CC 2014-02-11_09.b. CUP 880 Oak Park Blvd Sheppel
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: TERESA McCLISH, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
BY: MATTHEW DOWNING, ASSISTANT PLANNER
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002, VARIANCE
12-004, AND AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
(T2713); LOCATION – 880 OAK PARK BOULEVARD (APNs 007-771-
053, 007-771-062, AND 007-771-076); APPLICANT – RUSS SHEPPEL
DATE: JANUARY 28, 2014
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended by the Planning Commission that the City Council adopt a
Resolution adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approving Conditional Use
Permit Case No. 12-002, Variance Case No. 12-004, and Amended Vesting Tentative
Tract Map Case No. 12-001 for the construction of an approximately 55,000 square-
foot, 69-bed assisted living/memory care facility and eight (8) townhomes.
IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES:
There would be additional City costs of approximately $200 per month associated with
landscape and pedestrian path maintenance within the creek setback area if the City
accepts the offer of dedication.
BACKGROUND:
This project is an integral part of a prior Planned Development (PD-1.1) area, and
therefore requires City Council action to amend the previously approved plan.
The project site is located within the Oak Park Professional Plaza (the “Plaza”) on the
southeast corner of James Way and Oak Park Boulevard in the Office Mixed-Use
(OMU) zoning district. The 3.74-acre Plaza is developed with two medical office
buildings and a health club (Kennedy Club Fitness). Surrounding the Plaza is a church
to the North, the Best Western Casa Grande Inn to the South, Meadow Creek and
Leisure Gardens condominiums to the East, and commercial development within the
City of Pismo Beach to the West. The 1.8 acre site is constrained by an existing access
from James Way and a fifty-foot (50’) setback from Meadow Creek, leaving a narrow
strip approximately forty-feet (40’) wide for development.
On May 9, 2006 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 3921 approving Vesting
Tentative Tract Map Case No. 04-006, Planned Unit Development Case No. 04-005,
and Minor Exception Case No. 05-015 (Attachment 1). These approvals allowed the
Item 9.b. - Page 1
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 12-002; VARIANCE NO. 12-
004; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
JANUARY 28, 2014
PAGE 2
subdivision of the remaining 1.8-acre site into 19 lots resulting in 24 density equivalent
town homes and condominiums as a mixed use development with the existing fitness
club and medical offices nearby (Attachment 2). The approved project was subject to a
twenty-five foot (25’) setback from the top of the Meadow Creek bank . The Tract Map
and associated permits are still valid until May 2016 as a result of State extensions.
The applicant is requesting to change the previously approved townhouse project to a
phased mixed-use project. The proposed project has significant design modifications to
portions of the approved project that includes 8 townhomes, as well as a 69-bed
residential care facility to replace the sixteen (16) density equivalent townhome and
condominium units in ten (10) buildings along the creek.
Location
Item 9.b. - Page 2
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 12-002; VARIANCE NO. 12-
004; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
JANUARY 28, 2014
PAGE 3
Staff Advisory Committee
The Staff Advisory Committee (SAC) reviewed the proposed project on June 26, 2013.
Members of the SAC discussed different issues related to the project, including Low
Impact Development (LID) requirements, potential problems related to tandem parking
garages, repairs to pedestrian facilities in the public right-of-way, modification to the
existing access and parking easement granted to the adjacent hotel, fire access and
striping requirements, and the need for grease interceptors in assisted living units with
kitchenettes. Overall, members of the SAC were in support of the project and
conditions of approval have been included in the proposed Resolution.
Architectural Review Committee
The Architectural Review Committee (ARC) reviewed the proposed project on July 1,
2013 (Attachment 3). Committee members discussed issues surrounding the creek
setback and pedestrian path, parking requirements and constraints on design,
landscaping, and existing and future signage at the eastern driveway to the site. The
ARC supported the project despite some concerns over the proposed creek setback.
The ARC recommended approval of the project with specific conditions addressing
additional architectural details (already addressed by the applicant), landscaping, and
signage. These conditions have been included in the proposed Resolution.
Planning Commission
The Planning Commission considered the proposed project at public hearings on
October 1, 2013 and January 7, 2014 (Attachments 4 and 5). After receiving much
public comment on the proposed project, the Planning Commission adopted a
Resolution recommending the City Council approve the project with additional
conditions of approval identified in the attached Council Resolution.
ANALYSIS OF ISSUES:
Phased Mixed-Use Project
The proposed project encompasses the same 1.8 acres as the previously approved
project. The site is generally bordered by Kennedy Club Fitness and the Sheppel
Medical Center to the North, another medical facility to the West, Casa Grande Inn and
Kmart to the South, and Meadow Creek and a residential development to the East. The
property is zoned Office Mixed-Use (OMU). The site also slopes from Oak Park
Boulevard to Meadow Creek. Phase I is proposed to include the 8-unit townhome
portion of the previous project with a slight modification on the western most lot. The
eastern most lots are proposed for a 69-bed memory care facility in Phase II.
Phase I
Phase I consists of a modification of the 8-unit townhome project that was approved
with the current entitlement. Each townhome will be approximately 1,200 square-feet of
living space with two bedrooms and basement level, single-car garages with parking for
Item 9.b. - Page 3
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 12-002; VARIANCE NO. 12-
004; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
JANUARY 28, 2014
PAGE 4
a second car in the driveway. Total square-footage equals approximately 1,800 square-
feet per unit, including garages and deck space. These sizes are generally consistent
with the previous approved project. However, the proposal includes the relocation of
single-car garages, which has necessitated additional review of the townhome phase of
the project.
The previously approved townhomes included a detached single-car garage to the west
of the structures, toward Oak Park Boulevard. The applicant is proposing the use of
single-car garages with additional driveway parking for the proposed project in an effort
to better utilize land given the slope of the parcel, as well as provide backyards for the
townhomes. The townhomes are proposed to be two-story structures with basement
level garages. Total height of these structures is approximately twenty-nine feet (29’).
The previously approved townhomes were thirty-seven feet (37’) high with a third-story
roof deck. The proposed project will not include roof deck space.
The reconfiguration of garages below the townhomes is accomplished due to the
sloping grade of the site toward Meadow Creek. The relocation of the garages to the
basement of the townhomes allows for expanded private open space of approximately
225 square-feet per lot. The relocation helps to maximize the use of the site.
Phase II
Phase II consists of a 69-bed memory care and assisted living facility in a single
structure. The memory care facility will include an Alzheimer’s care wing while the
remainder of the units will be utilized for assisted living. In total, the proposed project
includes forty-four (44) assisted living units and twenty-five (25) Alzheimer care units.
Other uses proposed for the building include dining and activity areas for the different
resident types, offices, and outdoor sitting and garden areas.
A variance is required for the reduction of the creek setback from fifty feet (50’) to thirty-
five feet (35’). The entitled project allowed for a twenty-five foot (25’) setback from the
top of bank. The difference in setback requirements result from the City Council’s
adoption of Ordinance No. 591 on June 26, 2007, which dictated increased setbacks
from creek banks for reasons such as bank stabilization, riparian vegetation, and wildlife
habitat. Staff supports the setback reduction to thirty-five feet (35’) due to the setback
increase from the current entitlement and the resulting project that comes from the
reduction. It is important to note that the mitigation measures developed for the original
project will still apply to the proposed project, including those related to riparian habitat
restoration adjacent to Meadow Creek along the project site.
Architecture
The proposed memory care facility will include several different materials to add
complexity to the architecture. The facility will include a mixture of cement fiber lap
siding and smooth cement plaster in green and beige hues. The building will also
Item 9.b. - Page 4
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 12-002; VARIANCE NO. 12-
004; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
JANUARY 28, 2014
PAGE 5
include cement fiber trim in a brown hue. Eldorado river rock stone will be used on
some of the lowest portions of the building, as well as accent columns near the building
base. The roof is proposed to be multicolored, lightweight concrete roof tiles that
complement the siding, trim, and rock materials. A colors and material board will be
available for review at the meeting.
Project Parking
Arroyo Grande Municipal Code (AGMC) Section 16.56.060 sets forth parking
requirements based upon proposed land use. The Phase I townhomes require two (2)
spaces per unit in an enclosed garage and a half space per unit for guests. For the
townhome phase of the project, twenty (20) parking spaces are required. The Phase II
care facility use requires a minimum of one (1) uncovered parking space for every three
(3) beds in the facility. Based upon these requirements, the proposed 69-bed facility
requires twenty-three (23) parking spaces. In addition to the twenty-three (23) parking
spaces required for residents, one (1) space is required for every employee on the
largest shift. According to information provided by the applicant, a maximum of twenty
(20) employees on the largest shift would require an equal amount of parking.
Therefore, the total amount of parking required for the Phase II care facility is 43
spaces. Between both Phases of the project a total of sixty-three (63) parking spaces is
required.
During the Planning Commission’s review of the project, Commissioners commented
that parking spaces in the driveways of the townhomes should not be counted toward
total parking being provided as identified in the Municipal Code. Additionally, the
Commission recommended that the garage parking should not be included as being
available for the whole project because those spaces would be enclosed and
permanently reserved for the townhomes. Staff concluded that if the garages were not
to count toward parking provided, it would not be appropriate to consider those eight
spaces for parking required for the project. Commissioners agreed with staff and the
numbers of parking spaces required for the project totaled 55.
The applicant has indicated that fifty (50) total parking spaces are being provided for the
proposed project. This includes four (4) reserved for Phase I townhome guests, twenty-
six (26) reserved for Phase II care facility, and twenty (20) non-designated spaces open
to both Phases of the proposed project as well as the Plaza as a whole (reference
Sheet A1.0 of Attachment 16). The parking provided by the applicant constitutes a nine
percent (9%) reduction in parking from the fifty-five (55) required spaces (less the eight
spaces recommended by the Planning Commission), which is below the maximum
twenty percent (20%) reduction allowed in the Municipal Code for mixed-uses.
Plaza Parking
As part of the original approval for the Plaza, a Master Plan was developed that
established shared access, parking and drainage easement agreements, which connect
Item 9.b. - Page 5
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 12-002; VARIANCE NO. 12-
004; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
JANUARY 28, 2014
PAGE 6
all six (6) parcels that are part of the Plaza. During approval of Conditional Use Permits
98-573 (Kennedy Club Fitness) and 98-572 (860 Oak Park Medical), a traffic impact and
parking study was completed by Penfield & Smith (1999) that discussed parking
demands of the proposed uses (Attachment 6). The study utilized Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE) and Urban Land Use (ULI) parking data based upon
time of day usage to determine the adequacy of parking for the two medical offices and
fitness center (reference Page 6 of the study). After the Kennedy Club Fitness Center
and second medical office building (860 Oak Park Boulevard) were occupied, a series
of issues and disputes arose with regard to parking. Following a series of meetings by
the Planning Commission in 2003 and 2004, a follow-up study was completed by Orosz
Engineering Group, Inc. (OEG) that investigated the parking space occupation and
utilization at the Plaza (Attachment 7). The reported parking issue at the Plaza was
lessened following the implementation of several recommendations from the study and
the Planning Commission’s review of the Plaza. These included designating several
spaces as having exclusive use for the medical offices during particular hours ,
enforcement and management of parking restrictions, and encouraging employees to
park elsewhere.
During permit processing for the currently entitled project in 2006, OEG submitted an
analysis supporting that project based on proposed parking supply and demand at the
Plaza (Attachment 8). The applicant has supplied additional correspondence from OEG
for the current proposal in support of the project due to similar traffic loads and
decreased parking demands (Attachment 9).
Currently, 145 parking spaces are provided between the medical office uses, Kennedy
Club Fitness, and improved parking on the project site, with certain amounts restricted
for use by the medical offices during daytime hours, as previously discussed. This is a
ten percent (10%) reduction in the 162 spaces required for the Plaza as identified in the
Penfield & Smith parking study from 1999. As part of the proposed project, some of the
existing, unassigned parking will be removed for construction. Additional surface
parking will be developed on Phase I of the proposed project. In total, 176 parking
spaces will be provided at the Plaza. This constitutes an 18.8% parking reduction when
combining the 162 spaces currently required for the Plaza and the 55 spaces required
of the proposed project. The following table summarizes the parking distribution
resulting from the proposed project:
Item 9.b. - Page 6
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 12-002; VARIANCE NO. 12-
004; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
JANUARY 28, 2014
PAGE 7
Table 1: Oak Park Professional Plaza Parking
Allocated Use Spaces Provided
Sheppel 1 (880 Oak Park Medical Building) 22 spaces
Farro Building (Sheppel 2 - 860 Oak Park
Medical Building)
22 spaces
Kennedy Club Fitness 58 spaces
Proposed Townhomes::
Guest Parking
4 spaces
4 spaces
Proposed Care Facility 26 spaces
Proposed Non-Designated 44 spaces
Total 176 spaces
Traffic
Based on SANDAG (San Diego Association of Governments) traffic generation rates,
the proposed project is anticipated to generate 19.62 PM peak-hour trips, which is
below the 20 peak-hour trips threshold that requires a traffic study. As part of the
current entitlement, the applicant submitted a traffic and driveway study that outlined the
impact of the residential project on the circulation system and access to the site
(reference Attachment 8). To help process the current proposal, the applicant has
submitted a letter from the same traffic engineer supporting the current project due to
reduced parking demands and similar traffic loads to the previous project (reference
Attachment 9).
Access and Circulation
The proposed project will be accessed from James Way. Extensive research was done
for the current entitlement regarding the safety of multiple egress driveways at the
entrance to the Plaza. The upper driveway adjacent to Kennedy Club Fitness and lower
driveway providing direct access to the site will remain open for ingress while only the
upper driveway will allow for egress from the Plaza. Emergency vehicles servicing the
site will utilize the lower driveway for egress purposes and the drive aisle will be signed
to alert motorists.
There are two (2) private easements on the two lots proposed for the assisted
living/memory care facility. These easements are for the benefit of the Best Western
Casa Grande Inn property owned by Ray Bunnell. One easement is for ingress and
egress to James Way from the motel through the Plaza while the other is the overflow
parking easements for the hotel. The proposed project requires the relocation of both
easements. The applicant believes the project, as designed, has satisfactorily relocated
these easements with his current site plan. Mr. Bunnell disagrees and believes the
relocated easements do not adequately accommodate his intended uses of the
easements.
Item 9.b. - Page 7
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 12-002; VARIANCE NO. 12-
004; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
JANUARY 28, 2014
PAGE 8
Staff facilitated a meeting between the applicant and the owner of the Casa Grande
property on November 8, 2013 in an attempt to resolve the access and parking
easement issue that arose at the October 1, 2013 Planning Commission meeting. To
staff’s knowledge, an agreement has yet to be reached. However, the project can be
approved while allowing the easement issues to be negotiated by the private parties. If
the outcome is that these issues cannot be resolved, the applicant would have to further
amend the Tentative Tract Map regarding the size, orientation, and access of townhome
lots 1 through 8 and amend the Conditional Use Permit for Plaza parking.
Density
Density equivalencies for mixed-use districts are set forth in the density equivalency
table in Development Code Section 16.36.030.C (set forth below). This table dictates
the density equivalency of residential units within mixed-use districts.
Table 2: Density Equivalencies
Residential Dwelling Unit Type Density Equivalent
Live/Work Unit .5
Studio .5
1-bedroom .75
2-bedroom 1
3-bedroom 1.5
4-bedroom 2
The proposed project includes eight (8) two-bedroom townhomes, forty-four (44) studio
and single-bed assisted living units, and twenty-five (25) studio and single-bed
Alzheimer’s care units. These unit types, along with their density equivalency are
shown in the following table:
Table 3: Project Densities
Unit Type Units Proposed Project Density Equivalent
Townhome – 2-Bedroom 8 8
Assisted Living – Studio 21 10.5
Assisted Living – 1-Bedroom 23 17.25
Alzheimer’s Care – Studio 11 5.5
Alzheimer’s Care – 1-Bedroom 14 10.5
Total Proposed Density Equivalency 51.75
Table 16.36.020(H).1 of the Municipal Code sets forth a maximum density of twenty
(20) dwelling units/gross acre for mixed-use projects in the OMU District. Municipal
Code Table 16.32.50-B notes that the maximum allowable density for congregate care,
assisted living, and convalescent living arrangements shall be thirty-four (34) dwelling
units per gross acre. Due to the differences in maximum densities, staff has calculated
Item 9.b. - Page 8
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 12-002; VARIANCE NO. 12-
004; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
JANUARY 28, 2014
PAGE 9
the maximum allowed density based upon area utilized for each use and summarized
the resulting densities in the table below.
Section 16.04.070.C of the Municipal Code defines a dwelling unit as one or more
rooms having not more than one kitchen, designed for occupancy by one family for
living, eating, and sleeping purposes. Staff does not believe that this definition lends
itself to the Alzheimer’s care units proposed in the care facility. Occupants of these
units are unable to live independently due to impairment of their mental faculties.
Additionally, the units do not have cooking facilities inside and residents must rely on
common eating and recreation areas that are centrally located. Lastly, occupant
movement is highly controlled and Alzheimer’s care residents are not able to come and
go as they please as is common with traditional dwellings. In this respect, the
Alzheimer’s care units are operated more as a commercial enterprise such as a
hospital, to which density does not apply and development is dependent on other site
development standards such as building setbacks and parking requirements. The
following table summarizes the proposed project density, less the Alzheimer’s care
units, based on staff’s recommended density calculations:
Table 4: Project Density Less Alzheimer’s Care Units
Unit Type Units Proposed Density Equivalent
Townhome – 2-Bedroom 8 8
Assisted Living – Studio 21 10.5
Assisted Living – 1-Bedroom 23 17.25
Alzheimer’s Care – Studio 11 Not included
Alzheimer’s Care – 1-Bedroom 14 Not included
Total 35.75
Total including Alzheimer’s Care units if determined to be
applicable
51.75
Maximum density allowed per Municipal Code 52.80
Creek Setback
The current entitlement for the subject property includes detailed study of Meadow
Creek, the “top of stream bank”, and riparian revegetation. The current entitlement was
approved with a twenty-five foot (25’) setback from the top of bank, which was
determined to be at the seventy-one foot (71’) elevation line (Attachment 10). Since
approval of the entitled project, the City adopted Ordinance No. 591, which increased
the Meadow Creek setback from twenty-five feet (25’) to fifty feet (50’). The applicant is
proposing a setback of thirty-five feet (35’) from the 71’ top of bank elevation line. Part
of this area directly adjacent to the assisted living/memory care facility would be used
for outdoor garden space for the residents and detention areas for rainwater to
percolate. The remaining portion of this 35’ setback would be used for a pedestrian
pathway connecting James Way to the southern border of the property as well as for
riparian revegetation. The required variance is discussed further below.
Item 9.b. - Page 9
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 12-002; VARIANCE NO. 12-
004; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
JANUARY 28, 2014
PAGE 10
Municipal Code Section 16.44.050 sets forth regulations for creek protection. The
purpose of the setback requirement is to protect biological resources, help prevent
erosion and sedimentation (flood control), provide open space amenities, and where
feasible, to provide for passive recreational opportunities such as pedestrian trails. In
light of the existing entitlements with a twenty-five foot (25’) setback from Meadow
Creek that could be built today, staff is in support of the reduction of the setback
requirement from fifty-feet (50’) to thirty-five feet (35’). Additionally, as outlined in the
Wetland Mitigation Plan prepared by Morro Group, Inc. and previously approved by the
Army Corps of Engineers, which is referenced in the Initial Study prepared for the
proposed project, a substantial amount of riparian revegetation is required and will
significantly enhance the health of the riparian habitat on the project site adjacent to
Meadow Creek.
The Planning Commission discussed the creek setback issue with regard to the
applicant fencing in and using a large portion of the area. While the purpose of the
creek setbacks are those identified above, this does not preclude a property owner from
fencing off part of their property and using it for garden purposes. Fences simply must
be designed to allow water and animals to pass through the fence, plantings must be of
a native riparian species, and no structures such as buildings are to be built in the area.
Decks are permitted to project into the setback with support columns on the ground as
this meets the intent of the creek protection guidelines. Staff has added a condition of
approval to the attached Resolution requiring all hardscape surfaces place in the
setback such as patios, parking lot, and pathways (other than the pedestrian path) to be
of a pervious nature. These materials would typically include pavers, porous concrete
and porous asphalt.
