions regarding air quality, including APCD's Clean Air Plan. To the extent the updated Housing Element helps produce more housing that is affordable to extremely -low, very-low, low and moderate income working people, many of whom now commute into the City, it may help provide additional density to support alternative transportation, and help reduce traffic congestion. 4. 1,2,7 1 1 1 1 X 1:1 3,7 1 1 1 1 X 18 1 1 1 1 X E1 a) The General Plan Land Use and Conservation and Open Space Elements guide the preservation of biological resources. Resources include creeks and adjacent riparian corridors, vernal pools, marshes, endangered species or species of special concern, hillsides, open space and park areas, and Laguna Lake. General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 7.3.3 says that wildlife habitat and corridors that provide continuous wildlife habitat shall be preserved. The Draft Housing Element Update is consistent with those documents, and anticipates new dwellings only in those areas suitable for residential development, with adequate guarantees to preserve natural and biological resources as part of new development. It says housing should be prevented on sites that are unsuitable for development due to the presence of open space resources, or natural or manmade hazards. b), and f j Individual development projects will be subject to development review by staff and City advisory bodies to ensure compliance with pertinent creek and wetland policies. Zoning Regulation 17.16.025 Creek Setbacks requires projects to be consistent with the General Plan and requires the protection of scenic resources, water quality and natural creekside habitat including opportunities for wildlife habitation, rest and movement; therefore, all new residential development must comply with the Creek Setback Ordinance and must avoid sensitive site resources. New projects are routinely evaluated for compliance with the City's Creek Setback Ordinance and modifications are required through the development review process, conditions of approval or mitigation measures, as appropriate to insure that any potential impacts are less than significant. c) Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 7.5.1 states that significant trees making substantial contributions to natural habitat or to the urban landscape due to their species, size or rarity shall be protected and their removal will be subject to specific criteria and mitigation requirements. Any housing projects proposed on sites with significant trees will be subject to �i CITY OF SAN Luis OBISPO 9 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2009 O O Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources Sources Petent",y Potentially Less Than . No 2009 GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Significant Significant Significant impact issues Unless impact ER # 130 08 Mitigation loco rated d) Development is subject to applicable City standards and guidelines, the State and Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), the Clean Water Act (CWA) and other local, state and federal regulatory programs to ensure significant impacts have mandated mitigation measures. Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 7.7.8 of the General Plan ensures the protection of wildlife corridors. The City shall condition development permrits in accordance with applicable mitigation measures to ensure that important corridors for wildlife movement and dispersal are protected. Important featured corridors include riparian corridors, wetlands, lake shorelines, and protected natural areas with cover and water. e) The Draft Housing Element does not conflict with any existing Habitat Conservation Plans, as determined by the City's Natural Resources Manager. Conclusion: No Impact. Residential development anticipated in the Draft Housing Element Update is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space Element. Proposed development projects will be evaluated for their potential to impact biological resources and modified, if necessary, to avoid significant impacts in accordance with local, State and Federal law and Conservation and Open Space Element policies. 15. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proiect: I 1,2,16 1 1 1 1 X 2,7,15 1 1 1 1 X 15 1 1 1 1 X X a) Preservation of cultural resources is a key General Plan goal. Land Use Element Policy 6.6 says that historically and architecturally significant buildings should not be demolished or substantially changed in outward appearance unless necessary to remove a threat to health or safety and no other means exist to avoid the threat. Draft Housing Element Policy 3.1 encourages the rehabilitation, remodeling or relocation of housing rather than demolition Changes to historic buildings and development in historic districts should reflect the design and materials of the original building and contribute to a neighborhood's historic pattern of development and architectural character. b) The City has established criteria to identify significant archeological resources and encourage the preservation of these archaeological resources and sites. The City's Archaeological Resource Preservation Guidelines will be the driving force in determining significant resources. These guidelines implement General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 3.5.1, which requires the City to protect known and potential archaeological resources. Meeting the community's housing needs is also a key community goal, and the Draft Housing Element Update seeks to balance these sometime competing needs. It contains eight policies addressing the need to rehabilitate and preserve basically sound housing, protect historic housing and residential districts, including downtown hotels, and ensure that new residential development is compatible with designated historic resources, promotes seismic safety upgrades, and the use of State or Federal funds to protect and improve existing neighborhoods. According to the Guidelines, as new housing is developed, those features or characteristics that create or reinforce San Luis Obispo's "sense of place" are to be preserved. Individual residential development projects will be evaluated for site - specific cultural resources and where necessary, project modifications to avoid resources or other appropriate mitigation measures will be included to protect Archeological resources. c) and d) The City's Archeological Resource Preservation Guidelines include specific criteria that address the discovery of unique resources or human remains during construction excavation. Development that is proposed on sensitive sites, which are mapped, requires a Phase 1 study to determine the likelihood of discovering resources during construction. These existing measures, which are in place for development city -wide, are sufficient to prevent impacts to archeological or paleontological resources, or any discovered human remains. Conclusion: No impact The Historic Preservation Program Guidelines and the Archeological Resource Preservation iii CITY OF SAN Luis OBIspo 10 INITIAL STuoy ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2009 a o Issues, Discussion and Supporting'lnformation Sources Sources Potentiu:ly Potentially Less Than No 2009 GENERAL. PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Significant Significant Significant Impact ER # 120-08 issues Unless lmpact Mitigation 7 X Incorporated Guidelines include specific criteria and steps that must be taken to protect and preserve cultural resources, including archeological or paleontological resources, or human remains discovered during construction. 6. ENERGY AND the ro ect: ],MINERAL �RESOURCES. pW�ould � (]LLLLV4 hLlY9p� b1 Y�i. "...T`F.'1 1,2 X J4,2R fi} Usan, nFR�l pieS�yrceSma�vasteftlaDdAl�ieif� ?ept a 2 X SG�;. �1. ifGtb10SS9tM '�.y'03,I,Cllitwl'mme[al '`�; 7 X .xECR7rC�y5 that wnulc� °be c�F�rbltte,'tptl]e xAg4$n and�th�"'reside5it� A�`ti[ez �' � r + a) In compliance with Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, the use of energy efficient appliances and insulation reduces energy consumption associated with new residential development projects. The Land Use and Conservation/Open Space Elements include policies to use land, water, and energy resources wisely. The Draft Housing Element Update is consistent with these documents in that it promotes housing design that conserves energy, water and materials wisely, and encourages higher density, infill housing that uses land more efficiently than conventional, detached, single - family housing. Through development incentives, selected land use changes (i.e. rezoning), and flexible development and architectural review standards, multi - family housing will be encouraged to help meet affordable housing needs, to avoid inefficient land use which can contribute to urban sprawl, and to use energy and materials wisely. The Draft also advocates flexible planning and building standards to encourage "Green Building Technology" such as hay -bale construction, passive and active solar energy design, and use of appropriate siting and energy - saving features in new housing. Planning and building staff, and City Advisory Bodies that review new housing projects would, under the Draft Element's programs, encourage housing design that conserves energy and resources. b) Draft Housing Element Policy 9.1 states that residential developments should promote sustainability in their design, placement and use. This can be achieved by incorporating renewable energy features into new homes, including passive solar design, solar hot water, solar power, and natural ventilation and cooling. Policy 9.1 will promote efficient design practices. by encouraging the use of construction materials and methods that maximize the recyclability of building elements. c) Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 4.2, Sustainable Energy Use, and Policy 4.3.1 both promote the use of best available practices in energy conservation, procurement and use and production. With policies to guide new developments, the City can ensure the protection of non renewable resources by conditioning a project to eliminate potential environmental effects. Conclusion: No impact. 7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the ro'ect: a pt naiadv rse' oosµ ei vtuau� 1,2 X ;Ell; 7,;; e iacludmg psk gwder uw7or vtngc l�Iapttlre 8f a known eaiiltgnake faith, delr>iefit rli the X mostrecentA�qust PolotixtfitLuke `)~au1L�%nm &.i\Qap „.. >Lssutd by the" Statg �edfogtst��'di�'arei}, or based on other i -, subsfant�le�t�e�ioe ofa ldoYbwn fault? ' ITS Srromg,setsmxe VORn SlI�I�_V X ..'�� Selsmrc re lati g...... und faihurer mcludt hgticfaeaon7 X lY rani s des brmudf>o�vs.. x b} ltesulf u> su)istanttal�otl rosron or tha loss! o£topscni7 PIP: X X e- )posted a umt or'sotl th 3t I s Y1lIb, that_ _ bu gerrlogtc be would beeSme unstab7eyas result of t)ie �froleet,.