Landscaping
The applicant is proposing new landscaping as part of the project. The memory care
facility will include two separate garden areas; one reserved for the Alzheimer’s care
unit and one reserved for the assisted living units. Typical plant selections for these
areas include screen shrubs, accent shrubs and grasses, succulents, sun and shade
tolerant shrubs, spreading ground cover, and several Queen palm accent trees.
Additionally, the applicant is proposing the inclusion of two (2) deciduous trees and
seventeen (17) broad leaf evergreen trees. A plant list has been included in the
landscape plan that outlines the specific species of plants proposed for the project. All
landscaping will need to be compatible with the riparian vegetation required to be
installed as part of the Wetland Mitigation Plan developed for the previously entitled
project. If a conflict between plant choices were to arise, the riparian vegetation would
supersede all other landscape choices.
Landscaping has been identified in the revised layout for the townhome portion of the
proposed project. The removal of the single-car garages previously approved opens
Item 9.b. - Page 10
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 12-002; VARIANCE NO. 12-
004; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
JANUARY 28, 2014
PAGE 11
portions of the site for surface parking. Outside of this conserved surface parking and
the relocated townhome driveways, areas are available for landscaping. The ARC
originally recommended that landscaping for the townhomes return for final review.
Staff has added a condition of approval that the final landscape plans for both phases to
return to the ARC prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Affordable Housing
The project is subject to the inclusionary policies of the Housing Element, which
requires 5% of the units to be restricted to families earning a very low-income level or
10% of the units to be restricted to families earning a lower-income level as defined in
the County’s Affordable Housing Standards. With eight (8) standard units proposed, the
project is required to restrict 0.4 units to the very low-income level or 0.8 units to the
lower-income level. The project has been conditioned to restrict one (1) unit to the one
of these income levels or pay in-lieu fees for the units or pay in-lieu fees for the units if
appropriate findings can be made, as required by the Development Code.
Pedestrian Path
Part of the proposed project is the construction of a pedestrian pathway. This path will
be located in the creek setback area to the East of the memory care building, which
requires the path to be pervious and allow for the infiltration of stormwater. The path
will be pervious and connect James Way to the pedestrian bridge between the Casa
Grande Inn and the Kmart Center. The pathway can be accessed from the exterior of
the memory care facility, but will not be accessible from the garden areas for security
purposes related to the Alzheimer’s unit. The fencing separating the gardens from the
path is recommended to be wrought iron or a similar graffiti-tolerant fence material with
adequate ground clearance and spacing between bars to allow wildlife passage
between the pedestrian area and the gardens.
Development Standards – Office Mixed-Use (OMU)
The proposed project is subject to the Office Mixed-Use (OMU) Development Standards
(AGMC Section 16.36.020), General Mixed Use Development Standards (AGMC
Section 16.48.065), and density standards found in various areas of the Development
Code. Note that most of these standards have been written to allow flexibility to
compensate for site constraints and allow for more creative design and an overall better
project than through conventional zoning. Below are the development standards for the
OMU District. The project meets all OMU standards with a couple of exceptions.
The proposed care facility building is approximately 55,000 square-feet on 1.2 acres of
the 1.8 acre development. This building size exceeds the maximum building size of
50,000 square-feet allowed in the OMU zoning district by approximately 5,000 square-
feet. The 55,000 square-foot building constructed upon an approximately 52,000
square-foot site also results in a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 1.05. Floor Area Ratio is
defined as the gross floor area of a building divided by the total net area of the parcel.
Item 9.b. - Page 11
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 12-002; VARIANCE NO. 12-
004; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
JANUARY 28, 2014
PAGE 12
The maximum OMU FAR is 1. Therefore, the current proposal also exceeds the
maximum FAR by 0.05. The minimum lot size of the townhomes does not meet the
minimum of the OMU zoning district. However, lot sizes are reduced as part of
multifamily housing in a mixed-use project. With the flexibility of the OMU zoning district
development standards can be modified through the approval of a conditional use
permit, as long as the appropriate findings for approval of the conditional use permit are
made.
AREA INTENTIONALLY BLANK
Item 9.b. - Page 12
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 12-002; VARIANCE NO. 12-
004; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
JANUARY 28, 2014
PAGE 13
Table 5: Project Summary and Zoning District Standards
AGMC Table 16.363.020(H) – Office
Mixed-Use (OMU) Standards
Entitled
Project
Proposed
Project
Comments
1. Maximum
Density
Mixed Use
Projects
2. Maximum
Density
Multi-
family
housing
3. Minimum
Density
20 dwelling units/acre
15 dwelling units/acre
75% of maximum
density (measured on
residential portion
horizontal mixed-use
project area or 50% of
project area, whichever
is less.
22 density
equivalent
units
75%, or 20
dwelling
units
35.75 density
equivalent
units (Care
facility: 27.75
units;
Townhomes:
8 units)
75%, or 39.6
dwelling units
Inclusion of
Alzheimer’s
care units
increases
number of
dwelling units
beyond
minimum
density
required, while
maintaining
density below
maximum
allowed.
4. Minimum
Lot Size
10,000 sq. ft (20,000
sq. ft. for residential)
Varies
depending
on unit type
Care
Facility:
~52,000 sq.
ft.
Townhomes:
1132-1246
sq. ft. (Site:
~26,000 sq.
ft.
Front yard area
and deck
spaces
available for
townhomes
5. Minimum
Lot Width
100 feet Varied, but
complied
with OMU
standard
Care
Facility:
~120 feet
Townhomes:
~150 feet
None
6. Front Yard
Setback
0 – 10 feet. Exceptions
may include entrance
courtyards and areas
for outdoor dining
determined through
discretionary review.
Varied, but
complied
with OMU
standard
Care
Facility: 17-
20.5 feet
Townhomes:
~12 feet
None
Item 9.b. - Page 13
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 12-002; VARIANCE NO. 12-
004; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
JANUARY 28, 2014
PAGE 14
7. Rear Yard
Setback
0 – 15 feet Varied, but
complied
with OMU
standard
Care
Facility: 7-9
feet
Townhomes:
~12 feet
None
8. Side Yard
Setback
0 – 5 feet Varied, but
complied
with OMU
standard
Care
Facility:
~52,000 sq.
ft.
Townhomes:
1132-1246
sq. ft.
None
9. Street
Side Yard
Setback
0 – 15 feet. Exceptions
may include areas for
outdoor dining or
architectural/landscape
features
determined through
discretionary action.
N/A N/A None
10. Building
Size
Limits
Maximum height for
mixed residential
/commercial use is 35
feet or three stories,
whichever is less.
Maximum building size
is 50,000 sq. ft.
Three-story building
components allowed
only with substantial
transitional space
and/or lower story
elements adjacent to
residential districts/
uses.
37 feet (3
stories
including
rooftop
deck)
20,500 sq.
ft.
Care
Facility:
~55,000 sq.
ft. - 35 feet in
height (2
stories with
basement)
Townhomes:
1132-1246
sq. ft. - 29
feet in height
(2 stories
with
basement)
Buildings
greater than
50,000 sq. ft.
can be
approved
through CUP
Building height
measured from
average
finished ground
level to roof,
minus vents,
etc.
Item 9.b. - Page 14
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 12-002; VARIANCE NO. 12-
004; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
JANUARY 28, 2014
PAGE 15
11. Site
Coverage
and Floor
Area Ratio
Maximum coverage of
site by structures is
70%
Maximum Floor Area
Ratio is 1
26%
0.6
Care
Facility:
~42%
coverage
1.05 FAR
Townhomes:
~36%
coverage
0.37 site FAR
Standards
written for
flexibility in site
development
standards
through CUP
process
Parking
Require-
ments
53 spaces 51 spaces 56 spaces See discussion
on parking
Creek
Setback
Meadow Creek: 50 feet 25 feet 35 feet Variance
required for
reduced creek
setback from
50’ to 35’
Conditional Use Permit
A conditional use permit is required for the development of assisted living facilities in the
OMU district as well as for multifamily housing in mixed-use projects. The proposed
Conditional Use Permit will allow the construction and operation of the 69-bed assisted
living/memory care facility as well as the eight (8) townhomes currently entitled with the
modified layout proposed by the applicant.
Variance
The proposed project requires a variance for the reduction of the setback from Meadow
Creek from fifty feet (50’) to thirty-five feet (35’). The previously entitled project included
a creek setback of twenty-five feet (25’), which was the setback standard at the time of
approval. The purpose of a variance is to provide flexibility from the strict application of
development standards when those standards would result in a practical difficulty or
unnecessary hardship resulting from special circumstances pertaining to the property,
such as size, shape, topography or location deprives such property of privileges
enjoyed by other property in the vicinity. The findings required for approval, which staff
has included in the attached Resolution, are centered on this purpose. In the case of
the subject property, the fifty foot (50’) setback from Meadow Creek would reduce the
buildable lot width from approximately 120 feet to 70 feet. This width is then further
reduced by access easements recorded on the property. Staff estimates that the
buildable lot width would be approximately forty-five feet (45’) if the fifty foot (50’)
setback from Meadow Creek was strictly enforced. Additionally, in order to get a
variance for creek setbacks, studies have to be completed to assess any impacts
Item 9.b. - Page 15
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 12-002; VARIANCE NO. 12-
004; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
JANUARY 28, 2014
PAGE 16
resulting from the variance. These impacts have been identified and mitigated to less
than significant levels in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration developed for
the project. While some of the technical studies will need to be updated due to being
prepared for the current entitlement with a 25’ setback, staff does not anticipate
additional impacts to be identified as the requested setback is now 35’.
Amended Vesting Tentative Tract Map
The entitled Vesting Tentative Tract Map (VTTM) includes nineteen (19) lots. The
proposed Amendment to the VTTM includes one lot designated for development of the
care facility, placing each of the townhomes on its own lot, and leaving one remaining
lot surrounding the townhomes that includes the new surface parking and previous
access areas. In total, ten (10) lots will result if the proposed project is approved.
General Plan
The project is consistent with the following General Plan objectives and policies:
Land Use
LU5: Community commercial, office, residential and other compatible land uses shall
be located in Mixed-Use (MU) areas and corridors, both north and south of the freeway,
in proximity to major arterial streets.
LU5-1: Provide for a diversity of retail and service commercial, offices,
residential and other compatible uses that support multiple neighborhoods and
the greater community, and reduce the need for external trips to adjacent
jurisdictions, by designating Mixed Use areas along and near major arterial
streets and at convenient, strategic locations in the community. (The project site
is within walking distance to shopping and restaurants within the K-Mart shopping
center and across Oak Park Blvd. in the Pismo Beach commercial center.
Kennedy Club Fitness provides recreational amenities).
LU5-3: Ensure that all projects developed in the MU areas include
appropriate site planning and urban design amenities to encourage travel by
walking, bicycling and public transit. (Given its proximity to shopping and public
transit at the Kmart center, the project encourages multi-modal forms of
transportation, including walking and/or cycling).
LU5-11: Promote a mixture of residential and commercial uses along Mixed
Use corridors including substantial landscaping and streetscape improvements.
(The project adds residential development to existing and compatible office and
recreational uses. Proposed landscaping within the project area along James
Way, within the open space parcel and along the creek will enhance the overall
look of the existing commercial area).
Item 9.b. - Page 16
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 12-002; VARIANCE NO. 12-
004; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
JANUARY 28, 2014
PAGE 17
Compatibility of Townhomes
In light of public comment received at the previous Planning Commission meetings, staff
has identified an additional alternative for consideration, which includes providing
direction to the applicant to reconsider the proposal for townhomes on Phase I of the
project. Several comments from the public and Planning Commissioners were made
that questioned the compatibility of the townhomes with the remainder of the Plaza.
This was partly due to the issues created from the townhome driveways impacting the
access and parking easements on the site, as well as incompatibility of individually
owned residences in a commercial complex that includes medical office uses, a
residential care facility, fitness center, and nearby hotel and vacant restaurant space.
There is value in having residences as part of the proposed project due to the
opportunity for employees of one of the nearby commercial operations to live next to
their place of employment as well as the opportunity for residents to meet many of their
daily needs in the immediate vicinity. The final recommendation from the Planning
Commission was for the Council to approve the project with the townhomes included.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for the Council’s consideration:
Adopt the attached Resolution adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and
approving Conditional Use Permit 12-002, Variance 12-004, and Amended
Vesting Tentative Tract Map 12-001;
Modify and adopt the attached Resolution adopting a Mitigated Negative
Declaration and approving Conditional Use Permit 12-002, Variance 12-004, and
Amended Vesting Tentative Tract Map 12-001 with a maximum care facility
building size of 50,000 square-feet;
Modify further and adopt the attached Resolution adopting a Mitigated Negative
Declaration and approving Conditional Use Permit 12-002, Variance 12-004, and
Amended Vesting Tentative Tract Map 12-001;
Provide direction to the applicant to revise the proposal for townhomes on Phase
I of the project in favor of a more compatible use;
Do not adopt the attached Resolution, provide specific findings and direct staff to
return with a Resolution denying approval of the project; or
Provide direction to staff.
ADVANTAGES:
The proposed project provides a much needed health care service and housing option
to elderly residents and those in need of special medical care in the area. The project
will be required to provide pedestrian access near Meadow Creek, the restoration of
important riparian habitat along the project frontage, and increases the creek setback
when compared to the existing entitled project. The project can also be considered
compatible with existing uses at the Plaza and neighboring sites.
Item 9.b. - Page 17
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 12-002; VARIANCE NO. 12-
004; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
JANUARY 28, 2014
PAGE 18
DISADVANTAGES:
The proposed project will increase traffic to the site. The project will increase parking
congestion compared to existing conditions as a result of the development, which has
been and continues to be a congested site. These impacts, however, are similar to the
full residential project currently entitled for the site. The proposed project also requires
the relocation of an existing parking easement, which, although necessary to be worked
out privately between the parties involved, has direct implications to the site design of
the proposed project. The project exceeds the maximum building size and floor area
ratios allowed in the OMU zoning district.
The proposed project will reduce the building setback from Meadow Creek from fifty feet
(50’) to thirty-five feet (35’). However, the currently entitled project was approved with a
twenty-five foot (25’) setback and approval of the new proposal would increase this
setback by approximately ten feet (10’).
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Staff has reviewed the proposed project in accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and has prepared a Draft Mitigated
Negative Declaration (Attachment 11).
Staff received correspondence from the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC)
regarding the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration on September 4, 2013 (Attachment
12) that included recommendations to help ensure no archeological resources are
impacted as a result of the project. Staff contacted the NAHC by phone on September
5, 2013 and clarified that the included mitigation measures were appropriate given the
previously completed Phase I Archeological Survey completed by Heritage Discoveries,
Inc. in October 2000 and referenced in the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration.
PUBLIC NOTICE AND COMMENT:
A Notice of Public Hearing was sent to all property owners within 500’ of the project site,
posted at City Hall, on the City’s website, and in the Tribune on January 17, 2014.
Numerous comments have been received for the previous public hearings and tonight’s
meeting, including one (1) email correspondence in opposition of the project
(Attachment 13), email correspondence from the operator of the medical building at 860
Oak Park Boulevard (Attachment 14) regarding Plaza parking, and documents objecting
to and commenting on the project from Best Western Casa Grande Inn owner Ray
Bunnell (Attachment 15). Staff has also discussed the project with Kennedy Club
Fitness owner Kevin Kennedy who supported development of the site but had concerns
regarding parking and emergency access from the Casa Grande Inn.
Item 9.b. - Page 18
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 12-002; VARIANCE NO. 12-
004; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
JANUARY 28, 2014
PAGE 19
ATTACHMENTS
1. City Council Resolution 3921
2. Architectural site plan from Vesting Tentative Tract Map 04-006 and Planned
Unit Development 04-005
3. Final ARC minutes from July 1, 2013
4. Final Planning Commission minutes from October 1, 2013
5. Final Planning Commission minutes from January 7, 2013
6. Traffic and parking study completed by Penfield & Smith dated June 2, 1999
7. Parking lot operation monitoring results from Orosz Engineering Group, Inc.
dated April 30, 2004
8. Parking and traffic study for Vesting Tentative Tract Map 04-006 and Planned
Unit Development 04-005 by Orosz Engineering Group, Inc. dated January
17, 2006
9. Letter from Orosz Engineering Group, Inc. (OEG), dated June 3, 2013 in
support of the proposed project as it relates to traffic and parking
10. Top of Bank Study by Triad/Holmes Associates, dated June 1, 2004
11. Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
12. Letter from the Native American Heritage Commission regarding the Draft
Mitigated Negative Declaration
13. Email correspondence from Ginger Lordus in opposition to the project
14. Email correspondence from Jill Lowe, Business & Finance Manager at Bone
& Joint Center, 860 Oak Park Boulevard
15. Correspondence from Ray Bunnell, owner of Casa Grande Inn
16. Project plans
Item 9.b. - Page 19
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION AND APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT CASE NO. 12-002, VARIANCE CASE NO. 12-004,
AND AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP CASE
NO. 12-001 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN
APPROXIMATELY 55,000 SQUARE-FOOT, 69-BED
ASSISTED LIVING/MEMORY CARE FACILITY AND EIGHT
(8) TOWNHOMES; LOCATED AT 880 OAK PARK
BOULEVARD (SOUTHEAST CORNER OF OAK PARK
BOULEVARD/JAMES WAY INTERSECTION); APPLIED
FOR BY RUSS SHEPPEL
WHEREAS, on May 9, 2006, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 3921 approving
Vesting Tentative Tract Map Case No. 04-006, Planned Unit Development Case No. 04-
005, and Minor Exception Case No. 05-015 for the subdivision of 1.8 acres into 19 lots
and authorizing the development of 24 density equivalent units on real property, located
at 880 Oak Park Blvd., Arroyo Grande, CA (the "subject property"); and
WHEREAS, by State Law, those approvals were extended and are currently entitled
through May 2016; and
WHEREAS, Russ Sheppel (the "applicant") has submitted new applications for a phased
mixed-use project on the subject property seeking development of eight (8) townhomes
and a 55,000 square-foot, 69-bed facility with 44 beds indicated for assisted living use
and 25 beds indicated for Alzheimer's care use; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the project in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the Arroyo Grande
Rules and Procedures for Implementation of CEQA and based on the initial study and
findings has determined that a Mitigated Negative Declaration can be adopted; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande has reviewed and considered
the project at a duly noticed public hearing in accordance with the Development Code of
the City of Arroyo Grande on January 28, 2014, at which time all interested persons were
given the opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds, after due study, deliberation and public hearing, the
following circumstances exist:
Conditional Use Permit Findings:
1. The proposed use is permitted within the subject district pursuant to the
provisions of this section and complies with all the applicable provisions of
this title, the goals, and objectives of the Arroyo Grande General Plan,
Item 9.b. - Page 20
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE2
and the development policies and standards of the City.
The proposed assisted living and memory care facility as well as mixed-
use housing is allowed in the Office Mixed-Use (OMU) zoning district per
section 16.36.030 of the Municipal code and is consistent with
development standards for the OMU zoning district per Municipal Code
Section 16.36.020.H with concurrent approval of a variance for creek
setback reduction from fifty feet (50J to thirty-five feet (35).
2. The proposed use wo.uld not impair the integrity and character of the
district in which it is to be established or located.
The proposed assisted living and memory care facility as well as mixed-
use housing would not impair the integrity or character of the Office
Mixed-Use zoning district, as it is consistent with the stated purposes of
the OMU zoning district per Municipal Code Section 16.36.020.H.
3. The site is suitable for the type and intensity of use or development that is
proposed.
The site is 1. 8 acres in area in a mixed-use development, which is
permitted in the Office Mixed-Use zoning district and meets applicable
development standards, excepting maximum building size, and Floor Area
Ratio which are allowed by Conditional Use Permit 12-002 and the
minimum creek setback allowed by Variance 12-004.
4. There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities
and services to ensure public health and safety.
Adequate capacity for water, sanitation and public utilities and services
exist to serve the project; therefore, public health and safety will not be
impacted.
5. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or
welfare or materially injurious to properties and improvements in the
vicinity.
Impacts associated with the proposed use have been adequately
mitigated to ensure the use will not be detrimental to the public health,
safety or welfare nor would it be materially injurious to properties and
improvements in the vicinity.
Item 9.b. - Page 21
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE3
Variance Findings:
1. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified
regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship not
otherwise shared by others within the surrounding area.
The strict enforcement of the fifty foot (50J creek setback would require
the complete redesign of the assisted living/memory care facility and
cause further parking and access impacts, resulting in a practical difficulty
or unnecessary. hardship not otherwise shared by others within the
suffounding area.
2. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions
applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property
that do not apply generally to other properties classified in the same zone.
The constraint of the site resulting from a fifty foot (50J setback from the
top of creek bank is an extraordinary condition that does not generally
apply to other properties in the Office Mixed-Use (OMU) zoning district.
3. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified
regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners
of other properties classified in the same zone.
Strict enforcement of the fifty foot (50J creek setback would deprive the
applicant of privileges enjoyed by owners of other properties in the Office
Mixed-Use (OMU) zoning district due to the naffowness of the property.
4. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special
privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in
the same zone.
The granting of the variance will not constituted a grant of special
privilege, as few properties within the OMV zone are impacted by lot
naffowness and large creek setback requirements as the subject property.
5. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health,
safety or welfare, nor will it be materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity as the building will be constructed in
accordance will all applicable California Codes and additional impacts
associated with the proposed use have been adequately mitigated to
Item 9.b. - Page 22
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE4
ensure this.
6. That the granting of a variance is consistent with the objectives and
policies of the General Plan and the intent of this title.
The granting of the variance is consistent with the objectives and polices
of the General Plan (Land Use Element LU5, LU5-1, LU5-3, and LU5-11)
and the intent of the Development Code (Section 16.44. 050.A).
Tentative Tract Map Findings:
1. The proposed tentative tract map is consistent with goals, objectives,
policies, plans, programs, intent and requirements of the Arroyo Grande
General Plan, as well as any applicable specific plan, and the
requirements of this title.
The proposed tract map is consistent with the goals, objectives, polices,
plans, programs, intent and requirements of the General Plan (Land Use
Element LU5, LU5-1, LU5-3, and LU5-11) and the intent of the
Development Code (Section 16.36.020.H), both of which support the type
of development proposed.
2. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed.
The site is 1. 8 acres in area in a mixed-use development which is
permitted in the Office Mixed-Use zoning district following the approval of
a conditional use permit.
3. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development.
The site is 1. 8 acres in area and is allowed .a maximum density of 52. 80
equivalent density units. The Development Code provides equivalency
information for residential units in mixed-use districts, which results in a
proposed density equivalency of 35. 75 units excluding memory care
facility, well below the maximum density for the site.
4. The design of the tentative tract map or the proposed improvements are
not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and
avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
Impacts associated with the proposed tentative tract map have been
adequately mitigated to ensure it will not cause substantial environmental
damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish, wildlife or their habitat.
Item 9.b. - Page 23
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGES
5. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements is not likely to
cause serious public health problems.
Impacts associated with the proposed tentative tract map have been
adequately mitigated to ensure it will not cause serious public health
problems.
6. The design of the tentative tract map or the type of improvements will not
conflict with easements acquired by the public-at-large for access through,
or use of property within the proposed tentative tract map or that alternate
easements for access or for use will be provided, and that these
alternative easements will be substantially equivalent to ones previously
acquired by the public.
The design of the tentative map will not conflict with any public
easements; access will be provided from James Way and existing
easements for parking, access, and circulation are required to be updated
and maintained as necessary.
7. The discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into an existing
community sewer system will not result in violation of existing
requirements as prescribed in Division 7 (commencing with Section
13000) of the California Water Code.
The subdivision will abide by all City and South County Sanitation District
standards relating to sewer system design.
8. Adequate public services and facilities exist or will be provided as the
result of the proposed tentative tract map to support project development.
The property is located within close proximity to and will be adequately
served by all necessary public facilities.
Required CEQA Findings:
1. The City of Arroyo Grande has prepared an initial study pursuant to
Section 15063 of the Guidelines of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA), for Conditional Use Permit 12-002, Variance 12-004, and
Amended Vesting Tentative Tract Map 12-001.
2. Based on the initial study, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared
for public review. A copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
related materials is located at City Hall in the Community Development
Department.
Item 9.b. - Page 24
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE6
3. After holding a public hearing pursuant to State and City Codes, and
considering the record as a whole, the Planning Commission adopts a
mitigated negative declaration and finds that there is no substantial
evidence of any significant adverse effect, either individually or
cumulatively on wildlife resources as defined by Section 711.2 of the Fish
and Game Code or on the habitat upon which the wildlife depends as a
result of development of this project. Further, the Planning Commission
finds that said Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the City's
independent judgment and analysis.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo
Grande hereby adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approves Conditional Use
Permit 12-002, Variance 12-004, and Amended Vesting Tentative Tract Map 12-001, as
presented to the City Council on January 28, 2014 and as shown in Exhibit "B" on file in
the Community Development Department, with the above findings and subject to the
conditions as set forth in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference.
On motion by Council Member ___ , seconded by Council Member ____ , and
by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 28th day of January, 2014.
Item 9.b. - Page 25
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE7
TONY FERRARA, MAYOR
ATTEST:
KELLY WETMORE, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY
Item 9.b. - Page 26
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGES
EXHIBIT 'A'
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002, VARIANCE 12-004,
AND AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
880 OAK PARK BOULEVARD
The approval authorizes the subdivision of a 1.8-acre property into ten (10) lots, and
development of eight (8) townhomes and a 55,000 square-foot, 69-bed residential care
facility including twenty-five (25) Alzheimer's care units and forty-four (44) assisted
living units. Also approved is a reduction of creek setback requirements to thirty-five
feet (35') from the top of creek bank and a maximum Floor Area Ratio of 1.05.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
GENERAL CONDITIONS:
1. The applicant shall ascertain and comply with all Federal, State, County and City
requirements as are applicable to this project.
2. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of approval for Conditional Use
Permit 12-002, Variance 12-004, and Amended Vesting Tentative Tract Map 12-
001.
3. This approval shall automatically expire on January 28, 2016 unless the final
map is recorded or an extension is granted pursuant to section 16.12.140 of the
Development Code.
4. The applicant shall, as a condition of approval of this tentative or final map
application, defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Arroyo Grande, its
present or former agents, officers and employees from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the City, its past or present agents, officers, or employees to
attack, set aside, void, or annul the City's approval of this subdivision, which action
is brought within the time period provided for by law. This condition is subject to
the provisions of Government Code Section 66474.9, which are incorporated by
reference herein as though set forth in full.
5. Development shall occur in substantial conformance with the plans presented to
the Planning Commission at the meeting of January 7, 2014.
6. Development shall conform to the Office Mixed-Use (OMU) zoning district
standards except as otherwise approved.
7. All conditions of approval and mitigation measures for the project shall be
included in construction drawings.
DEVELOPMENT CODE:
Item 9.b. - Page 27
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE9
8. For zero lot line projects where detached dwelling units are to be constructed
upon a lot line, a five-foot maintenance easement shall be provided on the
adjacent lot, along, and parallel to, the zero lot line dwelling. The easement shall
grant access to the owner of the zero lot line dwelling for purposes of maintaining
the zero lot line walls.
9. A property owners' association and covenants shall be established to ensure that
common areas are maintained by property owners.
a. The homeowners association must be established before the homes are
sold;
b. Membership must be mandatory for each home buyer and any successive
buyer;
c. The open space restrictions must be permanent;
d. The association must be responsible for liability insurance, local taxes,
and the maintenance of recreational and other facilities;
e. Homeowners must pay their pro rata share of the cost, and the
assessment levied by the association can become a lien on the property if
allowed in the master deed establishing the homeowners association; and
f. The association must be able to adjust the assessment to meet changed
needs.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS:
10. Consistent with the City's lnclusionary Housing Provisions, the project shall
restrict five percent (5%) of the townhomes, or 0.4 townhomes, to qualified
families earning a very low-income, or restrict ten percent (10%) of the
townhomes, or 0.8 townhomes, to qualified families earning a lower-income
(based on the City's affordable housing standards). The applicant may pay an
affordable housing in-lieu fee instead of restricting the townhomes.
11. The Final Map shall show an irrevocable offer to dedicate the 35' creek setback
area to the City.
12. The Final Map shall show an irrevocable offer to dedicate the pedestrian path to
the City.
13. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall record a new,
non-exclusive pedestrian trail easement that coincides with the project plans.
This easement instrument shall be to the satisfaction of the City Attorney. The
applicant shall submit construction plans for the pedestrian trail for review and
approval by the Community Development and Public Works Departments.
14. Prior to issuing a certificate of occupancy, the developer shall install the
pedestrian trail in accordance with the approved construction plans.
15. The pedestrian trail shall connect the public sidewalk on James Way by means
Item 9.b. - Page 28
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE10
of an ADA ramp and stairs.
16. Only native riparian plants shall be planted within the 35' creek setback area.
Detailed planting plans shall be submitted in advance of or concurrent with
improvement plans. ·
17. Signs shall be posted prohibiting the use of herbicides or other toxic substances
potentially harmful to creek habitat.
18. No lighting other than that approved on the care facility shall be installed
adjacent to the creek. ·
19. The applicant shall submit documentation submitted to the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers to satisfy requirements outlined in the "Wetland Mitigation Plan" prior
to improvement plan review.
20. The project shall provide bicycle parking in a location acceptable to the
Community Development Director.
21. Fencing shall be installed along the pedestrian creek path that does not prohibit
migration of fauna between the path and riparian area.
22. All impact trees shall be a minimum 36" box in size.
23. The applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director
that the turning radiuses within the project site can accommodate a range of
vehicles from large trucks and buses, to cars, or the project shall return to the
City Council for additional review and modification.
24. The applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Fire Chief that the
turning radiuses within the project site can accommodate the Fire apparatus.
25. Speed bumps shall be installed between the hotel gate and the third townhouse.
26. Any modification to the conceptual plans that is determined not to be in
substantial conformance shall be reviewed by the Architectural Review
Committee and approved by the Community Development Director.
27. The developer shall comply with Development Code Chapter 16.20, "Land
Divisions".
28. The developer shall comply with Development Code Chapter 16.64,
"Dedications, Fees and Reservations".
29. Double detector check valve assemblies shall be located directly adjacent to or
within the respective building to which they serve.
30. All fire department connections shall be located near a fire hydrant, adjacent to a
Item 9.b. - Page 29
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE11
Fire access roadway, away from the public right-of-way, incorporated into the
design of the site, and screened to the maximum extent feasible·.
31. All electrical panels shall be architectural integrated into the buildings.
32. All solid surfaces placed in the 35' creek setback, including but not limited to
walking paths, patios, and parking lots, shall be of pervious materials, including
but not limited to pervious pavers, pervious concrete, or pervious asphalt.
33. No Certificate of Occupancy for the townhomes will be issued prior to the
issuance of a building permit for the care facility.
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE CONDITIONS
34. The lower sign to identify the Plaza shall be retitled, removed or relocated, or a
new sign shall be placed at the top entrance near Oak Park Boulevard to indicate
the professional center and/or fitness club.
35. Windows and similar architectural details shall be placed at the ends of the care
facility building and the ridgeline should have cupolas installed for venting.
36. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the final landscape plan for the
project, including riparian revegetation, shall be submitted to the ARC for review
prior to approval by the Director of Community Development.
PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITIONS
37. Vehicular egress though the lower (easterly) driveway shall be limited to
emergency vehicles due to safety concerns.
38. Proposed directional sign #1 shall be modified to state that only emergency
vehicles may exit through the lower (easterly) driveway.
39. Proposed directional signs #4 and #6 shall be removed.
ENGINEERING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
GENERAL CONDITIONS
40. Perform construction activities. during normal business hours (Monday through
Friday, 7 A.M. to 5 P.M.) for inspection purposes. The developer or contractor
shall refrain from performing any work other than site maintenance outside of
these hours, unless an emergency arises or approved by the Community
Development Director. The City may hold the developer or contractor responsible
for any expenses incurred by the City due to work outside of these hours.
Item 9.b. - Page 30
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE12
41. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall submit one (1)
copy of the final project-specific Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
consistent with the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWCB) requirements.
42. A grease interceptor shall be required for the proposed care center.
43. The applicant shall show trash enclosures on improvement plans to the
satisfaction of the Community Development Director.
NOISE
44. All residential units shall be designed to mitigate impacts from non-residential
project noise, in compliance with the City's noise regulations.
IMPROVEMENT PLANS
45. All project improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the
City of Arroyo Grande Standard Drawings and Specifications.
46. The Developer shall submit three (3) full-size paper copies and one (1) full-size
mylar copy of approved improvement plans for inspection purposes during
construction.
47. The Developer shall submit as-built plans at the completion of the project or
improvements as directed by the Community Development Director. One (1) set
of mylar prints and an electronic version on CD in AutoCAD format shall be
required.
48. The following Improvement plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer
and approved by the Community Development Department:
a. Grading, drainage and erosion control,
b. Street paving, curb, gutter and sidewalk,
c. Public utilities,
d. Water and sewer,
e. Landscaping and irrigation,
f. Any other improvements as required by the Community Development
Director.
49. The site plan shall include the following:
a. The location and size of all existing and proposed water, sewer, and
storm drainage facilities within the project site and abutting streets or
alleys.
b. The location, quantity and size of all existing and proposed sewer
laterals.
Item 9.b. - Page 31
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE13
c. The location, size and orientation of all trash enclosures.
d. All existing and proposed parcel lines and easements crossing the
property.
e. The location and dimension of all existing and proposed paved areas.
f. The location of all existing and proposed public or private utilities.
50. Improvement plans shall include plan and profile of existing and proposed on and
off-site utilities and retaining walls.
51. Landscape and irrigation plans are required within the public right of way. The
Public Works Director shall approve the irrigation plan.
WATER
52. Non-potable water is available at the Soto Sports Complex. The City of Arroyo
Grande does not allow the use of hydrant meters.
53. Townhomes will require individual water met~rs and sewer laterals.
54. Lots using fire sprinklers shall have individual service connections. A fire sprinkler
engineer shall determine the size of the water meters.
55. Utilities to this project have been stubbed out with the prior mixed-use project. The
developer shall be required to use these existing stubbed out utilities on James
Way. No work shall be permitted on James Way.
56. The applicant shall pay a water neutralization fee for each new residential unit.
SEWER
57. All sewer mains or laterals crossing or parallel to public water facilities shall be
constructed in accordance with the Standard Plans.
58. Sewer to this project has been stubbed out with the prior mixed-use project. The
applicant shall utilize these utilities and shall not be permitted to do work on James
Way.
59. The Developer shall obtain approval from the South County Sanitation District for
the development's impact to District facilities prior to building permit issuance.
60. The Developer shall mitigate lift station #1 CIP force main replacement.
PUBLIC UTILITIES
61. The Developer shall underground all existing and new public utilities in accordance
with Section 16.68.050 of the Development Code.
Item 9.b. - Page 32
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE14
62. Prior to approving any building permit within the project for occupancy, all public
utilities shall be operational.
STREETS
63. No work shall be permitted on James Way.
CURB. GUTIER. AND SIDEWALK
64. The Developer shall utilize saw cuts for all repairs made in curb, gutter, and
sidewalk.
65. The Developer shall install ADA compliant facilities where necessary. Ramps on
James Way shall be brought up to the City and State standards including the ramp
at the intersection of James Way and Oak Park Blvd. Decorative crosswalks shall
be installed across driveway aprons along James Way.
66. The Developer shall install tree wells for all trees planted adjacent to curb, gutter
and sidewalk to prevent damage due to root growth. Root barriers are to be
installed on the sidewalk side of tree wells per City standards.
67. Any sections of damaged or displaced curb, gutter & sidewalk or driveway
approach shall be repaired or replaced to the satisfaction of the Public Works
Director
GRADING
68. The Developer shall perform all grading in conformance with the City Grading
Ordinance including setback for cut or fills.
69. The Developer shall submit a preliminary soils report prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and supported by adequate test borings. All earthwork design and
grading shall be performed in accordance with the approved soils report.
70. The Developer shall submit all retaining wall calculations for review and approval
by the Community Development Director for walls not constructed per City
standards.
71. Existing 24" CMP pipe behind the building shall be removed and replaced with
HDPE.
72. The Developer shall provide outlet structure for Meadow Creek storm drain. A
stormceptor and or clarifier for storm drain leading to Meadow Creek shall be
required.
Item 9.b. - Page 33
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE15
DRAINAGE
73. All on-site and off-site drainage facilities shall be designed to accommodate a 100-
year storm flow. The applicant shall provide detailed drainage calculations
indicating that increased run-off can be accommodated by existing facilities and/or
provide on-site retention basins, to the satisfaction of the Director of Community
Development.
7 4. The project is in Drainage Zone C. Infiltration basins will be required so that peak
storm flows do not exceed the existing Oak Park Blvd basin capacity.
75. Infiltration basins shall be designed based on soil tests. Infiltration tests shall
include a minimum of 2 borings 15 feet below the finished basin floor. Additional
borings or tests may be required if the analysis or soil conditions are inconclusive.
76. All drainage facilities shall be in accordance with the Drainage Master Plan.
77. The applicant shall provide on-site storm water retardation facilities designed and
constructed to Public Works and Community Development requirements, and the
following:
a. The facilities shall be designed to reduce the peak flow rate from a post-
development 100 year storm.
b. The 100 year basin outflow shall not exceed the pre-development flow.
c. The 100 year basin outflow shall be limited to a level which does not
cause the capacity of existing downstream drainage facilities to be
exceeded.
d. The basin design shall include freeboard equal to 20 percent of the
basin depth, to a minimum of 12 inches.
e. The basin shall be fully constructed and functional prior to occupancy for
any building permit within the project.
f. The basin shall be maintained by the City. The applicant shall enter into
an agreement to fund the maintenance of the basin. The funding
agreement shall be approved by the City Attorney and shall be
recorded.
g. The basin shall be maintained by a homeowner's association. The City
shall approve the related language in the association CC&Rs prior to
recordation.
h. The basin design shall include landscaping and irrigation.
i. The basin shall be fenced around the perimeter. Fencing shall be
subject to the review and approval of the Community Development
Director and the Public Works Director.
78. The applicant shall submit an engineering study regarding flooding related to the
project site as directed by the Director of Public Works. Any portions of the site
Item 9.b. - Page 34
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE16
subject to flooding from a 100-year storm shall be shown on the plans and shall be
noted as a building restriction.
79. Storm drain inlets, both public and private, will be required to be stenciled with
the warning: "Drains to Creek" or other appropriate advice as directed by the
City.
80. The project shall comply with the Regional Water Quality Control Board Low
Impact Development requirements. Currently the City is utilizing Guidelines that
include calculations by the applicant of the additional stormwater runoff that will
be generated by their project. With that information the applicant will develop a
plan for handling on-site drainage including a determination of how much runoff it
may be possible to percolate, or store for irrigation purposes, or otherwise use
on site. Stormwater runoff that cannot be retained on site for percolation or use
must be treated through the use of bioswales and then directed into the
appropriate drainage system described in the Drainage Master Plan.
DEDICATIONS AND EASEMENTS
81. Reciprocal access and maintenance agreement will be required for the proposed
project and the adjacent businesses using the existing parking area.
82. All existing underlying lot lines shall be merged.
83. All easements, abandonments, or similar documents to be recorded as a
document separate from a map, shall be prepared by the applicant on 8 1 /2 x 11
City standard forms, and shall include legal descriptions, sketches, closure··
calculations, and a current preliminary title report. The applicant shall be
responsible for all required fees, including any additional required City processing.
84. A Public Utility Easement (PUE) shall be reserved a minimum 6 feet wide adjacent
to all street right-of-ways. The PUE shall be wider where necessary for the
installation or maintenance of the public utility vaults, pads, or similar facilities.
85. The property owner shall be responsible for maintaining the creek path and
vegetation until the offer of dedication is accepted by the City.
PERMITS
86. Obtain an encroachment permit prior to performing any of the following:
a. Performing work in the City right of way,
b. Staging work in the City right of way,
c. Stockpiling material in the City right of way,
d. Storing equipment in the City right of way.
Item 9.b. - Page 35
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE17
87. Obtain a grading permit prior to commencement of any grading operations on site.
FEES
88. Pay all required City fees at the time they are due.
89. Fees to be paid prior to plan approval:
a. Plan check for grading plans based on an approved earthwork estimate.
b. Plan check for improvement plans based on· an approved construction
cost estimate.
c. Permit Fee for grading plans based on an approved earthwork estimate.
d. Map check for tentative tract map based on the engineer's cost
estimate.
e. Inspection fee of subdivision or public works construction plans based
on an approved construction cost estimate.