{uld llbtentaally i�sul ra onaor oi�f site jdSl�es,' lateral. spreadm, �ttbstdenoe, CITY OF SAN Luis OBispo t t 'INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONmr:NTAL CHECKLIST 2009 i Issues, Discussion and Supporting' Informr ation Sources Sources Potrnn "y Potentially Less Than No 2009 GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE physically and environmentally suited for residential development. The Building and Safety Division has designated a Seismic Significant Significant Significant Impart ER It 120 -08 8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATFRiALS. Would the ro'ect: issucs I Unless I Impact X r . klitoug i }f 1of zite 'ti nsRort p°s�al of... ia>;d'ou.. Mitigation et}a) Incorporated CRY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 12 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2009 a), b), c) and d)The Draft Housing Element Update includes policies to prevent establishing new housing on sites with natural hazards, such as geological or seismic risks, including soil erosion, landslides, or liquefaction. Draft Housing Element Policy 3.3 encourages seismic upgrades of older dwellings to reduce the risk of bodily harm and the loss of housing in an earthquake. Policy 11.2 states that the City will prevent new housing development on sites subject to natural hazards such as unmitigable geological or flood risks, or wild fire dangers. City policies and development standards encourage housing where appropriately zoned land exists with the necessary public services and infrastructure (or can be served), and where the land is physically and environmentally suited for residential development. The Building and Safety Division has designated a Seismic Coordinator to assist in the implementation of mitigation programs to prevent unreinforced masonry hazards. The City's Construction Regulations regarding grading and drainage include specific erosion control measures to ensure the safety of all residents. Building Permit issuance and development review of projects will ensure projects are developed in a manner that is safe and consistent with City standards, guidelines and policies. Conclusion: No impacL The Draft is consistent with these policies and standards. 8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATFRiALS. Would the ro'ect: aF4afe a $cap��iazardfo ti)e ptitblic dr�the erlvsianment` X r . klitoug i }f 1of zite 'ti nsRort p°s�al of... ia>;d'ou.. 12,5 et}a) i b ;,' C�Fe a - *:,a �c ;t% �'ob o t AM=' trok te'itt 5 X thr °u� reatsnnal��oreseeajile upsef an� accrdL�tt Con�itlons � �releaSe "Of 1*3�a*d �t'(,a5fC ld'}¢ �1]' yhnVOLZ111 ,UA r. w� Cmll',1'laZSCd�OUS 0I17155Itrn& or..fiandlB:�laZal'd°lLS of aCUtel ;. I, - 1 X k zar�otisssta` 3a,-W. S es, or iva a `mtlut one'quarfer , title bf extshng' °FAmPosed,s°ol� '� 4 x ` t 2 X °fie „1'��'M COM -es :O �tat��tm�soatceS b�h�arsl4i�: .x3•cr t tr�usS3ru�racutl}�d*pW tpatelrals, ;;D40SCdi1 $ Of� yz y � rr e} Bey��oenes se wnd- s m es tor, 2 X ma>enalssrtgs ebmptled pursues Tito Govemmen6Cbde Secho ` 1 -PR 10 J�r2 an11r asr�s Yli ti'wottld create a,"srgntfioant"irazard to t�'e p��)irR oi<fhe envunnment� h ° J , , . , K k'�r a pj7i�c€ IoeAted wLthin an augort !arid use plAt� Cliyti4ntiun It 1,10 X tyvo mrles of a publiaar _5`wMd tfieprolecf result m a safety . haaat�l or�tbt pE�ple,rgstdtpg or wp°rlC :ih1WprOiecharea� h, ` g) arr X doted e4nErgencrbspon.§e planr einergbilcy evhCltihbh; t '✓ 5,a 5 h) ore people or structures 4o a signxfipaut ask bf dose, tnl 5 X oMng icUazid ftrea, rncuttmg a k�e4c �vtldlands ey. ^ adlacen�trto uritantze� areas pr w�ieSe iestdgnts ale mtetmrxpd qua, ... _ .._.... -. .... ....... ........�...... _... . a) The General Plan land Use and Safety Elements are the primary local policy documents addressing hazards and hazardous materials. Within the Safety Element, Policy 5.2 states that new residential projects should minimize people's exposure to hazardous materials and substances. The Draft Housing Element Update is consistent with these documents in that it includes polices to prevent new residential developments from being located on sites subject to natural or manmade hazards. Policy 11.4 states that the City will implement a construction and demolition debris recycling program (as described in Chapter 8.05 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code) to ensure disposal of hazardous materials are displaced properly. b) Safety Element Policy 5.3 says the City should avoid using hazardous materials in its own operations to the greatest extent practical and will follow all established health and safety practices when they are used. The protection and safety of CRY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 12 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2009 0 Issues, Discussion and Supporting information Sources Sources pot an" potentially I= Than No 2009 GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Significant Significant Significant Impact ER # 120 -08 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated community members is also evaluated in development applications and plans by the Building and Safety Division. Construction codes ensure hazards are taken into consideration and mitigated accordingly. c) Schools within the City are safely located within residential developments, close to parks and transit stops. Any proposed development that may result in upset or accident conditions near schools is routed to San Luis Coastal School District for comments. The City's Fire Marshall has the authority to require changes to proposed projects or existing uses where hazardous materials usage is proposed or ongoing. d) Draft Housing Element Policy 9.1 states that residential developments should promote sustainability in their design, placement and use by avoiding the use of building materials that may contribute to health problems through the release of gasses or fibers into indoor air. New development projects are reviewed for consistency with this policy and changes to proposed projects are required through conditions of approval or mitigation measures where potential impacts may occur. e) Draft Housing Element Policy 11.2 states that the City will prevent housing development on sites subject to unacceptable levels of man -made hazards or nuisances, including severe soil contamination, odors or incompatible neighboring uses. New development projects are reviewed for consistency with this policy and changes to proposed projects are required through conditions of approval or mitigation measures where potential impacts may occur. f) Airport compatibility issues are of special concern because much of the City's vacant residential land is located in the southern part of the City, near the San Luis Obispo County Airport. The Airport Land Use Commission adopted the San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Plan to guide where and what types of land uses are compatible with airport operations. Generally, residential development is not appropriate in flight approach and take -off areas, and where safety or noise considerations dictate greater spacing between housing and airport activities. City Land Use policies are consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan, and individual developments are evaluated for their consistency with the Plan. The anticipated residential growth is located outside of airport hazard areas, or within areas where residential use is conditionally allowed with appropriate design and safety considerations. For instance, the Margarita Area and Orcutt Area Specific Plans both include chapters that deal specifically with airport compatibility and ensure that future development is consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan. g) Fire Code compliance is checked with all new residential development to ensure the safety of the community by the Fire Marshall and the Building and Safety Division. h) Safety Element Policy 3.0 requires adequate fire services and Policy 3.1 requires housing in interface areas to address wildland fire safety. It is the City's policy to only approve development when adequate fire suppression services and facilities are available. Maintaining consistency with Fire Department standards will ensure the safety and well being of community members and prevent development from occurring in areas of high or extreme wildland fire hazards. Conclusion: No impact. Existing City standards and General Plan Policies from the Safety Element and Housing Element ensure that potential impacts from hazards and hazardous materials are entirely avoided, or mitigated to less than significant levels, before new development is permitted. X X 3,9,10 1 1 J 1 X CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISpo 13 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHEcxLisT 2009 C O Issues, Discussion and SupportingAnformation Sources Sources Puteniiary Potentially Less Than No 2009 GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Significant Significant Significant impact Issues Unless Impact ER # 120 -08 Mitigation Incorporated X X X X 13 1 .I 1 X a) and b) The General Plan Water and Wastewater Element states that the City will maximize the yield and long -term reliability of all water resources, and will minimize overall costs for meeting urban water demand, (Water and Wastewater Element Policy 1.0.3). To ensure there is not a water deficit, the City abides by a safe annual yield amount, per Policy 1.0.2. The adopted safe annual yield from Salinas and Whale Rock Reservoirs, and groundwater resources for 2008, is 7,460 acre - fee per year (AFY). Water allocated from the Nacimiento pipeline will provide an additional 3,380 AFY by 2010 for new developments, increasing the safe annual yield amount to 11,090, which is above the projected demand of 9,290 acre feet at General Plan build -out In major expansion areas, where large residential subdivisions will occur (Margarita and Orcutt expansion areas), specific project - related effects on runoff, siltation, flooding, and water quality are addressed in required specific plans and environmental review documents. Housing development must comply with City, regional and State standards for the protection of surface water and ground water quality. Compliance with these regulations is mandated by the City's Stormwater Management Plan permit under the RWQCB program, and ensures that significant impacts will not occur with new development anticipated by the Housing Element. c), d), e), f), h) and i) Newly proposed developments shall be in accordance with City, State, and Federal standards relating to development within flood zones. The City's established environmental review process will help to ensure future residential developments will be evaluated on an individual basis for potential violation of water quality standards. For example, the Prefumo Creek Commons EIR and Orcutt Area Specific Plan EIR have substantial guidance and mitigation required to comply with RWQCB standards and address impacts to drainage, flooding and erosion. Conclusion: Less than significant impact. Hydrology and water quality impacts are avoided in new construction, including the new housing anticipated by the Draft Housing Element Update, through compliance with existing City, State and Federal water qualify guidelines implement by the RWQCB. Would the 1,2 X X a), b), and c)The Draft Housing Element Update includes numerous programs, or implementation "tools ", to implement its goals and policies. For example, policies'rn the Draft encouraging higher density, infill housing close to jobs and employment centers are consistent with existing policies in the Land Use Element that encourage