90. Impact fees for Lift Station #1 force main replacement shall be as determined by
the Public Works Director.
PROCEDURE FOR PROTESTING FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR
EXACTIONS:
(A)Any party may protest the imposition of any fees, dedications, reservations, or
other exactions imposed on a development project, for the purpose of defraying
all or a portion of the cost of public facilities related to the development project by
meeting both of the following requirements:
(1) Tendering any required payment in full or providing satisfactory evidence of
arrangements to pay the fee when due or ensure performance of the
conditions necessary to meet the requirements of the imposition.
(2) Serving written notice on the City Council, which notice shall contain all of
the following information:
(a) A statement that the required payment is tendered or will be
tendered when due, or that any conditions which have been imposed
are provided for or satisfied, under protest.
(b) A statement informing the City Council of the factual elements of
the dispute and the legal theory forming the basis for the protest.
(B) A protest filed pursuant to subdivision (A) shall be filed at the time of the
approval or conditional approval of the development or within 90 days after the
date of the imposition of the fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions to
be imposed on a development project.
Item 9.b. - Page 36
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE18
(C) Any party who files a protest pursuant to subdivision (A) may file an action to
attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the imposition of the fees, dedications
reservations, or other exactions imposed on a development project by a local
agency within 180 days after the delivery of the notice.
(D) Approval or conditional approval of a development occurs, for the purposes of
this section, when the tentative map, tentative parcel map, or parcel map is
approved or conditionally approved or when the parcel map is recorded if a
tentative map or tentative parcel map is not required.
(E) The imposition of fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions occurs, for
the purposes of this section, when they are imposed or levied on a specific
development.
AGREEMENTS
91. Inspection Agreement: Prior to approval of an improvement plan, the applicant
shall enter into an agreement with the City for inspection of the required
improvements.
92. Subdivision Improvement Agreement: The applicant shall enter into an
agreement for the completion and guarantee of improvements required. The
agreement shall be on a form acceptable to the City. ·
93. Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions: The subdivider shall prepare project
CC&Rs for maintenance and repair of all privately owned improvements. The
CC&Rs shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Attorney and the
Director of Public Works.
IMPROVEMENT SECURITIES
94. All improvement securities shall be of a form as set forth in Development Code
Section 16.68.090, Improvement Securities.
95. Submit an engineer's estimate of quantities for public improvements for review by
the Community Development Director.
96. Provide financial security for the following, to be based upon a· construction cost
estimate approved by the Community Development Director:
a. Faithful Performance: 100% of the approved estimated cost of all
subdivision improvements,
b. Labor and Materials: 50% of the approved estimated cost of all
subdivision improvements
Item 9.b. - Page 37
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE19
c. One Year Guarantee: 10% of the approved estimated cost of all
subdivision improvements. This bond is required prior to acceptance of
the subdivision improvements.
d. Monumentatiori: 100% of the estimated cost of setting survey
monuments. This financial security may be waived if the developer's
surveyor submits to the Director of Public Works a letter assuring that all
monumentation has been set.
PRIOR TO ISSUING A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY
97. All utilities shall be operational.
98. All essential project improvements shall be constructed prior to occupancy. Non-
essential improvements, guaranteed by an agreement and financial securities,
may be constructed after occupancy as directed by the Community Development
Director.
99. Prior to the final 10% of occupancies for the project are issued, all improvements
shall be fully constructed and accepted by the City.
BUILDING AND LIFE SAFETY DIVISION AND FIVE CITIES FIRE AUTHORITY
CONDITIONS:
92. All buildings shall comply with the latest adopted California Codes.
93. The applicant shall pay all applicable development impact fees prior to the
issuance of a building permit.
94. At least one (1) covered passenger loading zone complying with Section 11 B-
503 of the California Building Code shall be provided at an accessible entrance
to licensed medical care and licensed long-term care facilities where the period
of stay may exceed twenty-four hours.
95. The project shall provide complete compliance with State and Federal disabled
access requirements. Per S.B. 1025, 10% of the primary entry levels of
multistoried dwelling units must comply with the HCD's accessibility provisions.
96. The applicant shall show all setback areas for each lot on the amended tentative
tract map prior to map recordation.
97. The creek side of the care facility building is adjacent to wildland where the
opportunity for conflagration exists. The building shall be built following the
Wildland Urban Interface requirements of the CBC Chapter 7 A.
98. The developer shall provide a Fire Department turnaround or provide access
Item 9.b. - Page 38
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 20
through the hotel site subject to approval by the Fire Chief.
FIRE LANES
99. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall post
designated fire lanes, per Section 22500.1 of the California Vehicle Code.
100. All fire lanes must be posted and enforced, per Police Department and Five Cities
Fire Authority guidelines.
101. In accordance with the California Fire Code, appendix D105, buildings or portions
of buildings exceeding 30 feet in height above the lowest level of fire department
vehicle access shall be provided with approved fire apparatus access roads
capable of accommodating fire department aerial apparatus. The width of these
roadways shall be 26 feet exclusive of shoulders, in the immediate vicinity of any
building or portion of building more than 30 feet in height. At least one of these
aerial access roadways shall be located a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of
30 feet from the building, and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the
building.
FIRE FLOW/FIRE HYDRANTS
102. Project shall have a fire flow based on the California Fire Code Appendix 111-A.
103. Prior to bringing combustibles on site, fire hydrants shall be installed per Five
Cities Fire Authority and Public Works Department standards. Locations shall be
approved by the Fire Chief.
104. The developer shall provide a fire hydrant on the James Way end of the property
at the location where the existing 8 inch ACP water main was to be abandoned.
The Double Detector Check Valve Assembly (DDCVA) and Fire Department
Connection (FDC) shall be located on the James Way side of the building.
FIRE SPRINKLERS
105. Prior to Occupancy, all buildings must be fully sprinklered per Building and Fire
Department guidelines.
106. The project shall provide Five Cities Fire Authority approved access and sprinkler
system per National Fire Protection Association Standards 13d or 13R as
appropriate.
107. The covered parking area must be fire sprinklered and sized to allow the passage
of a fire apparatus 20 feet in width with 13 feet 6 inch minimum head clearance.
Item 9.b. - Page 39
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 21
ABANDONMENT/NON-CONFORMING
108. Prior to issuance of a grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first,
the applicant shall show proof of properly abandoning all non-conforming items
such as septic tanks, wells, underground piping and other undesirable conditions.
OTHER APPROVALS
109. The project shall comply with Federal and local flood management policies.
110. Any review costs generated by outside consultants shall be paid by the applicant.
MITIGATION MEASURES
A negative declaration with mitigation measures has been adopted for this project. The
following mitigation measures shall be implemented as conditions of approval and shall
be monitored by the appropriate City department or responsible agency. The applicant
shall be responsible for verification in writing by the monitoring department or
agency that the mitigation measures have been implemented.
MITIGATION MEASURES:
MM 1-1: The applicant shall submit a lighting plan verifying that all exterior
lighting for the development is directed downward and does not create spill or
glare to adjacent properties and riparian habitat.
MM 111-1: Based on the recommendation by the APCD, the applicant shall
demonstrate how the construction phase impacts will be below the level of
significance as identified in the APCD's CEQA Handbook prior to grading permit
issuance and at least three months before construction activities are to begin.
MM 111-2: The following standard mitigation measures for construction equipment
shall be implemented to reduce the ROG, NOx, and diesel particulate matter
(DPM) emissions during construction of the project:
a. Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to
manufacturer's specifications;
b. Fuel all off-road and portable diesel powered equipment with ARB
certified motor vehicle diesel fuel (non-taxed version suitable for use off-
road);
c. Use diesel construction equipment meeting ARB's Tier 2 certified engines
or cleaner off-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State
Off-Road Regulation;
d. Use on-road heavy-duty trucks that meet the ARB's 2007 or cleaner
certification standard for on-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply
with the State On-Road Regulation;
e. Construction or trucking companies with fleets that do not have engines in
their fleet that meet the engine standards identified in the above two
Item 9.b. - Page 40
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 22
measures (e.g. captive or NOx exempt area fleets) may be eligible by
proving alternative compliance;
f. All on-and off-road diesel equipment shall not idle for more than 5
minutes. Signs shall be posted in the designated queuing areas and or
job sites to remind drivers and operators of the 5 minute idling limit;
g. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors is not permitted;
h. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of
sensitive receptors;
i. Electrify equipment when feasible;
j. Substitute gasoline-powered in place of diesel-powered equipment, where
feasible; and
k. Use alternatively fueled construction equipment on-site where feasible,
such as compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG),
propane or biodiesel.
MM 111-3: Prior to any construction activities at the site, the project proponent
shall ensure that a geologic evaluation is conducted to determine if Naturally
Occurring Asbestos (NOA) is present within the area that will be disturbed. If
NOA is not present, an exemption request must be filed with the APCD. If NOA
is found at the site, the applicant must comply with all requirements outlined in
the Asbestos Air Toxins Control Measure (ATCM) regulated by the California Air
Resources Board (ARB) and may require development of an Asbestos Dust
Mitigation Plan and an Asbestos Health and Safety Program for approval by the
APCD.
MM 111-4: Prior to any demolition activities or the removal or relocation of utility
pipelines at the site, if necessary, the project proponent shall notify the APCD to
ensure the activities occur in accordance with the requirements stipulated in the
National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP).
MM 111-5: The following mitigation measures shall be implemented during
construction to manage fugitive dust emissions such that they do not exceed the
APCD 20% opacity limit (APCD Rule 401) or prompt nuisance violations (APCD
Rule 402):
a. Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible;
b. Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent
airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency will be
required whenever wind speeds exceed .15 mph. Reclaimed (non-
potable) water shall be used whenever possible;
c. All dirt stockpile areas should be sprayed daily as needed;
d. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project
revegetation and landscape plans shall be implemented as soon as
possible, following completion of any soil disturbing activities;
Item 9.b. - Page 41
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 23
e. Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater
than one month after initial grading shall be sown with a fast germinating,
non-invasive, grass seed and watered until vegetation is established;
f. 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;
g. 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 o soil binders are used;
h. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on
any unpaved surface at the construction site;
i. 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;
j. Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto
streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site;
k. 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;
I. All PM 10 mitigation measures required shall be shown on grading and
building plans; and
m. The contractor or building shall designate a person or persons to monitor
the fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implementation of the
measures as necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible
emissions below 20% opacity. Their duties shall include holidays and
weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and
telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD
Compliance Divisions prior to the start of any grading, earthwork or
demolition.
MM 111-6: Prior to any construction activities on the site, the project proponent
shall contact the APCD Engineering Division to obtain all necessary permits for
portable equipment used during the construction and operational phases of the
project. Typical equipment requiring a permit includes, but is not limited to, the
following:
• Diesel engines;
• Portable generators and equipment with engines that are 50 horsepower
or greater;
• Electrical generation plants or the use of standby generators; and
• Portable plants (e.g. aggregate plant, asphalt batch plant, concrete batch
plant, etc.
MM 111-7: Proposed truck routes shall be evaluated and selected to ensure
routing patterns have the least impact to residential dwellings and other sensitive
Item 9.b. - Page 42
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 24
receptors, such as schools, parks, daycare centers, nursing homes, and
hospitals.
MM 111-8: The project proponent shall coordinate with and obtain all necessary
equipment and operation permits that are required by APCD. Typical equipment
requiring such permits includes, but is not limited to, the following:
• Portable generators and equipment with engines that are 50 hp or greater;
• Electrical generation plants or the use of standby generators;
• Boilers;
• Internal combustion engines;
• Sterilization unit(s) using ethylene oxide and incinerator(s); and
• Cogeneration facilities.
MM IV-1: The applicant shall revegetate the 0.18-acre mitigation area as outlined
in the "Wetland-Mitigation Plan" prepared by the Morro Group, Inc., dated May
21, 2002. Any plants that do not survive shall be replaced in kind and monitored
until established. Temporary irrigation shall be provided for all planting areas for
three (3) years or until plants are established. An independent consultant
specializing in biological resources shall be hired by the City and paid for by the
applicant to monitor the mitigation for a minimum of five (5) years.
MM IV-2: The applicant shall consult and coordinate with the Regional Water
Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and the United States Corps of Engineers
(USACE) regarding the project. The applicant shall obtain all permits required
for the construction, operation, or mitigation of the project. If permits are not
required, the applicant shall provide written verification as such from the
appropriate agency.
MM IV-3: The applicant shall obtain compliance with Section 1602 of the
California Fish and Game Code (Streambed Alteration Agreements) in the form
of a completed Streambed Alteration Agreement or written documentation from
the CDFG that no agreement would be required. Should an agreement be
required, the applicant shall implement all the terms and conditions of the
agreement to the satisfaction of the CDFG. The CDFG Streambed Alteration
Agreement process encourages applicants to demonstrate that the proposed
project has been designed and will be implemented in a manner that avoids and
minimizes impacts on riparian habitat and the stream zone.
MM IV-4: All non-native plant species shall be eliminated from the 35' wide creek
setback area.
MM IV-5: The developer shall record an irrevocable offer of dedication open
space agreement and thirty-five foot (35') creek easement on the property
measured from top of bank. No structures shall occur within the 35' creek
setback area, in accordance with Section 16.44.050 of the Municipal Code.
Item 9.b. - Page 43
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 25
MM IV-6: Siltation/sedimentation control measures shall be implemented along
the entire eastern property boundary prior to site construction. Such control
measures shall include sediment fences and/or hay bales placed into the crux of
the bank of Meadow Creek. Erosion/sediment control barricades shall be placed
around the perimeter of each construction zone with the potential to drain to
Meadow Creek.
MM IV-7: Soil shall not be stockpiled in areas located near the eastern property
margin adjacent to Meadow Creek, or in areas that have potential to drain to
Meadow Creek. Stockpiled soil should be properly covered at all times to avoid
wind and water erosion, and consequent siltation to Meadow Creek.
MM IV-8: No heavy equipment shall be allowed within the Meadow Creek
corridor.
MM V-1: If a potentially significant cultural resource is encountered during
subsurface earthwork activities, all construction activities within a 100-foot radius
of the find shall cease until a qualified archaeologist determines whether the
uncovered resource requires further study. A standard inadvertent discovery
clause shall be included in every grading and construction contract to inform
contractors of this requirement. Any previously undiscovered resources found
during construction shall be recorded on appropriate California Department of
Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance in terms of
California Environmental Quality Act criteria by a qualified archaeologist.
Potentially significant cultural resources consist of, but are not limited to, stone,
bone, glass, ceramic, wood, or shell artifacts; fossils; or features including
hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. If the resource is determined
significant under CEQA, the qualified archaeologist shall prepare and implement
a research design and archaeological data recovery plan that will capture those
categories of data for which the site is significant. The archaeologist shall also
perform appropriate technical analysis, prepare a comprehensive report, and file
it with the appropriate Information Center and provide for the permanent curation
of the recovered materials.
MM V-2: If human remains are encountered during earth-disturbing activities, all
work in the adjacent area shall stop immediately and the San Luis Obispo
County Coroner's office shall be notified immediately. If the remains are
determined to be Native American in origin, the Native American Heritage
Commission shall be notified and will identify the Most Likely Descendent, who
will be consulted for recommendations for treatment of the discovered remains.
MM Vl-1: All construction plans shall incorporate the recommendations of the
soils engineering report prepared for the project site by Earth Systems Pacific
dated October 30, 2006.
--_J Item 9.b. - Page 44
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 26
MM Vll-1: All construction plans shall reflect the following GHG-reducing
measures where applicable. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant
shall submit impact reduction calculations based on these measures to the
APCD for review and approval, incorporating the following measures:
• Incorporate outdoor electrical outlets to encourage the use of electric
appliances and tools.
• Provide shade tree planting in parking lots to reduce evaporative
emissions from parked vehicles. Design should provide . 50% tree
coverage within 10 years of construction using low ROG emitting, low
maintenance native drought resistant trees.
• Provide conduit for future fueling of electric vehicles (one space in parking
area).
• No residential wood burning appliances.
• Provide employee lockers and showers. One shower and 5 lockers for
every 25 employees are recommended.
• Trusses for south-facing portions of roofs shall be designed to handle
dead weight loads of standard solar-heated water and photovoltaic
panels. Roof design shall include sufficient south-facing roof surface,
based on structures size and use, to accommodate adequate solar
panels. For south facing roof pitches, the closest standard roof pitch to the
ideal average solar exposure shall be used.
• Increase the building energy rating by 20% above Title 24 requirements.
Measures used to reach the 20% rating cannot be double counted.
• Plant drought tolerant, native shade trees along southern exposures of
buildings to reduce energy used to cool buildings in summer.
• Utilize green building materials (materials which are resource efficient,
recycled, and sustainable) available locally if possible.
• Install high efficiency heating and cooling systems.
• Design building to include roof overhangs that are sufficient to block the
high summer sun, but not the lower winter sun, from penetrating south
facing windows (passive solar design).
• Utilize high efficiency gas or solar water heaters.
• Utilize built-in energy efficient appliances (i.e. Energy Star®).
• Utilize double-paned windows.
• Utilize low energy street lights (i.e. sodium).
• Utilize energy efficient interior lighting.
• Install energy-reducing programmable thermostats.
• Use roofing material with a solar reflectance values meeting the EPA/DOE
Energy Star® rating to reduce summer cooling needs.
• Eliminate high water consumption landscape (e.g., plants and lawns) in
residential design. Use native plants that do not require watering and are
low ROG emitting.
Item 9.b. - Page 45
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 27
• Provide on-site bicycle parking both short term (racks) and long term
(lockers, or a locked room with standard racks and access limited to
bicyclist only) to meet peak season maximum demand. One bike rack
space per 10 vehicle/employee space is recommended.
• Require the installation of electrical hookups at loading docks and the
connection of trucks equipped with electrical hookups to eliminate the
need to operate diesel-powered TRUs at the loading docks.
• Provide storage space. in garage for bicycle and bicycle trailers, or
covered racks / lockers to service the residential units.
MM IX-1: A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SW PPP) shall be developed
and implemented in consultation with the City, Regional Water Quality Control
Board (RWQCB), and other regulatory agencies. The SWPPP shall include
BMPs to reduce potential impacts to surface water quality through the
construction and life of the project. The SWPPP shall adhere to the following
requirements:
• The SWPPP shall include measures to avoid creating contaminants,
minimize the release of contaminants, and water quality control measures
to minimize contaminants from entering surface water or percolating into
the ground.
• The water quality control measures shall address both construction and
operations periods.
• Fluvial erosion and water pollution related to construction shall be
controlled by a construction water pollution control program that shall be
filled with the appropriate agency and kept current throughout any site
development phase.
• The water pollution prevention program shall include BMPs, as
appropriate, given the specific circumstances of the site and project.
• The SWPPP shall be submitted for review and approval to the RWQCB.
• A spill prevention and countermeasure plan shall be incorporated into the
SW PPP.
• Designation of equipment and supply staging and storage areas at least
150 feet from the outside edge of the Meadow Creek 35-foot setback
area. All vehicle parking, routine equipment maintenance, fueling, minor
repair, etc., and soil and material stockpile, shall be done only in the
designated staging area.
• Major vehicle/equipment maintenance, repair, and equipment washing
shall be performed off site.
• A wet and dry spill cleanup plan that specifies reporting requirements and
immediate clean up to ensure no residual soil, surface water or
groundwater contamination would remain after clean up.
• Designating concrete mixer washout areas at least 100 feet from the
outside edge of the Meadow Creek 35-foot setback with the use of
appropriate containment or reuse practices.
Item 9.b. - Page 46
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 28
• A temporary and excess fill stockpile and disposal plan that ensures that
no detrimental affects to receiving waters would result.
• Requiring all grading and application of concrete, asphalt, etc. to occur
during the dry season from April 15 to October 15.
• Required site preparation and erosion control BMPs for any work that may
need to be completed after October 15.
MM IX-2: To reduce erosion hazards due to construction activities, grading shall
be minimized and project applicants shall use runoff and sediment control
structures, and/or establish a permanent plant cover on side slopes following
construction.
MM IX-3: Erosion control and bank stabilization measures shall be implemented
to ensure that the creek bank does not erode. In addition, alternative bank
protection methods, such as restoration of native vegetation, root wads, or other
bioengineering methods of stabilization, shall be used whenever possible. In
order to reduce long-term effects of soil compaction and changes in topography,
construction vehicles and personnel shall not enter the low flow channel and wet
areas. Construction mats and other devices shall be used whenever possible to
reduce impacts associated with soil compaction.
MM IX-4: All temporary fill placed during project construction shall be removed at
project completion and the area restored to approximate pre-project contours
and topography.
MM IX-5: No construction debris or materials shall be allowed to enter the creek
bed, either directly or indirectly. Stockpiles shall be kept far enough from the
banks of the active channel and protected to prevent materials from entering the
creek bed.
MM IX-6: The following water quality BMPs shall be incorporated into the
project:
• Run-off Control. Maintain post-development peak runoff rate and average
volume of runoff at levels that are similar to pre-development levels.
• Labeling and Maintenance of Storm Drain Facilities. Label new and
existing storm drain inlets with "No Dumping -Drains to Ocean" to alert
the public to the destination of stormwater and to prevent direct discharge
of pollutants into the storm drain.
• Common Area Litter Control. Implement a trash management and litter
control program to prevent litter and debris from being carried to water
bodies or the storm drain system.
• Food Service Facilities. Design the food service facility to have a sink or
other area for cleaning floor mats, containers, and equipments that is
Item 9.b. - Page 47
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 29
connected to a grease interceptor prior to discharging to the sanitary
sewer system. The cleaning area shall be large enough to clean the
largest mat or piece of equipment to be cleaned.
• Refuse Areas. Trash ·compactors, enclosures and dumpster areas shall
be covered and protected from roof and surface drainage. Install a self-
contained drainage system that discharges to the sanitary sewer if water
cannot be diverted from the areas.
• Outdoor Storage Controls. Oils, fuels, solvents, coolants, and other
chemicals stored outdoors must be in containers and protected from
drainage by secondary containment structures such as berms, liners,
vaults or roof covers and/or drain to the sanitary sewer system. Bulk
materials stored outdoors must also be protected from drainage with
berms and covers. Process equipment stored outdoors must be
inspected for proper function and leaks, stored on impermeable surfaces
and covered. Implement a regular program of sweeping and litter control
and develop a spill cleanup plan for storage areas. ·
• Cleaning, Maintenance and Processing Controls. Areas used for
washing, steam cleaning, maintenance, and repair or processing must
have impermeable surfaces and containment berms, roof covers, recycled
water wash facility, and discharge to the sanitary sewer. Discharges to
the sanitary sewer may require pretreatment systems and/or approval of
an industrial waste discharge permit.
• Street/parking lot Sweeping: Implement a program to regularly sweep
streets, sidewalks and parking lots to prevent the accumulation of litter
and debris. Debris resulting from pressure washing should be trapped
and collected to prevent entry into the storm drain system. Washwater
containing any cleaning agent or degreaser should be collected and
discharged to the sanitary sewer.
MM Xll-1: Construction activities shall be restricted to the hours of 8 a.m. and 6
p.m. Monday through Friday. No construction shall occur on Saturday or
Sunday. Equipment maintenance and servicing shall be confined to the same
hours. To the greatest extent possible, grading and construction activities should
occur during the middle of the day to minimize the potential for disturbance of
neighboring noise sensitive uses.
MM Xll-2: All construction equipment utilizing internal combustion engines shall
be required to have mufflers that are in good condition. Stationary noise sources
shall be located at least 300 feet from occupied dwelling units unless noise
reducing engine housing enclosures or noise screens are provided by the
contractor.
MM Xll-3: Equipment mobilization areas, water tanks, and equipment storage
areas shall be placed in a central location as far from existing residences as
feasible.
Item 9.b. - Page 48
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 30
MM XIV-1: The applicant shall pay the mandated Lucia Mar Unified School
District impact fee.
Item 9.b. - Page 49
RESOLUTION NO. 3921
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING VESTING TENTATIVE
TRACT MAPCASE NO. 04-006, PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT CASE NO. 04-005 ANDMINOR
EXCEPTION CASE NO. 05-015, APPLIED FOR BY RUSS
SHEPPEL FOR PROPERTYLOCATED ON OAK PARK
BLVD. AND JAMES WAY (OAKPARKPROFESSIONAL
PLAZA)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande has considered Vesting
TentativeTract Map 04-006, Planned Unit Development 04-005and Minor Exception
05-015, filed by Russ Sheppel, to subdivide a 1.8-acre site into nineteen (19) lots
resulting in 24 density equivalent town homes and condominiums as a mixed use with
existing fitness club and medical offices and to deviate from the maximum building
height; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has held a public hearing on this application in accordance
with City Code; and .
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this project is consistent with the City's General
Plan, Development Code and the environmental documentsassociatedtherewith, and
has reviewed the draft Negative Declaration with mitigation measures under the
provisions of the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds, afterdue study, deliberation and public hearing, the
following circumstances exist:
Tentative Tract Map Findings:
1. The proposed tentative tract map is consistent with the goals, objectives, policies,
plans, programs, intent, and requirements of the General Plan map and text and
the requirements of the Development Code.
2. The site, as shown on the tentative tract map, is physically suitable for the
proposed density because all necessary easements, parking, open space, and
setbacks can be provided.
3. The design of the tentative tract map or the proposed improvements are not likely
to cause substantial damage to the natural environment, including fish, wildlife or
their habitat.
4. The design of the subdivision or proposed improvements is not likely to cause
public health problems.
ATTACHMENT 1
Item 9.b. - Page 50
RESOLUTION NO. 3921
PAGE 2
5. The design of the tentative tract map or the type of improvements will not conflict
with easements acquired by the public at large for access through, or use of,
property within the proposed tentative tract map or that alternate easements for
access or for use will be provided, and that these alternative easements will be
substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public.
6. The discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into an existing community
sewer system will not result in violation of existing requirements a prescribed in
Division 7 (commencing with Section 13000) of the California Water Code.
7. Adequate public services and facilities exist or will be provided as the result of the
proposed tentative tract map to support project development.
Planned Unit Development Permit Findings:
1. The proposed development is consistent with the goals, objectives, and programs
of the Arroyo Grande General Plan.
2. The project site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use and all
yards, open spaces, setbacks, walls and fences, parking areas, landscaping, and
other features required by the Development Code.
3. The site for the proposed development has adequate access, meaning that the
site design and development plan conditionsconsider the limitations of existing
streets and highways.
4. Adequate public services exist, or will be provided in accordance with the
conditions of the development plan approval, to serve the proposed development;
and that the approval of the proposed development will not result in a reduction of
public services to properties in the vicinity so as to be a detriment to public health,
safety, and welfare.
5. The proposed development, as conditioned, will not have a substantial adverse
effect on surrounding property, or the permitted use thereof, and will be compatible
with the existingsingle-family residential, hospital and medical office uses in the
surrounding area.
6. The improvements required, and the manner of development, adequately address
all natural and man-madehazards associated with the proposed development of
the project site, including, but not limited to, flood, seismic, fire and slope hazards.
7. The proposed development carries out the intent of the Planned Unit Development
Provisions by providing a more efficient use of the land and an excellence of
design greater than that which could be achieved through the application of
conventional development standards.
8. The proposed development complies with all applicable performance standards
listed in Development Code Section 16.32.050.
Item 9.b. - Page 51
RESOLUTION NO. 3921
PAGE 3
Required CEQA Findings:
1. The City of Arroyo Grande has prepared an initial study pursuant to Section 15063
of the Guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), for Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 04-006and Planned Unit Development 04-006.
2. Based on the initial study, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for
public review. A copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration andrelated materials
is located at City Hall in the Community Development Department.
3. After holding a public hearing pursuant to State and City Codes, and considering
the record as a whole, the City Council adopts a negative declaration and finds
that there is no substantial evidence of any significant adverse effect, either
individually or cumulatively on wildlife resources as defined by Section 711.2 of the
Fish and Game Code or on the habitat upon which the wildlife depends as a result
of development of this project. Further, the City Council finds that said Mitigated
Negative Declaration reflects the City's independent judgment and analysis.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo
Grande hereby approves Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 04-006, Planned Unit
Development No. 04-006 and Minor Exception No. 05-015, as presented to the City
Council on May 9, 2006 and as shown in Exhibits B1-B27 on file in the Administrative
Services Department and incorporated herein by thisreference as though set forth in full,
with the above findings and subject to the conditions as set forth in Exhibit "A", attached
hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
On a motion by Council Member Arnold, seconded by Council Member Dickens, and by
the following roll call voteto wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Council Members Arnold, Dickens, Costello, Guthrie
Mayor Ferrara
None
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 9th day of May 2006.
Item 9.b. - Page 52
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 4
MAYOR
ATTEST:
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
MS, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ATTORNEY
Item 9.b. - Page 53
RESOLUTION NO. 3921
PAGE 5
EXHIBIT "An
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
VESTING TENTATIVETRACT MAP 04-005,
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 04-006 and
MINOR EXCEPTION 05-015
Russ Sheppel
Oak Park Blvd. and James Way (Oak Park Professional Plaza)
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTDEPARTMENT
GFNFRAI CONOITIONS
This approval authorizes the subdivision of a 1.8-acre property into nineteen (19) lots resulting
in 24 densityequivalent town homes and condominiums in eleven (11) buildings as a mixed
use with existing fitness club and medical offices. Also approved is a one-foot (1 ') deviation
from the maximum building height.
1. The applicant shall ascertain and comply with all Federal, State, County and City
requirements as are applicable to this project.
2. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of approval for Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 04-005 and Planned Unit Development No. 04-006.
3. This Tentative Map and Planned Unit Development shall automatically expire on May 9,
2008 unless the final map is recorded or an extension is granted pursuant to Section
16.12.140 of the Development Code.
4. Development shall occur in substantial conformance with the plans presented to the City
Council at the meeting of May 9, 2006 as shown in Exhibits 81-827 on file in the
Administrative Services Department.
5. The applicant shall agree to defend, indemnify and hold harmless at his/her sole
expense any action, claim or proceeding brought against the City, its present or former
agents, officers, or employees within thetime period provided for in Government Code
Section 66499.37 because of theissuance of said approval, or in anyway relating to the
implementation thereof, or in thealternative, to relinquish such approval. The City shall
promptlynotify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully
in its defense. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees,
for any court costs and attorney's fee's which the City, its agents, officers or employees
may be required by a courtto pay as a result of suchaction. The City may, at its sole
discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such
participation shall not relieve applicant of his/her obligations underthis condition. This
condition is imposed pursuant to Government Code Section 66474.9.
6. Development shall conform to the OMU zoning requirements except as otherwise
approved.
Item 9.b. - Page 54
RESOLUTION NO. 3921
PAGE 6
SPFC:IAI C:ONDITIONS
7. Consistent with the City's Housing Element policies, the project shall restrict fifteen
percent (15%) of the units, or 3.3 units, to qualified families earning a. rnoderate-
income (based on the City's affordable housing standards). The developer shall pay
an affordable housing in-lieu fee for any fraction of a unit (see also MM 9.1).
8. The Final Tract Map shall show an irrevocable offer to dedicate the 25' creek setback
area to the City, including the pedestrian path.
9. Prior to issuance of building permit, the applicant shall record a new, non-exclusive
pedestrian trail easernent that coincides with the project plans. The applicant shall
submit construction plans for the pedestrian trail for review and approval by the
Departments of Public Works and Parks, Recreation and Facilities. Prior to issuing
a certificate of occupancy, the developer shall install the pedestrian trail in
accordance with the approved construction plans. The pedestrian trail shall either be
maintained by a homeowners association with maintenance responsibilities outlined in
the CC&Rs, or by the City if the offer of dedication is accepted.
10. The pedestrian trail shall connect to the public sidewalk on James Way by means of
an ADA ramp and stairs.
11. Only native plants shall be planted within the 25' creek setback area.
12. Signs shall be posted prohibiting the use of herbicides or othertoxic substances
potentially harmful to creek habitat.
13. The CC&Rs shall prohibitprivately installed lighting adjacent to the creek.
14. The City shall receive all documentation submitted to the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers to satisfy requirements outlined in the "Wetland Mitigation Plan".
15. The project shall provide bicycle parking in a location acceptable to the Community
Development Director.
16. Fencing shall be installed along the pedestrian creek path that does not prohibit
migration of fauna between the path and riparian area.
17. Driveway option NO.3 shall be implemented, which has all traffic directed towards the
upper (westerly) driveway and closes off thelower (easterly) driveway allowing for
emergency access only.
18. All impact trees shall be a minimum 36" box in size.
19. The applicant shall prepare a plan for a right pocket turn lane within the public right of
way for review and approval by thePublic Works Director, if a right pocket turn lane is
determined to be a substantial public safety enhancement within a five (5) year
timeframe based on traffic projections.
Item 9.b. - Page 55
RESOLUTION NO. 3921
PAGE 7
20. The applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of thePublic Works Director that
the turning radiuses within the project site can accommodate a range of vehicles from
large trucks and buses, to cars, or the project shall return to the city Council for
additional review and modification.
21. Speed bumps shall be installed between the hotel gate and the third town house.
ARCHITECTlJRAI REVIEW COMMITTEE (ARC) CONDITIONS
22. Soften the two purple building colors of the town homes.
23. Provide more landscaping in the three islands where the cantilevered building projects
out (pending no loss of parking spaces).
24. Plant two Liquidambars in the diamonds on the north side of the condos.
25. Change the Flax plants to Pittosporum undulatum and change the planter area to
project as far as possible into the parking space on the west side of the condos on
either side of garage doors.
26. Submit a final landscape to the Architectural Review Committee for review and
approval prior to issuance of building permit.
27. Provide decorative paving in the driveways between garages of the town homes.
NOISF
28. All residential units shall be designed to mitigateimpacts from non-residential project
noise, in compliance with the City's noise regulations.
29. Construction shall be limited to between the hours of 8am and 6pm Monday through
Friday. No construction shall occur on Saturday or Sunday.
DFVEl OPMENT CODE
30. Development shall conform to the Office Mixed Use (OMU) zoning requirements except
as otherwise approved.
31. All fences and/or walls shall not exceed six feet (6') in height unlessotherwise approved
with a Minor Exception or Variance application.
32. The developer shall comply with Development Code Chapter 16.20, "Land Divisions".
33. The developer shall comply with Development Code Chapter 16.64, "Dedications, Fees
and Reservations."
Item 9.b. - Page 56
RESOLUTION NO. 3921
PAGE 8
34. The following shall be included in the CC&Rs regarding open space:
a. The dedicated open space area (Lot A) shall not be further subdivided in the
future;
b. The use of the openspace shall continue in perpetuity for the purpose
specified;
c. Appropriate provisions shall be made for the maintenance of the open space;
and
d. Common undeveloped open space shall not be turned into a commercial
enterprise admitting the general public at a fee.
35. For zero lotline projects where detached dwelling units are to be constructed upon a
lot line, a five-foot maintenance easement shall be provided on the adjacent lot, along,
and parallel to, the zero lotline dwelling. The easement shall grant access to the
owner of the zero lot line dWelling for purposes of maintaining the zero lot line wall.
36. A property owners' association and covenants shall be established to ensure that
common areas are owned and maintained by Planned Unit Development property
owners.
a. The homeowners association must be established beforethe homes are sold;
b. Membership must be mandatory for eachhome buyer and any successive
buyer;
c. The openspace restrictions must be permanent, not just for a period of years;
d. The association must be responsible for liability insurance, local taxes, and the
maintenance of recreational and other facilities;
e. Homeowners must pay their pro rata share of the cost, and the assessment
levied by the association can become a lien on the property if allowed in the
master deed establishing thehomeowners association; and
f. The association must be able to adjust the assessment to meet changed
needs.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMIT
37. All walls, includingscreening and retaining walls, shall be compatible with the approved
architecture and Development Code Standards, andshall be no more than 3 feet in
height in the front setback area, subject to the review and approval of the Community
Development Director.
PRIOR TO RECORDING THE FINAL MAP
38. The applicant shall submit final Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) that
are administered by a subdivision homeowners' association and formed by the applicant
for common areas within the subdivision. The CC&Rs shall preclude privateproperty
owners from utilizing the 25' creeksetback area for private use. The CC&Rs shall be
reviewed and approved by the City Attorney and recorded with the final map.
39. A landscaping and irrigation plan shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect
subject to review and approval by the CommunityDevelopment and Parks and
Item 9.b. - Page 57
RESOLUTION NO. 3921
PAGE 9
Recreation Departments. The landscaping plan shall include the following for all public
street frontages and common landscaped areas:
1) Tree staking, soil preparation and planting detail;
2) The use of landscaping to screen ground-mounted utility and mechanical
equipment;
3) The required landscaping and improvements. This includes:
i. Deep root planters shall be included in areas where trees are within five
feet (5') of asphalt or concrete surfaces and curbs;
ii. Water conservation practicesincluding the use of low flow heads, drip
irrigation, mulch, gravel, drought tolerant plants and mulches shall be
incorporated into the landscaping plan; and
iii. All slopes 2:1 or greater shall have jute mesh, nylon mesh or equivalent
material.
iv. An automated irrigation system.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY
40. All fencing shall be installed.
PARKSAND RFCRFATION DFPARTMFNT CONDITIONS
41. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Ordinance 521 C.S., the Community
Tree Ordinance.
42. Linear deep root barriers shall be used for all trees within six feet (6') of curb, gutter or
sidewalks.
43. All street front trees shall be 24-inch box andshall be located a minimum of one (1) tree
for every seventy-fivefeet (75') of street frontage.
44. Prior to issuance of building permit, the applicant shall submit a trail improvement
plan for the pedestrian trail located within the creek setback area.
BUILDING AND FIRF DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS
LJBCfLJFC
45. The project shall comply with the most recent editions of the California State Fire and
Building Codes and the Uniform Building and Fire Codes as adopted by the City of
Arroyo Grande.
46. The project shall provide complete compliance with State and Federal disabled access
requirements. Per S.B. 1025, 10% of the primary entry levels of multistoried dwelling
units must comply with the HCD's accessibility provisions.
47. The applicant shall show all setback areas for each lot on the tentative tract map prior
to map recordation.
Item 9.b. - Page 58
RESOLUTION NO. 3921
PAGE 10
FIRF I ANF'S
48. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall post designated
fire lanes, per Section 22500.1 of the California Vehicle Code.
49. All fire lanes rnust be posted and enforced, per Police Department and Fire Department
guidelines.
FIRE FI OWfFIRF HYDRANTS
50. Project shall have a fire flow based on the California Fire Code Appendix III-A.
51. Prior to bringing combustibles on site, fire hydrants shall be installed per Fire
Department and Public Works Department standards. Locations shall be approved by
the Fire Chief.
FIRF SPRINKI FRS
52. Prior to Occupancy, all buildings must be fully sprinklered per Building and Fire
Department guidelines.
53. The project shall provide Fire Department approved access or sprinkler system per
National Fire Protection Association Standards 13d or 13R as appropriate.
OPTICOM DFVICF
54. An opticom traffic signal pre-emption device shall be installed that meets Building and
Fire Department requirements as determined by theDirector of Building & Fire for traffic
signal at West Branch Street and Oak Park Boulevard.
ARANDONMF'NTfNON-CONFORMING
55. Prior to issuance of a grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first, the
applicant shall show proof of properly abandoning all non-conforming items such as
septic tanks, wells, underground piping and other undesirable conditions.
OTHFR APPROVAl S
56. The project shall comply with Federal andlocal flood management policies.
57. Any review costs generated by outside consultants shall be paid by the applicant.
Item 9.b. - Page 59
RESOLUTION NO. 3921
PAGE 11
PUB) IC WORKS nEPARTMENT CONDITIONS
All Public Works Department conditions of approval as listed below are to be complied with
prior to recording the map or finalizing the permit, unless specifically noted otherwise.
58. Fees - The applicant shall pay all applicable City fees at the time they are due. (For
your information, the "Procedure for Protesting Fees, Dedications, Reservations or
Exactions" is provided below).