compact urban form. A few programs CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 14 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2009 Issues, Discussion and Supporting nformation Sources Sources Pat entiauy Potentially Less nan No 2009 GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Significant Significant Significant impact ER # 120 08 issues Unless Impact Mitigation .t¢ wby 5 t' ?l�ToxC`w MR incorporated e ertt�?nr mere Ap e au ei ceS �f attdat 1, t rw t � that identify non - residential sites as potential areas to consider residential zoning would be implemented, in part, through changes to the General Plan Land Use Map and Zoning map but do not involve activities that would conflict with a regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding an environmental effect. Sites that may be appropriate for multi- family housing are identified in the Draft, with subsequent review and action needed to evaluate and implement the change, however, no circumstance can be envisaged where an encouraged project would physically divide an established community. No Habitat Conservation Plans are in effect on any of the sites identified in the Housing Element as suitable for residential development. Conclusion: No impact. The Draft Housing Element does not conflict with any plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding an environmental effect, will not divide an established community and does not conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan. If during the implementation of any Housing Element policy or program, such an impact is found to have a potential effect, then appropriate mitigation would be adopted prior to permit issuance to insure compliance with existing City policies and State environmental thresholds. 11. NOISE. Would the project result in: 2,6 X .t¢ wby 5 t' ?l�ToxC`w MR e ertt�?nr mere Ap e au ei ceS �f attdat 1, t rw t � 7� esia� S ii d `Yq`the. ........ Y . b�j tj sui>sianfial3erazy; penoct , kr p�*^�a ^t increase 3iti X "hixi ev! I Rthe prgJ4ct xrlcuit a'f3ovg itvel exrstrh ILI Lit r. zvrthitt the procf7 3, s 4 osit#e o .persons emf & erationn of e e Sstve coun�botne X vibdtibrounatsoinp`n3rseieveis 10 X l) FQ %aprq�ect ip�c�ted within an�'Qrt Isndvseiaa rn within � �i��iiporT�FgtSb ,,� t�_�mtles.o�. pith) .�tlse�o�,- w4ttl� the ;. �-, �• It1 � 4s_e= Y Lesrding"tiY wOr�an��tx�rrpJeC�i?tY,a'to a), b), and c) The General Plan Noise Element establishes standards and procedures for protecting noise - sensitive uses from stationary and mobile noise sources. Noise attenuation measures identified in the General Plan include land use limitations, separation between land uses (i.e. noise buffers), earth berms, and where appropriate and no other feasible measure exists, noise walls. New residential development must be consistent with the Noise Element and City Noise Ordinance standards. Noise Element Policy 1.1 says that the City will work to minirni e noise exposure based on the established numerical noise standards, or thresholds, contained in the document. The Draft Housing Element Update encourages the production of affordable housing through development of non - conventional housing, including mixed residential- commercial housing, "work- live" and "live -work" housing, and high- density downtown housing above commercial uses. In these types of housing, special attention must be paid to use compatibility, of which noise is a key factor. The City of San Luis Obispo routinely evaluates proposed development projects to ensure compliance with applicable Noise Element policies and Noise Ordinance Standards. The City also publishes a Noise Guidebook, which includes prescriptive compliance techniques where noise attenuation through building design is determined to be necessary. d) The City's General Plan and Zoning ordinance are consistent with the standards contained in the SLO County Regional Airport land Use Plan. The Airport Land Use Plan includes standards to insure that uses proximate to the airport are developed in a manner that is safe and compatible with aircraft operations. Noise levels are one of the key considerations in the Airport Land Use Plan, and all development within the Plan area must be developed in a manner that eliminates noise exposure in excess of the standards, including through the imposition of noise attenuation measures where necessary. Conclusion: No impact. The City's Noise Element, Noise Ordinance, Noise Guidebook and the Airport Land Use Plan include existing standards, policies and procedures to ensure that new development does not expose people to excessive noise levels. 42. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the ro'ect: R-0--a-M, area, eiir rineltI}? X a� CITY OF SAN LUIS OSISPO is INITIAL STuoy ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2009 0 0 Issues, Discussion and Supporting lnformation Sources Sources Pot=6.4 Potentially Less Than No 2009 GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Significant Significaat Significan, Impact ER # 120 08 254 issues Unless Mitigation Impact 302 Above Moderate 668 668 Incorporated 1589 1589 a) General Plan policies seek to achieve a sustainable level of growth through the City's planned build -out of 24,300 dwellings and 57,200 persons, anticipated to occur by 2022. Land Use Element Policy 1.10.2 says the City's housing supply should grow no faster than one percent per year, averaged over a 36 -month period. This will assure population growth does not exceed the City's ability to assimilate new residents and ensure municipal services are available for new and existing residents. Affordable housing is excluded from the City's one percent growth limit, which is established by General Plan Land Use Element Policy 1. 11.2 and the Residential Growth Management Regulations (SLOMC 17.88). As required by State law, the Draft Housing Element Update includes Quantified Objectives showing the number of units the City expects to accommodate in each income group during the planning period from January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2014. Under the Draft Update, the City would expect to accommodate up to 1,589 new, in -city dwellings. Of the total, 58 %, or 922, units will be affordable to extremely low, very low, low and moderate income households. The remaining units can be constructed within the allowed average residential growth rate of one percent per year and will be credited towards meeting the City's Regional Housing Need Allocation of 1,589 added units by 2014. According to the Regional Housing Needs Plan adopted by the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments, San Luis Obispo's Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA) during the planning period is 1,589 dwellings as shown in table 1. However, State housing law (Article 10.6, Section 65583(b)(2) of the California Government Code) recognizes that total housing needs identified for a jurisdiction may exceed available resources and the ability of the jurisdiction to satisfy this need within the context of State and local General Plan requirements. Under these circumstances, a jurisdiction's quantified housing objectives need not be identical to the total housing needs. The City's proposed Quantified Objectives are shown in Table I, below. Table 1 Regional Housing Need Allocation, January 2007- December 2014 Citv of San Luis Ohisno c RRN MAE 111 pl; IN .9 Very Low 366 366 Low 254 254 Moderate 302 302 Above Moderate 668 668 TOTAL 1589 1589 Sousse: City of San Luis Obispo, Community Development Department b) San Luis Obispo has evaluated its ability to accommodate the RHNA number of 1,589 dwellings by December 2014 and determined it has sufficient zoned land and infrastructure to accommodate its assigned regional housing need allocation. There is sufficient land and water supplies for residential development to accommodate the RHNA mtmber within the planning period. New State housing laws have placed greater responsibility on local government to address housing needs even in the face of reduced financial resources. The updated Housing Element includes new information, policies and programs to address these legal requirements. Such proposed statewide and regional changes include the approval of SB 2, SB 575, AB 2348 and AB 1866. Conclusion: No impact The Draft Housing Element Update and Quantified Objectives are consistent with the residential growth anticipated by the General Plan and allowed by the Residential Growth Management Regulations. Population and CITY OF SAN Luis Obispo 16 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2009 Issues, Discussion and Support 2009 GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ER # 120 -08 C ition Sources Sources Potentmuy I Potauially I Less Than I No UPDATE Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Housing growth anticipated in the General Plan were evaluated in the 1994 General Plan Land Use/Circulation Elements Final EIR, and the growth anticipated in the Dra$ Housing Element is consistent with growth levels evaluated in the FEIR. 13. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision, or need, of new or physically altered government 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: ,a ASkkG#521 'a1 r �� GF ? b F r { r� i+S ..� Y - I 5 X IY F2 L } u -'v ddi�T- pzofeianT3 F .�'y X 2 X 'GlG• "N "3 }i.B:i 3r a Ri.. a , r a 17 X e #jAF�and AI� lCLlFan5�AT13Q{1114$trtletlireY S 2 X Z. n©'theC' t1rCrJttl �- 2 X ' r* + d c a) and b) Safety Element Policy 3.0 states that adequate facilities and services shall be in place before new development is approved. Section 9.3 of the Safety Element includes specific response performance standards. For fire protection, the standard is a response -time objective of four minutes. The Police Department has set a 30- percent available -time objective for patrol response. When new development is proposed, the location and size of the development is considered to determine if they will impact the adopted response performance standards. In addition, the ability of each Department to meet these standards city-wide is monitored and evaluated on an annual basis as part of the General PIan Annual Report and the City's budgeting documents. When resource deficiencies are identified, the City Council routinely allocates funding for new personnel or facilities to insure compliance. c) The Draft Housing Element update estimates that one, or possibly two, additional school sites will be needed to serve planned residential growth in the southern part of the City. The Orcutt Area Specific Plan includes one potential elementary school site. Development projects will be required to pay construction permit school fees to offset costs of developing new schools. d.) The Parks and Recreation Element of the General Plan requires new development to allocate 10 acres of developed park Iand for every 1000 residents to ensure that sufficient parkland is developed along with new residential development e) Draft Housing Element policies encourage connectivity between residential developments. Policy 7.5 discourages walled - off residential developments because physical separation prevents the formation of safe, walkable and enjoyable neighborhoods, and reduces convenient access to transit routes. Draft Housing Element Policy 7.4 says that residential developments should be an integral part of an existing neighborhood with pedestrian and bicycle linkages that provide direct, convenient and safe access to adjacent neighborhoods and commercial areas. As new development is proposed, projects are evaluated to ensure consistency with these policies. 