PROCEDURE FOR PROTESTING FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR
EXACTIONS:
A) Any party may protest the imposition of any fees, dedications, reservations, or other
exactions imposed on a development project, for the purpose of defraying all or a
portion of the cost of public facilities related to the development project by meeting
both of the followingrequirements:
1) Tendering any required payment in full or providing satisfactory evidence of
arrangements to pay the fee when due or ensure performance of the conditions
necessary tomeet the requirements of the imposition.
2) Serving written notice on the City Council, which notice shall contain all of the
following information:
a) A statement that the required payment is tendered or will be tendered when
due, or that any conditions which have been imposed are provided for or
satisfied, under protest.
b) A statement informing the City Council of the factualelements of the dispute
and the legal theory forming the basis for the protest.
B) A protest filed pursuant to subdivision (A) shall be filed at the time of the approval or
conditional approval of the development or within 90 days after the date of the
imposition of the fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions to be imposed on
a development project.
C) Any party whofiles a protest pursuant to subdivision (A) may file an action to attack,
review, set aside, void, or annulthe imposition of the fees, dedications reservations, or
other exactions imposed on a development project by a local agency within 180 days
after the delivery of the notice.
D) Approval or conditional approval of a development occurs, for the purposes of this
section, whenthe tentative map, tentative parcel map, or parcel map is approved or
conditionally approved or when the parcel map is recorded if a tentative map or
tentative parcel map is not required.
Item 9.b. - Page 60
RESOLUTION NO. 3921
PAGE 12
E) The imposition of fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions occurs, for the
purposes of this section, when they are imposed or levied on a specific development.
59. Fees to be paid prior to plan approval:
1) Plan checkfor grading plans based on an approved earthwork estimate.
2) Plan checkfor improvement plans based on an approved construction cost
estimate.
3) Permit Fee for grading plans based on an approved earthwork estimate.
4) Inspection fee of subdivision or public works construction plans based on an
approved construction cost estimate.
PURl IC WORKSDEPARTMENT SPECIAl CONDITIONS
All Public Works Department conditions of approval as listed below are to be complied with
prior to recording the map, unless specifically noted otherwise.
60. Relocate the existing water main from James Way to the southern project limits to ten
feet (10') west of the sanitary sewer mainand provide the appropriate fifteen-foot (15')
easement.
61. Abandon the existing water main connection to James wayper the requirements of
the Director of Public Works.
62. The applicant shall extend the sewer main across the project frontage to City
standards and provide the appropriate twenty-foot (20') wide easement due to depth
of line.
63. The applicant shall pay the fair share for the impacts to the following wastewater
capital improvement projects:
a. EI Camino Real Upgrade.
b. Walnut Street Upgrade.
64. The applicant shall overlay James Way from the easterlyproject driveway to Oak Park
Boulevard with 1 y," of asphalt from gutter to gutter.
65. Replace the driveway approach adjacent to Kennedy Club Fitness with City standard
curb, gutter and sidewalk.
66. The applicant shall provide on-site below ground stormwater retardation facilities
designed and constructed to Public Works and Community Development requirements,
and the following:
a. The facilities shall be designed to reduce the peak flow rate from a post-
development 100-year storm.
b. The 100-year basin outflow shall not exceed the criteria provided by the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE).
Item 9.b. - Page 61
RESOLUTION NO. 3921
PAGE 13
c. The 1 DO-year basin outflow shall be limited to a 'level that does not cause the
capacity of existing downstream drainage facilities to be exceeded.
d. The basin design shall include freeboard equal to twenty percent (20%) of the
basin depth, to a minimum of twelve inches (12").
e. The basin shall be fully constructed and functional prior to occupancy for any
building permit within the project.
f. The basin shall be maintained by a homeowner's association. The City shall
approve the related language in theassociation CC&Rs prior to recordation.
67. The applicant shall provide access from top of bank for creek maintenance.
PlJRllC WORKS OFPARTMFNT STANOARO CONDITIONS
GFNERAI CONOITIONS
68. Clean all streets, curbs, gutters and sidewalks at the end of the day's operations or as
directed by the Director of Public Works.
69. Perform construction activities during normal business hours (Monday through Friday, 7
A.M. to 5 P.M.) for noise and inspection purposes. The developer or contractor shall
refrain from performing any work other than site maintenance outside of these hours,
unless an emergency arises or approved by the Director of Public Works. The City may
hold the developer or contractor responsible for any expenses incurred by the City due
to workoutside of these hours.
IMPROVEMENT PI ANS
70. All project improvements shall be designed by a registered civil engineer in the State of
California and constructed in accordance with the City of Arroyo Grande Standard
Drawings and Specifications.
71. Submit four (4) full-size paper copies, one (1) full-size mylar copy, and one (1) electronic
copy on CD in AutoCAD of approved improvement plans for inspection purposes during
construction.
72. Submit as-built plans at the completion of the project or, improvements as directed by
the Director of Public Works. One (1) set of mylar prints and an electronic version on
CD in AutoCAD format shall be required.
73. The followingImprovement plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and
approved by the Public Works Department:
1) Grading, drainage and erosion control,
2) Street paving, curb, gutter and sidewalk,
3) Public utilities,
4) Water and sewer,
5) Landscaping and irrigation,
Item 9.b. - Page 62
RESOLUTION NO. 3921
PAGE 14
6) Any other improvements as required by the Director of Public Works.
74. Landscape and irrigation plans are required for landscaping within the public right of
way, and shall be approvedby the Community Development and Parks and Recreation
Departments. In addition, The Director of Public Works shall approve any landscaping
or irrigation within a public right of way or otherwise to be maintained by the City.
75. Improvement plans shall include plan and profile of existing and proposed streets,
utilities and retaining walls.
76. The site plan shall include the following:
1) The location and size of all existing and proposed water, sewer, and storm
drainage facilities within the project site and abutting streets or alleys.
2) The location, quantity and size of all existing and proposed sewer laterals.
3) The location, size and orientation of all trashenclosures.
4) All existing and proposed parcel lines and easements crossing the property.
5) The location and dimension of all existing and proposed paved areas.
6) The location of all existing and proposedpublic or private utilities.
WATFR
77. Whenever possible, all water mains shall be looped to prevent dead ends. The Director
of Public Works must grant permission to dead end water mains.
78. Construction water is available at the corporate yard. The City of Arroyo Grandedoes
not allow the use of hydrant meters.
79. Each parcel shall have separate water meters. Duplex servicelines shall be used if
feasible.
80. Lots using fire sprinklers shall have individual service connections. Ifthe units are to be
fire sprinkled, a fire sprinkler engineer shall determine the size of the water meters.
81. Existing water services to be abandoned shall be properly abandoned and capped at
the main per the requirements of the Director of Public Works.
82. The applicant shall complete measures to neutralize the estimated increase in water
demand created by the project by either:
1) Implement an individual water program consisting of retrofitting existing off-site
high-flow plumbing fixtures with low flow devices. The calculations shall be
submitted to the Director of Public Works for review and approval. The proposed
individual water program shall be submitted to the City Council for approval prior
to implementation; OR,
2) The applicant may pay an in lieu fee of $2,200 for each new residential unit.
Item 9.b. - Page 63
RESOLUTION NO. 3921
PAGE 15
83. All units to be sprinklered shall have individual water services.
84. The on-site water systems that supply water to fire hydrants shall be a public facility.
This will require public improvement plans and dedication of a fifteen-foot (15') wide
easement.
SFWER
85. Each parcel shall be provided a separate sewer lateral.
86. Both units on each parcel will utilize the samesewer lateral.
87. All new sewer mains must be a minimum diameter of 8".
88. All sewer laterals within the public right of way must have a minimum slope of 2%.
89. All sewer mains or laterals crossing or parallel to public water facilities shall be
constructed in accordance with CaliforniaState Health Agency standards.
90. Existing water laterals to be abandoned shall be properly abandoned and capped at the
main per the requirements of the Director of Public Works.
91. The applicant shall obtain approval from the South County Sanitation District for the
development's impact to District facilities prior to final recordation of the map.
PllBIIC lJTlIlTIFS
92. Install all new public utilities as under ground facilities in accordance with Section
16.68.050 of the Development Code.
93. Underground improvements shall be installed prior to street paving.
94. Submit all improvement plans to the publicutility companies for approval and comment.
Utility comments shall be forwarded to the Director of Public Works for approval. All
utility companies shall sign the improvement plans prior to final submittal.
95. Submit the Final Map to the public utility companies for review and comment. Utility
comments shallbe forwarded to the Director of Public Works for approval.
96. Prior to approving any building permit within the project for occupancy, all public utilities
shall be operational.
STREETS
97. Obtain approval from the Director of Public Works prior to excavating in any street
recently over-laid or slurry sealed. The Director of Public Works shall approve the
Item 9.b. - Page 64
RESOLUTION NO. 3921
PAGE 16
method of repair of any such trenches, butshall not be limited to an overlay, slurry seal,
or fog seal.
98. All street repairs shall be constructed to City standards.
99. All trenching in City streets shall utilize saw cutting. Any over cuts shallbe cleaned and
filledwith epoxy.
100. Street structural sections shall be determined by an R-Value soil test, but shall not be
less than 3" of asphalt and 6" of Class II AS.
ClJR8 GlJTTFR ANO SIOFWAI K
101. Repair or replace any cracked or broken curb, gutter and sidewalk along the project
frontage with James Way.
102. Utilize saw cuts for all repairs made in curb, gutter, and sidewalk.
103. Install tree wells for all trees planted adjacent to curb, gutter and sidewalk to prevent
damage due to root growth.
GRAOING
104. Perform all grading in conformance with the City Grading Ordinance.
105. Submit a preliminary soils report prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and supported
by adequate test borings. All earthwork design and grading shall be performed in
accordance with the approved soils report.
106. Submit all retaining wall calculations for review and approvalby the Director of Public
Works for walls not constructed per City Standards. All retaining walls subject to
vehicular loading shall be designed for H20-44 loading.
ORAINAGE
107. All drainage facilities shall be designed to accommodate a 100-year storm flow.
108. All drainage facilities shall be in accordance with the Drainage Master Plan.
109. The project is in Drainage Zone "C" and allows for drainage to thecreek.
110. The applicant shall install an in-line filtration system to remove hydrocarbons,
sedimentation and pollutants from stormwater prior to discharging to Meadow Creek.
111. The grading and drainage plans shall be reviewed by theCoastal San Luis Obispo
Resource Conversation District. The applicant shall reimbursethe City for this review.
Item 9.b. - Page 65
RESOLUTION NO. 3921
PAGE 17
DEOICATIONS AND FASFMFNTS
112. All easements, abandonments, or similardocuments to be recorded as a document
separate from a map, shall be prepared by the applicant on 8 1/2 x 11 City standard
forms, and shall include legal descriptions, sketches, closure calculations, and a current
preliminary title report. The applicant shall be responsible for all required fees, including
any additional required City processing.
113. Abandonment of public streets and public easements shall be listed on thefinal map, in
accordance with Section66499.20 of the Subdivision Map Act.
114. Street tree planting and maintenance easements shall be dedicated adjacent to all
street right of ways. Street tree easements shall be a minimum of 10 feet beyond the
right of way, except that street tree easements shall exclude the area covered by public
utility easements.
115. Easements shall be dedicated to the public on the map, or other separate document
approved by the City, for the following:
a. Sewer easements as described in theseconditions of approval. The
easements shall be a minimum of fifteen feet (15') wide.
b. Water easements as described in these conditions of approval. The
easements shall be a minimum of fifteen feet (15') wide.
116. A Public Utility Easement (PUE) shall be dedicated a minimum 6 feet wide adjacent to
all street right of ways. The PUE shall be wider where necessary for the installation or
maintenance of the public utility vaults, pads, or similar facilities.
117. A blanket Public Utility Easement (PUE) shall be dedicated over the drive isles and
parking areas.
PFRMITS
118. Obtain an encroachment permit prior to performing any of the following:
1) Performing work in the City right of way,
2) Staging work in the City right of way,
3) Stockpiling material in the City right of way,
4) Storing equipment in the City right of way.
119. Obtain a grading permit prior to commencement of any grading operations on site.
AGREE=MFNTS
120. Inspection Agreement: Prior to approval of an improvement plan, the applicant shall
enter into an agreement with the City for inspection of the required improvements.
Item 9.b. - Page 66
RESOLUTION NO. 3921
PAGE 18
121. Subdivision Improvement, Agreement: The applicant shall enter into an agreement
for the completion and guarantee of improvements required. The agreement shall be on
a form acceptable to the City.
122. Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions: The subdivider shall prepare project
CC&Rs for maintenance and repair of all privately owned improvements. The CC&Rs
shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Attorney and the Director of
Public Works.
IMPROVFMFNT SFCIJRITIFS
123. All improvement securities shall be of a form as set forth in Development Code Section
16.68.090, Improvement Securities.
124. Submit an engineer's estimate of quantities for public improvements for review by the
Director of Public Works.
125. Provide financial security for the following, to be based upon a construction cost
estimate approved by the Director of Public Works:
1) Faithful Performance: 100% of the approved estimated cost of all subdivision
improvements.
2) Labor and Materials: 50% of the approved estimated cost of all subdivision
improvements.
3) One Year Guarantee: 10% of the approved estimated cost of all subdivision
improvements. This bond is required prior to acceptance of the subdivision
improvements.
4) Monumentation: 100% of the approved estimated cost of placement of all
subdivision monuments.
OTHFR DOCIIMFNTATION
126. Preliminary Title Report: A current preliminary title report shall be submitted to the
Director of Public Works prior to checking the map.
127. Subdivision Guarantee: A current subdivision guarantee shall be submitted to the
Director of Public Works prior to checking the final submittal of the map.
128. Tax Certificate: The applicant shall furnish a certificate from the tax collector's office
indicating that there are no unpaid taxes or special assessments against the property.
The applicant may be required to bond for any unpaid taxes or liens against the
property. This shall be submitted prior to placing the map on the City Council agenda
for approval.
Item 9.b. - Page 67
RESOLUTION NO. 3921
PAGE 19
PRIOR TO ISSlJlNG A BUll DING PERMIT
129. The Final Map shall be recorded with all pertinent conditions of approval satisfied.
PRIOR TO ISStJlNG A CFRTIFICATF OF OCCIJPANCY
130. All utilities shall be operational.
131. All essential project improvements shall be constructed prior to occupancy. Non-
essential improvements, guaranteed by an agreement and financial securities, may be
constructed after occupancy as directed by theDirector of Public Works.
132. Prior to the final 10% of occupancies for the project are issued, all improvements shall
be fully constructed and accepted by the City.
MITIGATION MFASlJRFS
A negative declaration with mitigation measures hasbeen adopted for this project. The
following mitigation measures shall be implemented as conditions of approval and shalL be
monitored by the appropriate City department or responsible agency. The applicant shall be
responsible for verification in writing by the monitoring department or agency that the
mitigation measures have been implemented.
Mitigation Measures:
MITIGATION MFAStJRES'
MM 1.1: The applicant shall submit a lighting plan verifying that all exterior lighting
for the development is directed downward and does not create spill or glare to
adjacent properties and riparian habitat.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - COD; Police Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
MM 1.2: The applicant shall develop design alternatives for thecondominium
stairway housing for Architectural Review Committee (ARC) review and approval.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - COD
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
MM 1.3: The applicant shall submit final exterior colors and materials of the town
homes and condominiums for ARC approval.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - COD
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
Item 9.b. - Page 68
RESOLUTION NO. 3921
PAGE 20
MM 3.1: All dust control measures listed below (MM 3.2 - 3.6) shall be followed
during construction of the project and shall be shown on grading and buildingplans.
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. The name and telephone number of such person(s) shall be provided to the APCD
prior to land use clearance for map recordation and finished grading of the area.
MM 3.2: During construction, water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used to
keep all areas of vehicle movement damp enough to prevent airborne dustfrom leaving
the site. At a minimum, this would include wetting down such areas in the later morning
and after work is completed for the day and whenever wind exceeds 15 miles per hour.
Reclaimed (non-potable) water shall be used whenever possible.
MM 3.3: Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or
treated with soil bindersto prevent dust generation.
MM 3.4: All vehicles hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be
covered or should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance
between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with CVC. Section23114.
MM 3.5: Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads on to
streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site. Vehicle speed for all
construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the
construction site.
MM 3.6: Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried on to
adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water should be used where
feasible.
MM 3.7: To mitigate the diesel PM generated during the construction phase, all
construction equipment shall be properly maintained and tuned according to
manufacturer's specifications.
The measures below (MM 3.8 - 3.10) shall be clearly identified in the project bid
specifications so the contractors bidding on the project can include the purchase and
installation costs in their bids.
MM 3.8: All 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 California Air
Resources Board (ARB) motor vehicle diesel fuel.
MM 3.9: To the maximum extent feasible, the use of diesel construction equipment
shall meet the ARB's 1996 certification standard foroff-road heavy-duty diesel engines.
Item 9.b. - Page 69
RESOLUTION NO. 3921
PAGE 21
MM 3.10: Prior to any grading activities at the site, the project proponent shall
ensure that a geologic evaluation is conducted to determine if Naturally Occurring
Asbestos (NOA) is present within the area that will be disturbed. If NOA is not present,
an exemption request must be filed with the APCD. If NOA is found at the site. the
applicant must comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos Air Toxins Control
Measure (A TCM) regulated under by the California Air Resources Board (ARB).
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Opemtional Phase Emissions
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept., Building
and Fire Department
Prior to issuance of Grading Permit and during
construction
MM 3.11: To encourage walking within the development and provide a safer
pedestrian environment, the applicant shall use textured and/or colored concrete at
pedestriancrossings.
MM 3.12: Provide continuous sidewalks separated fromthe roadway by landscaping
with adequate lighting.
MM 3.13: Provide shade tree planting along southern exposures of buildings to
reduce summer cooling needs.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, Public Works Dept.,
and Building & Fire Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
MM4.1: The applicant shall revegetate the 0.18-acre mitigation area as outlined in
the "Wetland Mitigation Plan" prepared by the Morrow Group, Inc., dated May 21, 2002.
Any plants that do not survive shall be replaced in kind and monitored until established.
Temporary irrigation shall be provided for all planting areas for three (3) years or until
plants are established. An independent consultant specializing in biological resources
shall be hired by the City and paid for by the applicant to monitor the mitigation for a
minimum of five (5) years.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD; ACOE
Installation of plant material shall occur before
issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Monitoring of
plants shall occur for at least 5 years.
Item 9.b. - Page 70
RESOLUTION NO. 3921
PAGE 22
MM 4.2: All non-native plant species shall be eliminated fromthe 25' wide creek
setback area.
Responsible Party:
MonitoringAgency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD
Prior to a Certificate of Occupancy
MM 4.3: The developer shall record an irrevocable offer of dedication open space
agreement and twenty-five foot (25') creek easement on the property measured from
top of bank. No structures shall occur within 25' creek setback area.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, Public Works Dept.
Prior to Grading Permit
MM 4.4: Siltation/sedimentation control measures shall be implemented along the
entire eastern property boundary prior to site construction. Such control measures shall
include sediment fences and/or hay bales placed into the crux of thebank of Meadow
Creek. Erosion/sediment control barricades shall be placed around the perimeter of
each construction zone with the potential to drain to Meadow Creek.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.
Prior to Grading Permit
MM 4.5: Soil shall not be stockpiled in areas located near the eastern property
margin adjacent to Meadow Creek, or in areas that have potential to drain to Meadow
Creek. Stockpiled soil should be properly covered at all times to avoid wind and water
erosion, and consequent siltation to Meadow Creek.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.
During grading activities
MM4.6:No heavy equipment shall be allowed within the Meadow Creek corridor.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.
During grading
MM 5.1: The note below shall be placed on the grading and improvement plans for
the project:
In the event that during grading, construction or development of the project, and
archeological resources are uncovered, all work shall be halteduntil the City has
reviewedthe resources for their significance. If human remains (burials) are
Item 9.b. - Page 71
RESOLUTION NO. 3921
PAGE 23
encountered, the County Coroner (781-4513) shall be contacted immediately. The
applicant may be required to provide archaeological studies and/or mitigation
measures."
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of grading permit and during grading
activities
MM 6.1: To address specific conditions concerninggrading, utility trenches,
foundations, retaining walls and drainage, the contractor or builder shall adhere to the
mitigation measures identified in theGeotechnical Engineering report by Earth
Systems Pacific dated January 29, 2001. An updated soils report shall be submitted
with deeper borings. A slope stability analysis shall also be prepared.