0 Draft Housing Element Update policies and programs call for the City to solicit new funding sources to assist in the development of affordable housing. The City of San Luis Obispo has an Affordable Housing Fund that can be used to offset costs and provide new infrastructure and services to new affordable housing developments. This and other funding sources will be needed to meet the Quantified Objectives. City Utilities, parking facilities, recreation facilities and programs, and to a limited degree, public schools, are funded by service users and new development City fees on new development, including water, wastewater, traffic, park, and affordable housing fees, and school fees are collected at the time of construction permit issuance to offset the costs borne by the City to meet the service needs of new development. Conclusion: Less than significant impact. Residential development will increase demands for public services, however, as provided in State law and local ordinances, new developments are required to fund a proportional share of the cost of additional public service or facility needs. 14. RECREATION. Would the project: CITY OF SAN LUIS Obispo 17 1 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKUsT2009 C � Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Lxw Than No 2009 GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Significant Significant Significant impact £R # 120-08 Issues unless impact _.. Mitigation Incorporated 17 1 1 1 1 X 2 1 1 1 1 X a) The General Plan Parks and Recreation Element Policy 3.13.1 of the General Plan says the City shall develop and maintain a park system at a rate of 10 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. The City monitors the adequacy of its recreational facilities and evaluates each major new residential development to determine if additional service capacity is needed. Specifically, all new residential expansion areas are required to develop neighborhood parks at the rate of 5 acres per 1,000 residents. Additional parkland is acquired and developed by the City as fees become available through the City's parkland in- lieu fee program to insure compliance with City policies regarding the total amount of parkland that should be maintained New development is responsible for providing funding or facilities in proportion to the need generated by the development project. This will help to ensure sufficient open space and recreational areas are allocated for the community. Generally, new subdivisions with 50 units or more are required to dedicate the required parkland, however, smaller subdivisions may pay a fee in lieu of dedicating land for parks. b) Housing development, including recreational facilities required as a condition of that development, will be allowed only in areas suitable for such development. Moreover, the Draft Housing Element Policy 11.2 states that the City will prevent new housing development on sites that should be preserved as dedicated open space or parks. Conclusion: Less than significant impact. Implementation of existing City policies and programs ensures that there will be adequate developed parkland available to serve new City residents. 1 15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the aroiect: I 91 14 1 1 1 1 X V4 10,14 a) Circulation Element Policy 16.1.4 states that the City will evaluate potential transportation impacts created by new development projects; development proposals to the City will include displays of the proposal's interfaces with nearby neighborhoods, and indicate expected significant qualitative transportation effects on the entire community. Traffic load and circulation impacts must be mitigated prior to development plan approvals. This information is routinely used by decision makers and planners to ensure that appropriate mitigation measures, including required off -site improvements, are established as part of any approved residential development project. b) Circulation Element Policy 8.0.1 says that the City will manage the use of arterial streets and regional routes/highways to accommodate increases in traffic levels limited to and permitted by the City's adopted growth management plan so levels of traffic congestion do not exceed the peak hour level of service standards. To maintain levels of service, traffic management plans will be established, alterative forms of transportation will be established and minor changes within existing roadways will be made to improve pedestrian and bicycling safety while improving traffic flow. i CITY OF SAN Luis Oatspo 18 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2009 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentiuiiy Potentially Less Than No 2009 GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Significant Significant Significant Impact ER # 120 -08 �a Unless Impact Mitigation Inc orated c) The City routinely evaluates proposed development projects to insure that hazards due to design features are reduced or eliminated. The proposed Housing Element update will not change the City's process for evaluating new development projects to ensure that vehicle circulation is accomplished without creating design hazards or conflicts with incompatible uses. d) Emergency access to new development will be taken into consideration during early phases of the development review process. Safety Element Policies 9.20 through 9.23 list the precautionary measures the City will take when evaluating a development plan. The City conducts safety inspections for fire safety, including enforcement of fire lanes, for multi- family residential developments. e) Circulation Element Policy 13.0.1 encourages people working in the commercial core to use alternative forms of transportation to get to and from work Workers who do drive individual vehicles should use parking structures or common facilities rather than curb parking, which generally should be reserved for short-term parking. f) Using alternative means of transportation is a key way to minimize congestion, and reduce health and environmental impacts. The General Plan discusses transportation with goals that are supported by specific policies to encourage alternative modes of travel throughout the City. Community Trip Reduction Policy 2.0.1, supports county wide and community programs geared to substantially reduce the number of vehicle trips and parking demand. Through this and many other transportation - related policies, transportation impacts due to level of service, road damage and traffic capacity can be successfully mitigated. g) The General Plan is consistent with the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport Land Use Plan and the Draft Housing Element wiIl be reviewed by the Airport Land Use Commission as a mandatory referral. The draft Housing Element cannot be adopted unless the Airport Land Use Commission determines that it is consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan. Conclusion: No impact. Existing policies and procedures ensure that new development is evaluated during the development review process so that any potential circulation impacts are mitigated as part of the development project. The proposed Draft Housing Element is consistent with the City's Circulation Element and the FEIR for the Circulation Element and does not propose substantially new housing development increment that was not previously anticipated. Overall, total housing in the City remains below the projections made in the Final EIR for the Land Use and Circulation Elements. 1 16. UTU MES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the vroiect: I 13 X X X X X 1;1 a) and b) The Draft Housing Element Update includes Quantified Objectives that can be accommodated by existing and planned water and wastewater treatment, distribution and collection facilities. CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 19 1NrnAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2009 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Inf mr0ation Sources Sources Potent' y Potentially Less Than No 2009 GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Demand @ 145 gpcd Significant Significant Significant impact ER #.a2aos Issues unless Mitigation lit 7,268 of 11,080 of 1,828 of Incorporated c) Based on the 2009 Water Resources Status Report, 'prepared by the City's Utility Department, the City can reasonably expect to have up to 1,828 AFY of water available to support new housing during the planning period — enough water to accommodate San Luis Obispo's projected population growth through 2022. Draft Housing Element Update policies assume that the development of up to 1,589 planned in-city dwelling units during the planning period will use 1,084 AFY, which is less than the amount available to allocate to new development The table below represents the water available for development based on water demand of 145 gallons per person per day. Projected City population of 57,200 at General Plan build -out results in a projected water demand of 9,290 acre -feet per year (excluding demand from the Cal Poly campus, which has separate entitlements), which is within the City's Safe Annual Yield of 11,080 acre feet. Table 4: Water Available for Develonment Year Population Present Water Safe Annual Yield Water Available for Demand @ 145 gpcd Allocation based on General Plan 2009 44,750 7,268 of 11,080 of 1,828 of d) The City of San Luis Obispo provides wastewater treatment for City residents. The capacity of the Water Reclamation Facility is adequate to accommodate project population growth and new commercial development in the City. The Wastewater Master Plan is updated from time to time to identify when additional capacity at the facility will be required. The planned expansion of the Water Reclamation Facility is funded by rate payers and through impact fees collected from new development e), f) The City's Construction Debris Diversion and Recycling Ordinance requires that all new development include a recycling plan to reduce the amount of debris disposed of at the Cold Canyon Landfill, which serves the City of San Luis Obispo. Cold Canyon Landfill has sufficient capacity to accommodate the City's anticipated build -out population. Conclusion: No impact. Based on planned service capacities, the City will be able to serve the increased water demand resulting from the additional population and housing anticipated in the Draft Housing Element Update. The increase in service demand is within the City's projections for available water and wastewater treatment resources, and within the growth limits established in the General Plan Land Use Element. F Individual development projects' impacts on natural and cultural resources will be evaluated and mitigated, consistent with CEQA and with General Plan policies. The proposed Update will not affect City policies on protecting and enhancing biological or cultural resources or preclude the City from achi resource &otection goals. iil'T)oes tbe'nmieeliaveinoacts