MM 6.2: Construction operations, especially grading operations, shall be confined
as much as possible to the dry season, in order to avoid erosion of disturbed soils.
MM 6.3: Permanent soil control measures identified in the landscape plan shall be
implemented as soon as possible followingcompletion of soil disturbing activities.
MM6.4: Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater
than one month after initial grading should be sown with fast-germinating native grass
seed and watered until vegetation is established.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of grading permit and during
construction
MM 8.1: Construction activities shall be restricted to the hours of 8 a.m. and 6 p.m.
Mondaythrough Friday. No construction shall occur on Saturday or Sunday.
Equipment maintenance and servicing shall be confined to the same hours. Tothe
greatest extent possible, grading and construction activitiesshould occur during the
middle of the day to minimize the potential for disturbance of neighboring noise sensitive
uses.
MM 8.2: All construction equipment utilizing internal combustion engines shall be
required to have mufflers that are in good condition. Stationary noise sources shall be
located at least 300 feet from occupieddwelling units unless noise reducing engine
housing enclosures or noise screens are provided by the contractor.
MM 8.3: Equipment mobilization areas, water tanks, and equipment storage areas
shall be placed in a central location as far from existing residences as feasible.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, Public Works Dept.
During construction
Item 9.b. - Page 72
RESOLUTION NO. 3921
PAGE 24
MM 9.1: Fifteen percent (15%) of new units constructed shall be sold to qualified
families earning a moderate-income (based on the City's affordable housing
standards). The developer shall pay an affordable housing in-lieu fee for any fraction
of a unit. An affordable housing agreement between the City and developer shall be
recorded that stipulates the details of the terms and conditions for producing and
selling affordable ownership housing within the project. Said agreement shall be
reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director and City Attorney,
and shall be recorded prior to recordation of the final tract map.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, City Attorney
Prior to recordation oftheFinal Tract Map
MM 10.1: The applicant shall pay the mandated Lucia Mar Unified School District
impact fee.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Building & Fire Dept.; Lucia
Mar Unified SchoolDistrict
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
MM 11.1: The developer shall pay all applicable City park development and impact
fees.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Building & Fire Dept.; PR&F
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
MM 11.2: The applicant shall submit a path/trail improvement plan.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - PR&F
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
MM 12.1: The developer shall pay the City's Traffic Signalization and Transportation
Facilities Impact fees.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Building & Fire Dept.; Public
Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
MM 13.1: The applicant shall pay the project's proportionate share of South SanLuis
Obispo County Sanitation District (SSLOCSD) sewer upgrade impact fees.
Responsible Party:Developer
Item 9.b. - Page 73
RESOLUTION NO. 3921
PAGE 25
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
City of Arroyo Grande -Public Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
MM 13.2: The developer shall pay the City's sewer hookup fees and fair share of
sewer upgrade impact fees.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Building & Fire Dept.; Public
Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
MM 14.1: The applicant shall submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
SWPPP) and Erosion Control Plan that specifies the implementation of Best
Management Practices to avoid and minimize water quality impacts as required by the
Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). At a minimum, the SWPP and
Erosion Control Plan shall include:
Designation of equipment and supply staging and storage areas at least
150 feet from theoutside edge of the Meadow Creek 25-foot setback
area. All vehicle parking, routine equipment maintenance, fueling, minor
repair, etc., and soil and material stockpile, shall be done only in the
designated staging area.
Major vehicle/equipment maintenance, repair, and equipment washing
shall be performed off site.
A wet and dry spill clean up plan that specifies reporting requirements
and immediate clean up to ensure no residual soil, surface water or
groundwater contamination would remain after clean up.
Designating concrete mixer washout areas at least 150 feet from outside
edge of the Meadow Creek 25-foot setback with the use of appropriate
containment or reuse practices.
A temporary and excess fill stockpile and disposal plan that ensures that
no detrimental affects to receiving waters would result.
Requiring all grading and application of concrete, asphalt, etc. to occur
during the dry season from April 15 to October 15.
Required site preparation and erosioncontrol BMPs for any work that
may need to be completed afterOctober 15.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.;
RWQCB
Prior to issuance of Grading Permit
MM 14.2: An independent consultant specializing in biological resources shall be
hired by the City and paid for by the applicant to monitorthe restoration of the riparian
corridor for a minimum of seven (7) years.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.
Item 9.b. - Page 74
RESOLUTION NO. 3921
PAGE 26
Timeframe:Prior to issuance of Grading Permit
MM 14.3: To reduceerosionhazards due to construction activities, grading shall
be minimized, and project applicants shall use runoff and sediment control structures,
and/or establish a permanent plant cover on side slopes following construction.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of Grading Permit
MM 14.4: Work shall be completed during the dry season (April 15 to October 15)
to reduce active construction erosion to the extent feasible. If construction extends
into the wet weather season, a qualified hydrogeologist or civil engineer shall prepare
a drainage and erosion control plan that addresses construction measures to prevent
sedimentation and erosion of Meadow Creek.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of Grading Permit and during
construction
MM 14.5: Erosion control and bank stabilization measures shall be implemented to
ensure that thecreek bankdoes not erode. In addition, alternative bank protection
methods, such as restoration of native vegetation, root wads, or other bioengineering
methods of stabilization, shall be used. In order to reduce long-term effects of soil
compaction and changes in topography, construction vehicles and personnel shall not
enter the low flow channel and wet areas. Construction matsand other devices shall
be used to reduce impacts associated with soil compaction.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.
During construction
MM 14.6: All temporary fill placed during project construction shall be removed at
projectcompletion and the area restored to approximate pre-project contours and
topography.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
MM 14.7: No construction debris or materials shall be allowed to enter the creek
bed, either directly or indirectly. Stockpiles should be kept at least 50' fromthe
topological top of bank to prevent material from entering the creek bed.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.
Item 9.b. - Page 75
RESOLUTION NO. 3921
PAGE 27
Timeframe:During construction
MM 14.8: The project shall comply with the City's required water conservation
measures including any applicable measures identified in any applicable City Water
Conservation Plans.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
MM 14.9: The project shall install best available technology for low-flow toilets,
showerheads and hot water recirculation systems.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande -Building Dept.
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
MM 14.10: The final landscape plan shall show low-water use/drought resistant
species and drip irrigation systems rather than spray irrigation systems.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Parks, Recreation and
Facilities Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
MM 14.11: The project plans shall include methods for collecting surface run-off
from the site for use on landscaped areas (minimum of 25% of landscaped areas) to
reduce water use and minimize run-off to the extent feasible.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande -Public Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
MM 14.12: Inline filters shall be installed for stormwater prior to creekoutfalls.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande -Public Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
Item 9.b. - Page 76
OFFICIAL CERTIFICATION
I, KELLY WETMORE, City Clerk of the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis
Obispo, State of California, do herebycertify under penalty of perjury, that Resolution
No. 3921 is a true, full, and correct copy of said Resolution passed and adopted at a
regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande on the 9th day of May
2006.
WITNESS my handand the Seal of the City of Arroyo Grande affixed this 10th day of
May 2006.
KELLY
Item 9.b. - Page 77
ATTACHMENT 2
.r-.
i"
'
f J l lJ ,l;:
·1
I: "' ~ fl1llj ~l:1:: r• i . D "~i S8:i I .. q H! !I ! J c~e p· ·Ill t:.1 .5 :a£ ... ~'i'"' ~It!t!I ·r •; ~ ug !~ iii >nc:r-I f c~ .... 1: ...... I . i rrn"'• . ... tt• Ji p ~= • fl: I ti
Item 9.b. - Page 78
(
FINAL MINUTES
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ARC)
REGULAR MEETING
MONDAY, JULY 1, 2013
ATTACHMENT 3
The meeting of the City of Arroyo Grande Architectural Review Committee was called to
order at 2:30 p.m. by Chair Warren Hoag.
I
ROLL CALL: Present were Committee Members Michael Peachey, Vice Chair Tom
Goss, and Chair Warren Hoag. Committee Member Randy Russom and Chuck Fellows
were absent.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Michael Peachey made a motion, seconded by Tom Goss,
to approve minutes from June 17, 2013 as presented. The motion was carried on a 3-0-
1 voice vote:
Tom Goss -Yes
Chuck Fellows -Absent
,,.--. Warren Hoag -Yes
Mike Peachey-Yes
Randy Russom -Absent
Committee Member Randy Russom arrived at 2:35 p.m.
I. PUBLIC COMMENT: NONE.
II. PROJECTS:
A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002, VARIANCE 12-002 & LOT LINE MERGER
12-001; APPLICANT -RUSSELL SHEPPEL; REPRESENTATIVE -STEVE
RIGOR; LOCATION -880 OAK PARK BOULAVARD (ACCESS FROM JAMES
WAY)
Staff Contact: Matt Downing ·
Assistant Planner Aileen Nygaard presented the staff report for the project.
Committee members asked questions and discussed the creek setbacks of 35 feet.
_,..-Tom Goss inquired about the current creek setbacks of 50 feet. The project was
\, __ ) originally approved at 25 feet. He wanted to know if the proposed 35 feet setbacks were
Item 9.b. - Page 79
ARC MINUTES
JULY 1, 2013
PAGE2
due to the ordinance change. He went on to ask about the pedestrian path. The
applicant clarified and stated it would be installed by the applicant and dedicated to the
City.
Committee Member Michael Peachey wanted to know the process of the creek setback
approval. He went on to question if the architecture of the structure would have to be
altered if setbacks were not approved. The applicant clarified and informed the
Committee that the vested tract map is still very much alive and the project could
technically be built at 25 feet. The applicant had worked with staff and agreed to 35 feet.
Committee Member Randy Russom questioned the appropriateness of the 8% parking
reduction. The applicant stated that Matt Downing was working on verifying the shared
parking calculations.
The discussion of parking continued and the Committee tried to ascertain the total
percent of parking reduction. It was stated that the applicant could have up to a 20%
reduction. Tom Goss came up with a rough calculation and concluded that as the
project currently stands it has just over a 10% reduction in parking.
/,,..---..........._\
( r
Tom moved on to question landscaping. He inquired about the landscaping for the (-.
townhomes. The applicant explained they are in the process of producing a landscaping
plan. It will include native plants and various LID techniques. Tom then questioned the
height of the fence in the Alzheimer units. The applicant stated the fence would be 6-7
feet high with no fencing around the assisted living units in the portion closest to James
Way.
Discussion moved on to the number of parking spaces required per bed. Parking in the
Alzheimer area will allow for one space per three beds. The Committee wanted to know
how parking would be affected with the loss of 14 spaces. It was concluded that the loss
of the 14 spaces would not have an effect as spaces would be gained elsewhere.
Randy went on to question what, if anything could be done in the creek setbacks. He
stated that even fencing, cantilevers and decks could potentially interfere with the
riparian habitat.
Chair Warren Hoag questioned if parking would be signed to indicate dedicated spaces.
The applicant stated that signs would be placed to inform Kennedy patrons and that
Kennedy is aware they will need to figure out a parking plan.
Tom brought up the monument sign located on James Way. He suggested it either be .·
moved or renamed to accurately depict the assisted living facility. (_'~-'
Item 9.b. - Page 80
ARC MINUTES
JULY 1, 2013
PAGE3
r,.--·\ Comments:
\, I
(~----
\. ~
,-.
( I ·-.. ___ ./
All present Committee Members really liked the project and feel it is needed. All
expressed concern over creek setbacks in terms of meeting criterion stipulated by
California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Michael and Warren wanted to see the two
blank walls facing James Way addressed though windows or some other architectural
feature. Michael expressed a desire to see the roof ridge line broken up and corbels to
support cantilevers. He went on to state the bronze colored windows are not appealing.
Tom Goss made a motion, seconded by Michael Peachey, to recommend to the
Planning Commission approval of the project with the following recommendations:
1. Variance setback must be approved by California Department of Fish and
Wildlife;
2. Lot merger be approved;
3. The lower sign to identify the plaza shall either be retitled, removed or relocated
or a new sign shall be placed at the top entrance near Oak Park Boulevard to
indicate the professional center and/or fitness club;
4. In the assisted living area, windows and details shall be placed at the ends of the
building and the ridge line should have cupolas installed for venting;
5. Details be placed at gable ends of townhomes;
6. Landscape plan for town homes be submitted for ARC review;
The motion was carried on a 4-0 voice vote:
Tom Goss-Yes
Chuck Fellows -Absent
Warren Hoag -Yes
Mike Peachey-Yes
Randy Russom -Yes
. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW 13-002; APPLICANT -VILLAGE CENTRE, KIMO
KEY; REPRESENTATIVE -ROBIN McDONALD; LOCATION -130-154
WES
Staff Contact: Aileen
Assistant Planner Aileen Nygaard p nted the staff report for the project.
Tom Goss wanted clarification on the proposed a s. All frames except Serendipity
will be loose below frame. He also questioned t hasing of the painting.
Representative Robin McDonald stated that all painting will be at the same time.
Item 9.b. - Page 81
ATTACHMENT 4
ACTION MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 1, 2013
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 215 EAST BRANCH STREET
ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Ruth called the Regular Planning Commission meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
2. ROLLCALL
Planning Commission:
Staff Present:
3. FLAG SALUTE
Commissioners Kristen Bameich, John Keen, Jennifer Martin, Lisa
Sperow, and Chair Elizabeth Ruth were present.·
Assistant Planner Matt Downing, Community Development
Director Teresa McClish, Deputy City Attorney Jon Ansolabehere,
and Secretary Debbie Weichinger were present.
Chair Ruth led the Flag Salute.
4. AGENDA REVIEW
None
5. COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS
None
6. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
The Commission received the following material after preparation of the agenda:
1. A letter dated September 30, 2013 from Ray Bunnell regarding Item 8.a. Conditional Use
Permit 12-002, Variance Case No. 12-004, Amended Vesting Tentative Tract Map 12-001
(T2713).
7. CONSENT AGENDA
Action: Commissioner Bameich moved, and Commissioner Keen seconded the motion to
approve Consent Agenda Item 7.a. September 17, 2013 minutes, with the following
modification: page 3, 11. COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS replace the word "out" with "from
home". The motion passed on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Bameich, Keen, Martin, Sperow, Ruth
None
None
7.a. Consideration of Approval of Minutes
Action: Approved the minutes of the Regular Planning Commission meeting of September. 17,
2013 as modified.
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
8.a. Consideration of Conditional Use Permit Case No. 12-002Nariance Case No. 12-
(___ 004 Amended Tentative Tract Map Case No. 12-001; Construction of a 55,000
~-)
Item 9.b. - Page 82
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
OCTOBER 1, 2013
PAGE2
square-foot memory care facility and eight· (8) town homes; Location -880 Oak
Park Boulevard; Applicant -Russ Sheppel
Assistant Planner Downing presented the staff report recommending the Planning Commission
adopt a Resolution recommending the City Council approve
Conditional Use Permit Case No. 12-002, Variance Case No. 12-004, and Amended Vesting
Tentative Tract Map Case 12-001. Assistant Planner Downing said that four Conditions of
Approval should be added addressing the concerns of the Fire Chief, including:
1. "The creek side of the care facility building is adjacent to wildland where the opportunity
for conflagration exists. The building shall be built following the Wildland Urban Interface
requirements of the CBC Chapter 7A."
2. "The developer shall provide a fire hydrant on the James Way end of the property at the
location where the existing 8 inch ACP water main was to be abandoned. The Double
Detector Check Valve Assembly (DDCVA) and Fire Department Connection (FDC) shall
be located on the James Way side of the building."
3. "The covered parking area must be fire sprinklered and sized to allow the passage of a
fire apparatus 20 feet in width with 13 feet 6 inch minimum head clearance."
4. "Provide a Fire Department turnaround or provide access through the hotel site subject
to approval by the Fire Chief."
Assistant Planner Downing indicated that the Commission received a letter dated September
30, 2013 from Ray Bunnell, owner, Best Western Casa Grande Inn, supporting the proposed
care facility use; expressed his concern with the proposed design being too large for the site,
and encroaching on his parking and ingress/egress easements. (~\:
Assistant Planner Downing and Community Development Director McClish responded to
questions from the Commission regarding the proposed project.
Chair Ruth opened the public hearing.
Russ Sheppel, Project Applicant, said he has an entitlement to build a mixed use project at the
site; there is no memory care facility in the Five Cities area; the proposed use is the least
impact on parking of anything he could come up with; discussed the travel direction that fire
trucks currently come on site; there is an easement for parking spaces benefitting the hotel;
talked about the wetland mitigation plan; that the elderly are under served; and responded to
questions from the Commission regarding the proposed project.
Steve Rigor, Project Architect, presented the proposed project and responded to questions from
the Commission regarding the proposed project.
The Commission took a break at 8:03 pm and reconvened at 8:14 pm.
John Belsher, attorney representing applicant Russ Sheppel, gave the history of the easements
for the site and the approved project; and said there is a parking agreement between Mr.
Sheppel and Mr. Kennedy.
Mr. Bunnell, owner of Best Western Casa Grande Inn, gave additional history of the easements;
information on the disconnect of his emergency access easement; the hotel was built in 1984;
agreed previously with Mr. Sheppel on going straight out using lower (easterly) driveway to
',.
Item 9.b. - Page 83
c~·
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
OCTOBER 1, 2013
PAGE3
James Way; only agreed to the quit claim in the past; feels Mr. Sheppel wants to over build and
encroach upon his easements; trucks and buses go in and out using the lower driveway; agreed
to the lower access in the past; indicated he is in favor of the care facility; the plan is too big of a
footprint; explanation of previous adjustments to the upper driveway easement; the proposed
town homes wipe out his parking easement due, to townhome driveways; he presented a copy of
a drawing showing an easement which shows a common driveway; should stick with the
approved plan; the easement is for ingress/egress not just for emergency use; wants parking
easement to stay the way it is for his employees as buses on his motel site take up more
parking spaces; and responded to questions from the Commission regarding the proposed
project.
Kevin Kennedy, owner of Kennedy Club Fitness, gave additional history of the property;
indicated some of the parking spaces are non exclusive; supports the care facility; is concerned
about the condominiums; is worried about the non exclusive spaces and development phasing
of new spaces; he has agreements with the motel and church for his employees to park;
concern with employee parking; parking is a nightmare; would like to see non exclusive parking
spaces approved; for the last 11 years the easement has gone straight out the lower driveway;
and responded to questions from the Commission regarding the proposed project.
Mark Pazell, General Manager of Kennedy Club Fitness, said the fire department parks in front
of the front door during emergency responses.
It was the consensus of Mr. Bunnell, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Sheppel and Deputy City Attorney Jon
Ansolabehere to meet regarding the parking and easements.
There were no further comments received, and the public comment period was closed.
The Commission provided the following comments: add LED lights in the Mitigated Negative
Declaration; change the tandem garage to single and move wall back so there is parking in front
of the door; the care facility is needed; maybe townhomes could be reworked; one parking
space in the garage; the legal documents have to be figured out; improve landscaping for new
townhomes; tree species can be discussed when the project comes back before the
Commission; the architectural is beautiful; concern with fire access; not convinced that a truck
could make the proposed tum; the suggested lower driveway ingress only is an issue; suggest
City Engineer look at the turning radius before the next Planning Commission meeting; not in
support of tandem garages; would like to see how the building looks in respect to slopes and
surroundings; would like to see the slopes graphically; concern with the density; the easements
need to be worked out by the parties; concern about the townhomes and need to show
elevations next to the hotel; slope of parking stalls and width of the throat of the driveway
between upper and lower accesses to James Way; would like to see a full size preliminary
grading plan; the multi-family needs more privacy; Yo'.ant Fire Chief concerns addressed;
condominiums might not work apartments may be better; and cannot recommend the project at
this time, as it is, and the item should be continued to allow the applicant time to clarify
easements and address other comments.
Action: Commissioner Barneich moved to continue to a date uncertain Conditional Use Permit
Case No. 12-002/Variance Case No. 12-004 Amended Tentative Tract Map Case No. 12-001;
Construction of a 55,000 square-foot memory care facility and eight (8) townhomes; Location -
Item 9.b. - Page 84
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
OCTOBER 1, 2013
PAGE4
880 Oak Park Boulevard; Applicant -Russ Sheppel. Commissioner Martin seconded, and the
motion passed on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Bameich, Martin, Keen, Sperow, Ruth
None
ABSENT: None
NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEM
TICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS SINCE SEPTEMBER 17 2013
This is notice of administrative decision for Minor Use Permits, including any approvals,
denials or ferrals by the Community Development Director. An administrative decision must
be a ealed called u for review b the Plannin Commission b a ma·ori vote.