that are iiiltvrdtrallvilttmted kirta "? X The Draft Housing Element Update would accommodate up to 1,589 in -city dwelling units in a five year period. Over h of these units are targeted to be affordable to very -low and low- income households and exempt from Residential Growth Management Regulations. Consequently, the Draft Element is consistent with General Plan Land Use Policies regarding CITY OF SAN Luis OBISPO 20 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2009 residential growth. Cumulative impacts of General Plan policies and anticipated growth are addressed and mitigated in the Land Use Element Final EIR. It also found identified significant, adverse impacts of cumulative growth factors, despite mitigation, for which findings of overriding considerations were made with regard to conversion of agricultural land to urban uses, accommodating a regional share of anticipated regional 'growth within the urban reserve line, and increases in population, employment and housing. �.W -15RWI-Wor R0 % Ix c Wa R I I I x The Housing Element update will meet a portion of the City's housing needs for all income groups. There is no evidence that the Element's policies and programs will have significant, adverse impacts on humans, either directly or indirectly. CITY OF SAN Luis 051spo 21 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL QiEcKusT 2009 Issues, Discussion and Supporti6glfntorrrtation Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Lass Than No 2009 GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Significant Significant Significant impact ER # 120-08 Issues I Unless . Impact I Mitigation hicorponited residential growth. Cumulative impacts of General Plan policies and anticipated growth are addressed and mitigated in the Land Use Element Final EIR. It also found identified significant, adverse impacts of cumulative growth factors, despite mitigation, for which findings of overriding considerations were made with regard to conversion of agricultural land to urban uses, accommodating a regional share of anticipated regional 'growth within the urban reserve line, and increases in population, employment and housing. �.W -15RWI-Wor R0 % Ix c Wa R I I I x The Housing Element update will meet a portion of the City's housing needs for all income groups. There is no evidence that the Element's policies and programs will have significant, adverse impacts on humans, either directly or indirectly. CITY OF SAN Luis 051spo 21 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL QiEcKusT 2009 18. EARLIER ANALYSES. i}ert sna1 ��5b� as�3�iSetexx I��'p..1b5�#�1'�Sr'it�o.P�l.� 4r 4t��r ��,�.p es;3`• nee or more e�"Ct�' �" ��- adGQl{$fQl}7�II�Ed- it1.'aA �$itr�]i�!]kii�I4�Y� i��Iidtibn +mt.�J��ll.�� .�,��,�� i1�5 8`d1SCU�30II .:l�rar�r�: `-1'st[;�t�ed~irieti' _�r�t•,r "a'ti� "��' and: h: ��tere :tba:�Ya9ialiteltSY`re�!te� ._._: �.._ +.� "... - .,:.;.. Final Environmental Impact Report, Land Use and Circulation Element Updates; available at the Community Development Department, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401. flt'�sxce��xh �opF o£a�d �dgiyaxt' 4 -+ 4•- +.�.�f v .+-r F „- �+-y p re e-` 3 i' i i sw u iu +4 I4 4 n i 54 r` k t 1a1y7�iiau CAI eat11G7a�lU�aeAt PIuSUazlk kA �tpplt��CtgASalfikLs� anc�. $fie a hel6ar4e� eiekl� wbrer a�tlre55e by :�.Zsmxti- aU�" o�xztteactus�bas� ,:Qnt>�zaFlie%.azial See attached Resolution No. 8332 excerpt, summarizing environmental impact, mitigation, monitoring and overriding considerations from the 1994 Land Use Element update. i5litrgahun measmes_or a t�iaf are `! mst "lhamarw�ationcod�ate ' de? cl tltd Dnat5otr � »,� ��,��o� ;tom fixiin��eE`��ul?>xPZ� tiie elcb�'nr tq �rinD7it�tey addz�ss stteei;t��: The Draft Housing Element Update is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element and must also be guided by the mitigation that applies to that document. 19. SOURCE REFERENCES. I • Unified General Plan, City of San Luis Obispo. 2. Draft General Plan Housing Element Update, City of San Luis Obispo, September 2009 3. 2003 California Environmental Quality Act, CEQA Guidelines, Consulting Engineers and Land Surveyors of California. 4. 2001 Clean Air Plan, San Luis Obispo County, San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District. 5. General Plan Safety Element, City of San Luis Obispo, July 2000 6. General Plan Noise Element and Noise Guidebook, City of San Luis Obispo, May 1996. 7. General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element, City of San Luis Obispo, 8. Community Design Guidelines, City of San Luis Obispo, May 2003 9. Zoning Regulations, City of San Luis Obispo, August 2009 10. Airport Land Use Plan, City of San Luis Obispo, May 2005 11. Draft Orcutt Area and adopted Margarita Area Specific Plans, City of San Luis Obispo, October 2004 12. Municipal Code City of San Luis Obispo 13. Water Resource Status Report, City of San Luis Obispo, July 2009 14. General Plan Circulation Element, City of San Luis Obispo, July 2000 15. Archaeological Resource Preservation Guidelines, City of San Luis Obispo, October 1995 16. Historic Preservation Guidelines City of San Luis Obispo, April 2008 17. General Plan Parks and Recreation Element City of San Luis Obispo, July 2000 18. Conservation Plans; Cerro San Luis, September 2005, Bishop Peak Natural Reserve, July 2004, Irish Hills Natural Reserve, Johnson Ranch, January 2008, South Hills, July 2007, Drafi Stenner Springs Natural Reserve, July 2009 Attachments: 1. Draft Housing Element Update July 2009 2. Excerpt, Resolution No. 8332 approving the Land Use/Circulation Element Updates and summarizing environmental impacts, mitigation and monitoring, and overriding considerations. CDD DOCS/GENERAL PLAN/ HOUSING ELEMENT IS 0 RESOLUTION NO. 10145 (2010 Series) RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY TO SURF CAB COMPANY AND PERMITTING THE OPERATION OF FOUR TAXI OPERATORS WITHIN THE CITY WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo desires to provide for taxi service for its citizens; and WHEREAS, Beach Cities Cab Company, 234 -Taxi L.L.C, and Green -Go Taxi, LLC are the current taxi operators in the City of San Luis Obispo; and WHEREAS, the City has received an application from Surf Cab Company to operate taxi service in the City; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the provisions of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Chapter 5.20, the City has evaluated the demand for additional taxi operators in the City; and WHEREAS, the City has determined the need for an additional taxi operator in the City exists, but wishes to re- evaluate that need after a reasonable period of operation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. The City Council finds that permitting additional taxi service on a one year trial basis serves the Public Convenience and Necessity. SECTION 2. The rates submitted by Surf Cab Company taxi operation and reviewed by the City Council on January 19, 2010 are hereby approved as Exhibit A. SECTION 3. The City Manager or her designee is hereby authorized to grant a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity and Taxi Permit to Surf Cab Company taxi for five vehicles on a one year trial basis. SECTION 4. The Applicant shall return to Council to request continued authorization to operate within one year of this resolution. R 10145 j \I Resolution No. 10145 (201v Series) Page 2 Upon motion of Council Member Settle, seconded by Council Member Marx, and on the following vote: AYES: Council Members Ashbaugh, Marx and Settle, Vice Mayor Carter and Mayor Romero NOES: None ABSENT: None The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 19th day of January, 2010. ATTEST: �% 0.el —�� Elaina Cano City Clerk AS TO FORM: J.,Christine Dietrick Attorney n, Resolution No. 10145 (201 a Series) Page 3 Exhibit A APPROVED 01 -19 -2010 Fee Type Surf Cab Pick Up Cash $4.00 Per Mile $3.00 Wait Time Per/Hr $35.00 Surchar a 2 :30 am -6 wn None 0 RESOLUTION NO. 10144 (2010 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO SUPPORTING THE FINDINGS OF THE CALIFORNIA STATEWIDE LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS NEEDS ASSESSMENT WHEREAS, cities and counties own and operate over 81% of the roads in California, where every trip begins and ends, and the local system is critical for safety and mobility of the traveling public, farm to market needs, multimodal needs, and commerce; and WHEREAS, the local street and road system provides two -fold opportunity for economic recovery during the worst fiscal crisis in California in decades. The maintenance and preservation of the local transportation network provides both public and private sector jobs and thus supports economic recovery in every comer of the state. Furthermore, well maintained infrastructure is critical for economic development by attracting businesses and providing for the safe and efficient movement of both people and goods; and WHEREAS, while federal and state governments regularly assess their transportation system needs, no such data existed for most of the local component of the State's transportation network; and WHEREAS, the California Statewide Local Streets and Roads Needs Assessment provides critical analysis and information on the local transportation network's condition and funding needs; and WHEREAS, the study surveyed all of California's 58 counties and 478 cities in 2007 -08, resulting in data that represents 93% of local street and road miles in the state; and WHEREAS, the results show that California's local streets and roads are on a path of significant decline. On a scale of zero (failed) to 100 (excellent), the statewide average pavement condition index (PCI) is 68, placing it in the "at risk category"; and WHEREAS, if current funding remains the same, the statewide condition is projected to deteriorate to a PCI of 58 in 10 years, and further to 48 ( "poor" category) by 2033; and WHEREAS, the pavement in the City of San Luis Obispo currently has a PCI of 72, but is in danger of declining if future revenues are not dedicated to pavement maintenance projects: and WHEREAS, ongoing road maintenance is a significant public safety concern. Fatality rates on county roads already exceed those of the State's freeway system. Maintaining the paved road network (potholes filling; sealing, overlays, etc.), traffic signals, signs, and street lights has a direct correlation to improving public safety thus reducing traffic accidents, injuries and deaths; and R 10144 Resolution No. 10144 (201 v Series) S Page 2 WHEREAS, to spend the taxpayer's money cost - effectively, preserving and maintaining the local system in good condition, or at a level of best management practices, is less costly in the long term; and WHEREAS, in order to bring the local system back into a cost - effective condition, thereby preserving the public's $271 billion pavement investment and stopping further costly deterioration, at least $7 billion annually in new money going directly to cities and counties over a period of ten years is needed to stop the further decline and deterioration of our streets and roads. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo supports the findings and recommendations of the California Statewide Local Streets and Roads Needs Assessment. Upon motion of Council Member Marx, seconded by Council Member Settle, and on the following vote: AYES: Council Members Ashbaugh, Marx and Settle, Vice Mayor Carter and Mayor Romero NOES: None ABSENT: None The foregoing resolution was adopted this 19`s day of January, 2010. Mayor David F. Romero ATTEST: (:��.1ZlA� Elaina Cano City Clerk AS TO FORM: d' Christine Dietrick City Attorney RESOLUTION NO. 10143 (2010 Series) ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CITY LEGISLATIVE ACTION PLATFORM FOR 2010 AND APPOINTMENT OF COUNCIL MEMBER AND STAFF PERSON TO ACT AS LIAISON BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AND THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES WHEREAS, a major objective of the City Council is to adopt an aggressive legislative action platform which strengthens local government, promotes City goals and defends the City against legislative actions by State and Federal governments that would weaken local government and/or take away traditional revenue sources; and WHEREAS, it is vital to the fiscal health and the self determination of the City to effectively communicate with State Legislators and Federal representatives in order to favorably influence State and Federal legislation, regulations and grant requests; and WHEREAS, the League of California Cities conducts a legislative analysis and advocacy program on behalf of cities for State issues and major Federal issues; and WHEREAS, the City desires to be proactive and involved in the governmental decision making processes directly affecting the City legislative priorities identified in Exhibit "A ", the League of California Cities federal priorities identified in Exhibit "B ", and other selected issues as may from time to time be recommended by the League of California Cities; and WHEREAS, a key component of the City's Legislative Action Platform is face -to -face meetings between City representatives and elected officials at the Federal, State, and County levels, and coordination with similar efforts made by other local government entities. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo does hereby: 1. Establish the Legislative Action Platform for 2010 as set forth in the attached Exhibits "A" and "B" and authorize staff to take positions on legislation generally consistent with the Legislative Action Platform and such other resolutions and recommendations of the League of California Cities as may be from time to time presented to the City; and 2. Appoint Mayor David F. Romero to act as Council Member legislative liaison and City Manager Katie Lichtig and City Attorney J. Christine Dietrick to act as staff legislative liaisons with the League of California Cities. R 10143 Resolution No. 10143 (201�Series) JJ Page 2 Upon motion of Council Member Marx, seconded by Council Member Settle, and on the following vote: AYES: Council Members Ashbaugh, Marx and Settle, Vice Mayor Carter and Mayor Romero NOES: None ABSENT: None The foregoing resolution was adopted this 19th day of January 2010. Mayor David F. Romero ATTEST: J (d;ZZ' Elama- Cano City Clerk AS TO Dietrick City Attorney G: \701 -03 Resolution (Log) \10143 reso.doc C� C Exhibit A CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO LEGISLATIVE ACTION PLATFORM FOR 2010 Community Development 1. Promoting reforms of the entire State mandated HCD Regional Housing Need Allocations process to recognize local resource limitations. 2. Promoting funding sources to accomplish retrofitting of unreinforced masonry buildings. .3. Promoting funding of on campus housing at Cal Poly for student and faculty housing. 4. Preserving local control of planning and zoning matters. Supporting efforts to increase funding for affordable housing for very low, low and moderate income families for all cities and communities and opposing the erosion of local inclusionary housing and in -lieu fee programs. 6. Promoting additional state funding to implement SB 375 through local general plan updates that implement the regional sustainable communities plan and alternative planning strategy, if needed. 7. Promoting funding for the identification, acquisition, maintenance and restoration of historic sites and structures. 8. Supporting continued or expanded funding for CDBG program. 9. Supporting reinstatement of protections from imposition of additional building or site conditions prior to issuance of a building permit for seismic related improvements to buildings subject to a mitigation program established according to state law (our URM Program) as previously provided in Government Code Section 8875.10 (this section was repealed effective January 1, 2009). 10. Supporting continued local control over mobile home park rent stabilization and the conversion of mobile home parks to other uses. Economic Development 11. Promoting funding and/or legislation using tax credits or other incentive programs to encourage research and development by businesses in California. 12. Supporting funding and policies for the promotion of California as a place to locate businesses. 13. Supporting funding for the state tourism promotion program. C Exhibit A 14. Supporting the effective and efficient use of all communications technologies including voice, video, data, and information services over wired and wireless transmission technologies. 15. Supporting telecommunications reform legislation and other measures that preserve local control over public rights -of -way, protect local resources and guarantee access to, funding for, and local flexibility in utilizing funds for public, educational and government (PEG) access television. Finance 16. Continuing to support efforts to protect the City from loss of revenues due to State take -aways and unfunded State or Federal mandates. 17. Endorsing legislation that provides local government with a fair share tax on catalog and Internet sales; and opposing legislation that limits state or local authority to tax catalog or Internet sales. 18. Supporting legislation and other measures to change processes in California regarding: determining legislative district boundaries, modifying term limit restrictions, and reducing the two- thirds vote required for adoption of the State budget. Human Resources/Employee Relations/Human Relations 19. Supporting additional workers compensation reforms that lower employers' costs while still protecting workers. 20. Supporting pension and retiree health benefits reform efforts in concert with the League of California Cities and the California Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) Board of Directors. 21. Opposing the expansion of the "Peace Officers' Bill of Rights," "Firefighters' Bill of Rights, or other attempts to curtail management rights. 22. Supporting legislation that provides funding sources for appropriate human service agencies that support the mission of the Human Relations Commission. 23. Supporting legislation to protect the City's continued ability to administer its Cafeteria Benefit Plan. 24. Supporting reforms that limit the financial impacts of joint and several liability on public entities. Public Safety G Exhibit A 25. Continuing State and Federal funding support for disaster preparedness, earthquake preparedness, Homeland Security, hazardous material response, State COPS program and other local law enforcement activities. 26. Preserving the City's authority to investigate police misconduct. 27. Preserving the City's authority to establish both medical and non - medical emergency service levels. 28. Supporting efforts to expand the scope of parental responsibility for crimes committed by minors. 29. Preserving the authority of local control on issuance of concealed weapons permits. 30. Supporting legislation to help curb alcohol - related criminal behavior and underage drinking. 31. Opposing new or increased state fees for state provided law enforcement services. 32. Supporting the fair and efficient allocation of radio spectrum that provides quality frequencies, free from interference, for all local public safety communication needs. 33. Supporting efforts to reduce retention periods for video monitoring tapes. Public Works 34. Supporting legislation to increase the availability of grant funding to replace aging infrastructure of all types, e.g. streets, bridges, water, sewer and storm sewer systems, etc. 35. Supporting legislation that would increase funding for projects that improve flood protection for the City. 36. Ensuring cooperation and prompt approval from Federal and State regulatory agencies (such as the Department of Fish & Game and the Army Corps of Engineers) for necessary projects involving the City's creek system. 37. Supporting legislation which would exclude assessments for vital infrastructure from Prop. 218 requirements. 38. Supporting legislation to provide monetary incentives or grant funding for alternative fuel vehicles for replacement of municipal fleet equipment. Exhibit A 39. Supporting legislation to provide monetary incentives or grant funding for retrofitting municipal buildings with Energy Management Systems to centrally control all lighting and HVAC systems. 40. Supporting measures to ensure the timely distribution of federal stimulus funds to cities with "ready to go" public works projects. Parks and Recreation and Natural Resources 41. Supporting State and Federal funding and other measures to promote the acquisition, protection, preservation and restoration of natural resources, open space, coastal resources, signature land forms, wetlands and park development, including continued funding for the Land and Water Conservation Grant Program and for the California Conservation Corps. 42. Supporting the expansion of National Marine Sanctuary off the coast of San Luis Obispo County to protect this fragile habitat from offshore oil and gas development. 43. Opposing any development under existing or new offshore oil and gas leases off the coast of San Luis Obispo County. 44. Supporting measures to prohibit discharge of pollutants into the ocean (e.g. selenium contaminated waters from the San Joaquin valley). 45. Encouraging the Resources Agency and its departments to reinstate and expedite the distribution of bond funds and other funds resulting from special legislation and voter - approved bond measures, to take advantage of the many favorable opportunities for land and easement acquisition and enhancement project contracting that exist at this time. 46. Seeking legislative exemption from property taxes on lands dedicated to open space purposes which are outside the boundaries of the jurisdiction owning such lands. 47. Protecting funding for vital regional and community services that negatively impact Californian's access to parks, open space, after school programming, senior services, facilities that promote physical activity, protect natural resources, and strengthen safety and security. 48. Promoting policies that recognize the benefits of parks and recreational facilities in the advancement of "sustainable communities" and curbing greenhouse gas emissions, including: strengthening policies that fund parks, open - space, bike lanes and non - motorized trails through the development and implementation of a carbon credit and offset program, and advocating for the strong integration of local and regional park and non - motorized transportation improvements into "Smart Growth Scenarios" pursuant to SB 375. 49. Supporting legislation that promotes access to joint use of schools; parks and open space; development of streets and trails that encourage physical activity and healthy living. Transportation O Exhibit A 50. Supporting changes in gas tax laws that allow local tax for transportation purposes based on a majority vote of the public. 51. Supporting the continuation of, and increased funding sources for street maintenance projects, transportation improvements, transit operations and bicycle facility projects. 52. Supporting clean air transit funding for San Luis Obispo County, in particular funding that provides for alternative modes of transportation with clean air benefits. 53. Supporting actions to: (1) promote cooperation and mutual support between metropolitan planning organization (MPO) agencies and local transit providers, and (2) discourage trends toward MPO agencies /regional "control" of local transit providers. 54. Supporting legislation that would encourage private transportation companies (such as Union Pacific Railroad) to reach agreements for sharing of properly secured right of way corridors for other compatible uses such as bicycle and pedestrian facilities. 55. Opposing the proposed diversion of gasoline sales tax to become an excise tax and other attempts to deprive transit agencies of significant funding sources. Utilities 56. Supporting clean water funding programs. 57. Supporting legislation to further recycling programs and enhance local government's ability to comply with solid waste requirements. 58. Supporting legislation to eliminate mandatory penalties for violations of NPDES Requirements and returning discretionary control to the Regional Water Quality Control Board Executive Officers (i.e. repeal SB 709). 59. Supporting legislation and other measures to ensure reasonableness in the administration of NPDES permit governing City operations, including pursuing a municipal representative on the Regional Water Quality Control Board. 60. Supporting legislation promoting the safe, responsible, and cost- effective reuse of Exceptional Quality or better biosolids. 61. Supporting legislation to streamline the state regulatory processes. 62. Supporting sustainable energy programs. 63. Supporting incentives for distributed energy generation projects such as solar power. O Exhibit A 64. Supporting legislation allowing cities /agencies to establish fees for the costs of operating mandated water quality programs such as, but not limited to, municipal storm water and total maximum daily loading. 65. Supporting federal legislative action to transfer Salinas Reservoir properties to a local agency, to the benefit of the City. 66. Supporting legislation that aids in the implementation of the California Urban Water Conservation Council's Best Management Practices regarding urban water conservation. 67. Supporting legislation eliminating departing load charges which discourage the use of alternative energy resources. 68. Supporting legislation to allow use of Public Goods Funds for the development and installation of energy saving or green energy generating projects to benefit local government. 69. Supporting legislation promoting the protection of water resources, including water quality, watershed protection, and treatment discharge measures. 70. Support legislation relative to protection of our natural resources from invasive species. 71. Support legislation promoting sustainability of our water resources through the use of recycled water, rainwater harvesting, greywater use, and other best practices. County/Retional Priorities 72. Working with the County to assure land use practices that are consistent with the Memorandum of Agreement adopted by the City Council and County Board of Supervisors in 2005 regarding development near the edges of the City. 73. Supporting a vector control program benefit assessment for San Luis Obispo County. 74. Encouraging participation by County in providing nearby parking for County employees and clients, and alternate transportation and parking demand reduction. 75. Supporting County development of a local ordinance providing additional local oversight and regulation of the land application of Pollutant Concentration (PC) or better biosolids. 76. Working cooperatively with the County to solve City/County flood problems. 77. Supporting the San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District's legislative program. G:Uxgislative Priorities\2010 Docs\2010 Legislative Action Platform.Exh A.Final Drafr.doc t League of California Cities �I J Exhibit B 2010 -01 -07 League Leadership Sets 2010 Strategic Priorities The League's board of directors met in a joint session with the leaders of the divisions, departments, policy committees and caucuses of the League on Nov. 18 through Nov. 20 to chart a strategic course for 2010. After small group discussions and large group presentations, the combined leadership of the League endorsed three strategic goals for 2010 that will guide the League's advocacy and education efforts. During its meeting on Friday, Nov. 20, the board formally adopted the three goals listed below. • Protect Local Control and Funding for Vital Local Services. Use statewide ballot measure and legislative and legal advocacy to achieve reforms that protect local control and abolish the power of the state to borrow, divert or impose restrictions on the use of all local revenue sources, including locally imposed or levied taxes, the local shares of all transportation tax revenues (including public transit funding), the redevelopment tax increment, and any other local revenue source used to fund vital local services. • Support Reform of the Structure, Governance, Management and Financing of State Government. Build on the success of the.2009 Local Government Summit on State Governance and Fiscal Reform by working collaboratively with other stakeholder groups to advance reforms to modernize the structure, governance, management and method of financing state government. • Promote Economic Stimulus, infrastructure Investment, Business Development and Job Creation. Promote federal, state and local investment in transportation, water, redevelopment and other critica` infrastructure projects that will support the retention and creation of new private businesses and jobs in our cities and stale. I� C RESOLUTION NO. 10142 (2010 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A HELISTOP ON THE ROOF OF THE SIERRA VISTA HOSPITAL'S PARKING STRUCTURE AT 21 CASA STREET (ARC 84 -09) WHEREAS, Sierra Vista Medical Center has requested to operate a rooftop helipad or helicopter landing facility (hereafter referred to as a helistop) atop the parking structure located at 21 Casa Street on its hospital campus in the City of San Luis Obispo; and WHEREAS, the proposed helistop will accommodate only emergency medical service (EMS) and public service medical helicopters and will facilitate the care of patients who are airlifted to this medical facility, thus improving the quality of medical service to patients; and WHEREAS, the proposed helistop will facilitate helicopter operations at an elevated location that will mitigate noise and other impacts on pedestrians, motorists and surrounding properties; and WHEREAS, California Public Utilities Code Section 21661.5 (b) requires that the City Council or its designated design review authority approve plans to construct a helistop located within City boundaries; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Director approved through a minor or incidental architectural review application the design of the helistop on November 6, 2009 and made appropriate findings as to the reasons why the requested helistop does not conflict with surrounding land uses; and WHEREAS, notices of the Director's action were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, the project is categorically exempt under Class 11, Accessory Structures, Section 15311 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the proposed helipad complies with federal requirements, and a City Council resolution noting City approval of the helistop is required for a final approval from state authorities. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Action. The City Council hereby supports the previous approval by the Community Development Director of the plans submitted by Sierra Vista Regional Medical Center to construct its helistop on the rooftop of the parking structure located at 21 Casa Street; based on the following findings, and subject to the following conditions and code requirements included in the Community Development Director's previous design approval: R 10142 Resolution No. 10142 (201 v aeries) Page 2 Findings 1. The proposed project will not be detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of persons living or working at the site or in the vicinity because the preliminary plans have been reviewed by all applicable City Departments for consistency with relevant codes and regulations. 2. The project is consistent with the Community Design Guidelines because the new helistop has been designed to blend with the architectural lines of the existing parking structure and be as inconspicuous as possible by incorporating the following: a. The elevation of the helistop has been lowered as much as feasible on the parking structure's roof deck. b. The beams of the helistop will be painted to match the parking structure. c. The helistop will be supported by the beams of the parking structure. 3. The proposed helistop will provide an important function and purpose for the hospital campus. 4. Revised parking calculations submitted with the helistop application demonstrate that there will still be a surplus of 64 parking spaces for the hospital campus above City code requirements even with the removal of the 17 parking spaces on the roof of the parking structure to accommodate development of the helistop. 5. The project is categorically exempt under Class 11, Accessory Structures, Section 15311 of the CEQA Guidelines. Conditions 1. Final project design and construction drawings shall be in substantial compliance with the project plans submitted as part of this minor or incidental .architectural review application. Any change to approved design, colors, materials, or other conditions of approval must be approved by the Director or Architectural Review Commission, as deemed appropriate. 2. Project lighting details including photometrics shall be submitted along with plans for a building permit. As indicated in project application materials, the goals are to keep light fixtures as low as possible in height and to keep illumination levels to a minimum, thereby reducing impacts to the night sky and surrounding neighborhood, but still meeting safety requirements. Code Requirements 1. Building elements shall have a fire - resistance rating not less than Type IIA construction. Resolution No. 10142 (20 (1 v'series) Page 3 2. Construction shall be in conformance with the 2007 edition of the California Building Codes (CBC) based on 2006 IBC, 2007 California Electrical Codes (CEC) based on 2005 NEC, 2007 California Plumbing Codes (CPC) based on 2006 UPC, 2007 California Mechanical Codes (CMC) based on 2006 UMC. Upon motion of Council Member Settle, seconded by Mayor Romero, and on the following vote: AYES: Council Members Ashbaugh, Marx and Settle, and Mayor Romero NOES: None ABSENT: None RECUSED: Vice Mayor Carter The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 19'' day of January, 2010. Mayor David F. Romero ATTEST: C��kr Elama Cano City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: A, Stine Dietrick ity Attorney RESOLUTION NO. 10141 (2010 SERIES) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ACCEPTING THE DONATION OF PUBLIC ART SCULPTURE "OH GREAT SPIRIT" WHEREAS, pursuant to receipt of Public Art Application for Privately Funded Art on City -Owned Property, Exhibit A attached herein, owner Don Ernst has offered to donate the sculpture "Oh Great Spirit' to the City of San Luis Obispo; and WHEREAS, subject to Resolution No. 8965 (1999 Series), Exhibit B attached hereto, all donations exceeding $5,000 shall be accepted through a written agreement consistent with these guidelines and approved by City Council; and WHEREAS, "Oh Great Spirit' is appraised at $90,000. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo hereby accepts the public art sculpture "Oh Great Spirit' subject to the terms and conditions of Exhibits A and B. Upon motion of Council Member Settle, seconded by Council Member Ashbaugh, and on the following vote: AYES: Council Members Ashbaugh, Marx and Settle, Vice Mayor Carter and Mayor Romero NOES: None ABSENT: None The foregoing resolution was adopted this 19`h day of January, 2010. i Mayor David F. Romero FEN 0 14419 &L Elaina Cano City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Christine Dietrick City Attorney R 10141 EANEAT "All PUBLIC ART APPLICATION (No Fee) PRIVATELY FUNDED ART ON CITY -OWNED PROPERTY CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 (805) 781 -7151 The Donor /owner must complete and sign this application form. If the Donor /owner is not the artist who created the artwork, the artist must also sign this Application below. ARTIST /DONOR: (Name, address, phone #) • bVIVO v D6N .E, 1610ek Hsi /s (2 5€9Q jrA.usQUeY u.)AY Wf5 ?L.'1'ke. V144 -'166 CA 1134ok . ZA AI 1j / !S 6RdSAb l'_A 93401 Q n a - -,99-105.R i TITLE OF WORK: DESCRIPTION OF WORK: (The form must be accompanied by drawings; models, photographs or any other graphic depiction which will help more clearly define the artwork.) rl/ va vt ;rte _ ft /n�f nrz e-A--q( hr�hzr_ MATERIALS /SIZE //: �J',LU� l /4- / ( l /c>�l� /eC / //% J/ k// X *� ,, PROPOSED LOCATION: (For inside or outside installation) 1 ,a9/0cf. i4. AN APPRAISAL OR OTHER EVIDENCE OF THE VALUE OF THE PROPOSED PUBLIC ARTWORK: CJ241 a, EXHISIT "A" PUBLIC ART APPLICATION (No Fee) PRIVATELY FUNDED ART ON CITY -OWNED PROPERTY CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 (805) 781 -7151 By signing this Application below and in consideration for participating in the City's Privately Funded Art on City-Owned Property program, the artist/owner hereby acknowledges and waives, pursuant to California Civil Code Section 987(8)(3), any rights and duties created by the California Art Preservation Act codified at California Civil Code Section 987 et seq., or other applicable law. The artistlowner further acknowledges and understands that upon completion and installation of the artwork, and upon its acceptance by the City Council, the work shall become the property of the City. The City retains the right to remove or relocate the artwork in its sole discretion as the interest of the public welfare, health and safety may require. If the artwork is damaged, defaced, altered or destroyed by human acts or by acts of nature, the City retains the right to remove, restore, repair or replace the artwork at any time in keeping with the artist's original design intent, without consulting the artist, or his or her heirs or assigns. The City will make reasonable efforts to contact the artist, or if unavailable, another design professional, to advise or assist in any restoration work. I have read, understand and accept the terms of this Application and represent that &"Plrt� of the artwork which is the subject of this Application. (owner, artist, or owner and.artist) Date: I am the I have read, un erstand and accept the terms of this Application and represent that I am the ae-h of the artwork which is the subject of this Application. (owner, artist, or owner and artist) Date: 2 S (Signature) (AiELL- (Print Name) n O EXHIBIT "A" I For What It's Worth $ Jacqueline D. Marie PO Box 852 Morro Bey, Ca. 93443 TdTax (805) 772-9648 Certified Personal Property Appraiser January 5, 2008 Dear Mr. Ernst; As per your authorization I have inspected, evaluated, researched, and appraised the following item, the property of Don A. Ernst 5882 Salisbury Way San Luis Obispo, California 93401 This appraisal was done to determine the current fair market value for the purpose of a noncash charitable contribution, to be accompanied by an 8283 IRS form. The value set.reflects the fair market value in the current market. The market place would be a fine art gallery, or private party sale. The methods used to determine the fair market value are actual prices paid, and comparable sales results. I inspected and photographed the appraised item on July 23, 2008. The effective date of this appraisal is December 30, 2008. In accordance with my implied fiduciary responsibility to both client and public, I have no present or contemplated future interest in the item described (see certification statement). This document comprises a (1) item inventory, (2) pages of photos depicting the appraised item, biographical information, appraisers statement, fair market value statement, 8283 IRS form, and a professional profile. The value of the item to be donated is $90,000.00. It is my opinion the value given represents fair market value; however, no responsibility, either financial or legal, is assumed. 1. Sculpture — A lost wax process bronze statue, "Oh Great Spirit" depicting an American Indian brave with his hands reaching up to the sky, 12' 6" tall x 42" at base, classic bronze patina, weight 780 pounds, c. 2007. By award winning artist Nell Bannister Scruggs of Thousand Oaks; California. Excellent condition. Value: $90,000.00 Note: Photographs and biographical information provided within this appraisal for further identification of the appraised item. The following reference material was used for research in this appraisal: Genesis Bronze, foundry owner John Kemple Mark Greenaway, sculptor @ 805 -466 -7076 Carolina Bronze Sculpture — Web site Nell Bannister Scruggs on line sculpture gallery Coeur d'Alene Art Auction — Web site Sincerely, Jacqueline D. Marie, AA, MCA USPAP Certified Appraiser US IRS # 77- 0338332 Ilu Nell Banister Scruggs 0, EXHIBIT "A'' Nell was bom in the mountains of western North Carolina and has been pursuing her love of art all her life. Her first work was in oils and pastels and her subjects ranged from seascapes to portraits. Nell spent years in art classes, studying with the Hal Reed (Who's Who in American Art), learning anatomy, perspective, composition and color. "One day he handed each of us a piece of clay, and mine quickly turned into a beautiful head. My clay figures evolved seemingly without effort. I knew I had found my medium." Nell went on to study with western sculptors Elie Hazak and Grant Speed, both recognized as Cowboy Artists of America, and later with world- renowned figurative sculptor Bruno Lucchesi of Italy. She has also taken watercolor classes from Ann Vasilik in North Carolina. "I try to show the feelings we all can appreciate or relate to: the tenderness of a mother toward her child; the power and energy of a wild horse; the grace of a ballerina; the toughness of a weary cowboy or the spirit of a Native American Indian." Nell has exhibited her work with the Golden State Sculptors Association; Loveland, Colorado's Sculpture Invitational; and Summerville, South Carolina's Sculpture in the South; Art After Dark, San Luis Obispo; Jack House and Gardens, San Luis Obispo; Civic Arts Plaza, Thousand Oaks, California. Nell's work has also been exhibited in galleries in Palm Desert, Laguna Beach, Morro Bay and Cambria, California; Portland, Oregon; Provincetown, Massachusetts; Jacksonville, Florida; Santa Fe, New Mexico; and her home town of Asheville, North Carolina. Nell's sculptures can be viewed at www. mcdanitl=ortin &com/gallery.html. Her piece entitled "Oh Great Spirit" has been enlarged by Genesis Bronze in Paso Robles to 13 feet tall and she would be willing to transport and show the piece at next year's Cattlemen's Western Art Show and Sale, should she be accepted as an artist. RESOLUTION NO. 8965 (1999 Series) EXHIBIT "B" A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ADOPTING A CITY DONATION ACCEPTANCE POLICY WHEREAS, individuals, community groups, and businesses may wish to make donations to the City in either cash or in -kind contributions that enhance projects, facilities, and programs; and WHEREAS, the need for projects, facilities, and programs exceeds the City's ability to fund all such needed projects; and WHEREAS, it is an acceptable and appropriate practice to accept donations, in order to enhance City programs and/or facilities to provide a higher level of service to the public. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo hereby adopts the following policy concerning the acceptance of donations: 1. The donation must have a purpose consistent with City goals and objectives 2. The City may decline any donation without comment or cause. 3. The donation will not be in conflict with any provision of the law. 4. The donation will be aesthetically acceptable to the City. 5. The donation will not add to the City's workload unless it provides a net benefit to the City. 6. The donation will not bring hidden costs such as starting a program the City would be unwilling to fund when the donation was exhausted. 7. The donation places no restriction on the City, unless agreed to by the City Council. 8. The donation shall become property of the City. 9. All donations will receive recognition appropriate to the level and nature of the donation as determined by the City. For those of a capital nature, that may be in the form of signage, marking, or naming. Any naming of Parks and Recreation facilities shall be consistent with City policy on the naming of such facilities as set forth in Resolution 8621 (1997 Series). Regardless of the recognition strategy selected, the intent shall be to appropriately honor the donor for their contribution to the community. The appearance of traditional commercial advertising shall be avoided. 10. Donations exceeding $5,000 shall be accepted through a written agreement consistent with these guidelines and approved by the City Council. In -kind capital donations will be subject to normal City review, permitting, inspection, and insurance requirements. Upon motion of Council Member Marx seconded by Council Member Ewan, and on the R 8965 EXHIBIT Resolution No. 8965 (1999 Series) Page 2 following roll call vote: AYES: Council Members Ewan, Marx, Schwartz, Vice Mayor Romero and Mayor Settle NOES: None ABSENT: None The foregoing resolution was adopted this 7th day of September, 1999. APPROVED AS TO FORM: or onsA C' orney UP