None
12. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
None
13. ADJOURNMENT
314 Stillwell Reduction of front setback A A. Nygaard
Drive for new residence
On motion by Commissioner Keen, seco ed by Commissioner Sperow and unanimously
carried, the meeting adjourned at 9:50 p.m.
ATTEST:
DEBBIE WEICHINGER
SECRETARY TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
(Approved at PC Mtg October 15, 2013)
I
~'.
Item 9.b. - Page 85
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
JANUARY 7, 2014
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
ATTACHMENT 5
8.a. CONSIDERATION OF CONDITION,AL USE PERMIT 12-002, VARIANCE 12-
004, AND AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001 (T2713);
LOCATION -880 OAK PARK BOULEVARD (APNs 07-771-053, 007-771-062,
AND 007-771-076); APPLICANT RUSS SHEPPEL
Assistant Planner Downing presented the staff report recommending the Planning Commission
adopt a Resolution recommending the City Council approve Conditional Use Permit No. 12-002,
Variance Case No. 12-004, and Amended Vesting Tentative Tract Map Case No. 12-001.
Assistant Planner Downing responded to questions from . the Commission regarding the
proposed project.
Presiding Officer Keen opened the public hearing.
Steve Rigor, Architect, indicated he worked with the City on.the proposed project and presented
the project to the Commission. Mr. Rigor also responded to questions from the Commission on
the proposed project. .
Russ Sheppel, stated that he already .has an entitlement to build on the site; this is the best plan
he could put together for this site with lowest demand for parking; and indicated the -Planning
Commission issues from the October 2013 meeting have been addressed adequately.
Kevin Kennedy, indicated he had not been invited to any of the meetings with Mr. Bunnell, Mr.
Sheppel and Deputy City Attorney Ansolabehere; he has a 24' easement; and asked the
Commission not to approve the proposed project and that it be sent back to the drawing board.
Fred Glick, attorney for Mr. Bunnell, stated the problems have not been worked out; the parking
easement cannot be moved without Mr. Bunnell's consent; Mr. Bunnell has a complete access
easement; if Mr.· Bunnell does not relocate parking easement they cannot build; and said the
project needs to be redesigned. He further stated that the project approved in 2006 shows
condominiums facing the other way and should be done that way and stated parking is a big
problem.
Dan Scarrey, representative for Mr. Bunnell, stated he is concern with the easements and
desire to preserve the easements.
John Belsher, attorney representing Russ Sheppel, indicated Mr. Kennedy's access will remain;
the desire to park trucks buses is not realistic in the existing easement; the easement issues
involve private parties and will not get resolved by the City; it is the use that requires the least
amount of parking; and asked the Commission to approve the project and send it to the City
Council.
Hearing no further comments, Presiding Officer Keen closed the public hearing.
Community Development Director McClish clarified to the Commission that the assisted living
facility would need one parking space per employee, which would equal twenty spaces.
Item 9.b. - Page 86
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
JANUARY 7, 2014
PAGE3
Deputy City Attorney Ansolabehere stated that if a dispute arises, the City has a responsibility to
process the permit, although as a matter of good planning, the City would want to approve a
project that could be built. Conditions can be made on the forefront. Assistant Planner
Downing stated if we did not consider driveway parking the project would still come in under
their maximum 20% parking reduction for mixed uses.
Commissioner Goss provided the following comments/concerns: the facility is much needed for
the area; parking is an issue for this property; the purpose of the setback for the creek is to try to
maintain and repair riparian features, this project is encroaching upon that; critters will not be
able to go through the wrought iron fenced off area; tandem parking for the townhomes is not
acceptable; agrees with the requirement of 20 spaces for the assisted living employees;
townhomes are not a good fit and should be redesigned; the 8 spaces on the westerly end by
the care facility should be set up for ingress/egress; would like to see as much vegetation
maintained; and overall is in support of the project but would like to see underlying problems
fixed (i.e. easements, townhomes).
Commissioner Sperow provided the following comments/concerns: the easement is a matter
between private parties; tandem parking should not be counted; the townhomes are not a good
fit; likes the assisted living facility; would like townhomes removed; and when considered as a
whole, is not in favor of the project. ·
Commissioner Russom provided the following comments/concerns: the creek setback needs to
be conditioned; fence openings should have reasonable spacing for wildlife; ok with the
proposed access off of James Way due to safety concerns; placement and inclusion of
townhomes is consistent to what is across the creek and provide needed higher density housing
that is more affordable; and parking allotments restricted for the townhomes (i.e. garages)
should not be included in calculating total Plaza parking.
Commissioner Martin provided the following comments/concerns: the parking issue must be
considered in view of the whole complex not just the proposed project; overall the project looks .
good and is a nice addition to the community; ok with townhomes there; ok with the 35' creek
setback; it is important that the documents are depicted accurately on site plan; it would be
helpful if all the changes are consistently depicted on all plan sheets; the easements in dispute
are not in Planning Commission realm.
Commissioner Keen provided the following comments/concerns: he likes the project; want to
approve because of the assisted living; 35' creek setback is a good fit; against tandem parking;
the bottom drive is necessary to keep as ingress only; looking at the topo, it only makes sense
that the townhomes were placed as proposed and if you turn them around it does not work
architecturally as well; pavers may not be a good material in a care facility patio walkway; and
parking is a problem and should not worsen with the project.
Action: Commissioner Martin moved to adopt a resolution entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING THE
CITY COUNCIL APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 12-002, VARIANCE
CASE NO. 12-004, AND AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP CASE NO. 12-001
FOR THE CONSTRUCT/ON OF AN APPROX/MA TEL Y 55,000 SQUARE-FOOT, 69 BED
ASSISTED LIVING/MEMORY CARE FACILITY AND EIGHT (8) TOWNHOMES, LOCATED
AT 880 OAK PARK BOULEVARD · (SOUTHEAST CORNER OF OAK PARK
Item 9.b. - Page 87
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
JANUARY 7, 2014
PAGE4
BOULEVARD/JAMES WAY INTERSECT/ON); APPLIED FOR BY RUSS SHEPPEL", as
modified to add the following Conditions of Approval: vehicular access through the lower
(eastern) driveway be limited to ingress and emergency vehicles due to safety concerns;
proposed directional sign #1 be modified to state that only emergency vehicles may exit through
the lower driveway; proposed direction signs #4 and tl8 be removed; the parking requirement
shall include 20 parking spaces for the employees at the memory care facility and the parking in
the townhome garages not be counted toward total parking. Commissioner Goss seconded,
and the motion passed on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Martin, Goss, Russom, Keen
Sperow
ABSENT: None
The Commission took at break at 8:40 pm and reconvened at 8:50 pm.
CONSIDERATION OF STAFF PROJECT 13-007; RESOLUTION AMENDING
JHE DESIGN GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS FOR DESIGN OVERLAY
TRICT (D-2.11)-TRAFFIC WAY AND STATION WAY
Assistant Plan r Downing presented the staff report recommending the Planning Commission
recommend the ity Council adopt a Resolution amending the Design Guidelines and
Standards for the T ffic Way and Station Way Design Overlay District (D-2.11 ).
Assistant Planner Dow · g responded to questions from the Commission regarding the
proposed project.
Presiding Officer Keen opened e public hearing and upon hearing no comments closed the
public hearing.
Action: Commissioner Sperow move o adopt a resolution entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF TH CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING
THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOL lON APPROVING STAFF PROJECT 13-007;
AMENDING THE DESIGN GUIDELINES A STANDARDS FOR DESIGN OVERLAY
DISTRICT (D-2.11) -TRAFFIC WAY AND T/ON WAY". Commissioner. Russom
seconded, and the motion passed on the following rol
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Sperow, Russom, Goss, Martin, Keen
None
None
9. NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEM
9.a. Election of Officers
Presiding Officer Keen presented the staff report and recommended tha the Planning
Commission elect a Chair and Vice Chair to hold office effective its second meeti in January
2014, and continuing until its second regular meeting in March 2014.
Presiding Officer Keen nominated Jennifer Martin as Chair. Commissioner Sperow secon d.
Item 9.b. - Page 88
I
_j
l
ATTACHMENT 6
' ;~-( .
101 EAST VICTORIA STREET
P.O. BOX 98
SANTA BARBARA, CALIFORNIA 93102
805-963-9532 • FAX 805-966-9801
Penfield&Smith
ENGINEERS SURVEYORS
2051 NORTH SOLAR DRIVE.
SUITE 225
OXNARD, CALIFORNIA 93030
805-983-7499 • FAX 805-983-1826
w.o. 13,326.01
June 2, 1999
City of Arroyo Grande
214 E. Branch Street
Arroyo Grande, CA 93421
Attention:· Mr. Hel71Iy Engen,
Interim Planning Director
City of Arroyo Grande
Community Development Dept.
JUN 0 4 1999
Subject: Traffic Impact Assessment for Conditional Use Permits No. 98-573
(Kennedy) and 98-572 (Sheppel), Arroyo Grande, California
P~nfield & Smith (P&S) has prepared the following traffic assessment of the potential
traffic refa.ted impacts associated with the subject projects. This report identifies the
(~.\)eak hour trip generation for the two project individually and cumulatively.
'~'intersection analysis on an existing and cumulative basis is also provided to evaluate
the level of service and the ability to maintain the City's desired LOS C, on an
irldividual and cumufative basis. The scope of work was coordirlated and approved by
the City of Arroyo Grande prior to the preparation of this study ..
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The City is presently reviewing two development proposals known as Conditional Use
Permit No. 98-573 (Kennedy) and 98-572 (Sheppel). The Kennedy proposal is for the
development of a 19 ,000 square foot health club and 58 parking spaces. The Sheppel
project is to develop an 11,335 square foot office building with 34 parking spaces.
Both of these projects are located at the intersection of Oak Park Boulevard and
James Way. On the project site, a 7 ,560 square foot office buildirlg presently exists.
The January 11, 1999 project site plan is on file in the City Planning Department.
Access to the project site is provided via an existing 26-foot wide drive on James Way.
On-site parking for 155 vehicles is proposed to serve the planned land uses. The
project site plan would maintain the secondary access for the hotel use to the south of
the project site. No access is proposed to Oak Park Boulevard.
EXISTmG CONDITIONS
Land Use
: ..__on the project site, a 7 ,560 square foot commercial office building is constructed and
occupied. To the south of the project site, lies a hotel use with access to Oak Park
Boulevard and to James Way through the project site. To the east lies a vacant
P&S Item 9.b. - Page 89
Mr. Henry Engen
June 2, 199~
Page 2
property with an apartment complex beyond the vacant property. To the north lies
the Four Square Community Church. At the church, a day care/pre-school is
presently open. The peak hours appear to be around 3 PM during the weekdays for ·
the school and on Sundays for the· church use. The Church driveway is located
approximately 30 feet to the east of the project driveway.
Traffic Volumes
The most recent daily traffic counts for Oak Park Boulevard near James Way were
observed in 1996 for the GENCOM development. At that time, the daily traffic volume
was 14,500 ADT. The posted speed limit for Oak ParkBoulevard and James Way is
40 MPH. This portion of James Way is striped to provide bike lanes on both sides of
the street, one travel lane in each direction with a center left turn lane.
The study area for this analysis encompassed the intersections of Oak Park Boulevard
at James Way and at W. Branch Street .. The current intersection level of service and
average delay is 11.0 seconds per vehicle at Level of Service (LOS) B for the W. Branch
Street intersectionI and 11.7 seconds per vehicle/ LOS B for the James Way
intersection2. The City of Arroyo Grande has a significant impact threshold of LOS C
for peak hour intersection operation. The existing traffic volumes on the adjacent
~.
( I
road system are summarized in Exhibit 1. · (
PROJECT TRAFFIC
Typically, the Institute of Transportation Engineers (!TE) provides guidance on the
expected trip generation characteristics for land use as reiated to traffic impact
analysis. For the office component of this traffic analysis, the !TE trip rates provide a
good estimate of the traffic related to this use. For the health club, the ITE source
provides data for one facility. When the ITE trip data is limited, another the trip
generation resource is commonly used. The San Diego Association of Governments
(SANDAG) has a localized summary of trip making data for some unique or other
limited data. Also, for the health club use, P&S has recently completed a similar
analysis for a YMCA and developed trip rates for this type of health club. To
determine the appropriate trip generation for the proposed health club, the available
data was averaged and applied to the proposed square footage. The trip generation
rates used in.this analysis are summarized in Table 1. Once the trip generation rates
were found for the project land uses, they were applied to the proposed building
square footage and the trips generated by them are summarized in Table 2.
As seen in these trip tables, the Kennedy Health Club is expected to generate 452
daily trips with 25 AM peak hour and 28 PM peak hour trips~ The Sheppel Office
building is expected to generate 124 daily trips with 18 AM peak hour and 17 PM
peak hour trips.
1 The existing intersection traffic volumes for this intersection were based on data collected in 1998 for the Brisco
Street Interchange by Higgins Associates.
2 The existing intersection traffic volumes for this intersection were based on the data provided in the 1996
GENCOM Development Traffic Analysis.
( :
'· j
P&S Item 9.b. - Page 90
. Mr .. Henry Engen
i r' June 2, 1999
\ ._ ·
1 Page 3
I
I :
HEALTH
CLUB
!TE
(Code 493)
SANDAG
P&S
AVERAGE
OFFICE
(!TE code 710)
Size
43KSF
NA
4SKSF
44 KSF
NA
Table 1
Trip Generation Rates
Kennedy -Sheppel Developments
ADT AM Peak Hour
(TE/ADT) In Out Total
NA 0.14 0.16 0.30
30 0.70 0.50 1.20
17.6 1.02 0.43 1.45
23.8 0.86 0.47 1.33
~
11.01 1.37 0.19 1.56
Table 2
PM Peak Hour
In Out Total
2.62 1.68 4.30·
1.62 1.08 2.70
1.43 0.90 2.33
1.51 1.41 2.52
0.25 1.24 1.49·
I r----;
Trip Generation Summary
Kennedy -Sheppel Developments
i ~-.
LAND USE Size ADT AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
(TE/ADT) In Out Total In Out Total
HEALTH 19 KSF 452 16 9 25 29 19 48
CLUB
OFFICE 11.335 124 16 2 18 3 14 17
KSF
Project Total 576 32 11 43 32 33 65
It is difficult to accurately estimate the overlap between the number of office workers
that will stay at the site and use the health club on a typical weekday. The positive
· effect on reducing the traffic impacts will occur. As an example if 10% of the office
employees choose to use the health club after work, the number of PM peak hour
inbound trips to the health club would be reduced by 1-2 trips, as would the PM peak
hour outbound trips from the office be reduced by 1-2 trips. This phenomena has not
been accounted for in the project traffic volumes used in the following analysis and
provides a very worst case analysis for this traffic assessment. ·
Once the amount of the project traffic that could be added to the adjacent road
system was found, the traffic was assigned to the road system using the following
general factors. These factors were based on our knowledge of travel patterns in the
Arroyo Grande area and previous studies. The distribution of project traffic is
1 ~-;raphically depicted on Exhibit 2 .
......... __ __,../
P&S Item 9.b. - Page 91
' '•
i
Mr. Henry Engen
June 2, 1999
Page4
Kennedy Shepp el
Health Club Office Building
North
on Oak Park Boulevard 5% 5%
on US Highway 101 35% 30%
South
on US Highway 101 25% 25%
on Oak Park Boulevard 10% 10%
East
on James Way 5% 10%
on W. Branch Street 20% 20%
Total 100% 100%
PROJECT TRAFFIC IMPACTS -Baseline Conditions
To assess the potential future impacts of the projects, a baseline level of background
traffic to simulate the "existing" traffic volumes. This baseline level of traffic
represents the traffic from approved and pending !mown projects in the City of Arroyo
Grande that have not been built. This baseline level of traffic for this project was
taken from the GENCOM Development traffic study and updated to include the recent
work performed by Higgins Associates relative to the Brisco Street Interchange PSR.
The baseline traffic volumes for the two study area intersections are presented in
Exhibit 3.
·Using the traffic volumes depicted in Exhibit 4, the PM peak hour intersection
operatiC?n was evaluated using the latest Highway Capacity Manual (HCM-98)
methodologies. The resultant intersection levels of service and delay are summarized
in Table 3.
LocC!-tion
Oak Park Blvd at
James Way
W. Branch St.
Table 3
PM Peak Hour Intersection Operation
Baseline Conditions
Type of Baseline +Health +Office
Control Club
Traffic 14.1 sec/veh 14.5 sec/veh 14.2 sec/veh
Signal LOSB LOSB LOS B
Traffic 11.5 sec/veh 11.6 sec/veh 11.6 sec/veh
Signal LOSB LOSB LOSB
Cumulative
14.6 sec/veh
LOSB
11. 7 sec/veh
LOSB
(~"\
'·
( !
·...._/
·P&S Item 9.b. - Page 92
.~---
Mr. Henry Engen
i ('·, June 2, 1999
I
I
-j
' Page 5
/"-. ( '
\ .
'-.. , -·
As seen in Table 3, the level of service does not exceed the LOS C threshold of the City
of .Arroyo Grande. The project(s) are not expected to create any significant traffic
related impacts un~er baseline cpnclitions .. · ·
PROJECT TRAFFIC IMPACTS -Build Out Conditions
To assess the potential future impacts of the projects, a build out level of background
traffic to simulate the "ultimate" traffic volumes. This level of traffic represents the
traffic from all developments in the Arroyo Grande General Plan if constructed per the
applicable zoning ordinances. This build out condition is projected to occur in a 15-
20 year time frame. This build out level of traffic for this project was taken from the
GENCOM Development traffic study and updated to include the recent work
performed by Higgins Associates relative to the Brisco Street Interchange PSR. The
build but traffic volumes for the two study area intersections is presented in Exhibit
4.
Using the traffic volumes depicted in Exhibit 5, the PM peak hour intersection
operation was evaluated using the latest Highway Capacity Manual (HCM-98)
methodologies. The resultant intersection levels of service and delay are summarized
in Table 4.
Location
Oak Park Blvd at
James Way
W. Branch St ..
Table 4
PM Peak Hour Intersection Operation
Build Out Conditions
Type of Baseline +Health +Office·
Control Club
Traffic 20. 7 sec/veh 20.8 sec/veh 21.0 sec/veh
Signal LOSC LOS C LOS C
Traffic 17.2 sec/veh 17.4 sec/veh 17 .5 sec/veh
Signal LOSB LOSB LOS B
Cumulative
21.2 sec/veh
LOSC
17.6 sec/veh
LOSB
As seen in Table 3, the level of service does not exceed the LOS C threshold of the City
of Arroyo Grande. The project(s) are not expected to create any significant traffic
related impacts under baseline conditions.
PROJECT SITE IMPROVEMENTS
Based on site plan as proposed and the projected future traffic volumes, the frontage
improvements along Oak Park Boulevard and James Way were assessed. As tlie
intersection is projected to operate at very good LOS C, no additional frontage
.... improvements are recommended.
(
\._ .. ·The proposed site access on James Way is located at an adequate distance from the
Oak Park Boulevard intersection. The driveway to the Four Square Church is located
Pf.~s Item 9.b. - Page 93
Mr." Herny Engen
June 2, 1999
Page 6
.---·-~,
diagonally from the proposed project access, but should operate adequately due to the
different peaking characteristics of the two land uses. However when the vacant
property to the east develops, a single driveway access for the project site and the
vacant property access will need to be aligned with the church driveway, or shared/
combined at the current project driveway location.
PARKING
Based on the ITE parking data3 and the Urban Land Institute data4 for time of day
usage, the adequacy of the amount of parking being provided was determined. In
general terms the office component of the existing and proposed uses. would require a
total of57 spaces at the peak of the office parking demand time of 10 -11 AM. The
health club parking generally peaks between 6 and 7 PM with a space requirement of
83 spaces. The combined parking requirement total of these two uses could be as
high as 140 spaces. However, the parking demands for the office and health club
uses do not peak at the same time.
Based on the ULI data, the office parking demand at 6-7 PM is about 23% of the peak
or 13 spaces. During this peak period at the health club, a total site parking demand
of 96 spaces would exist. At the office peak time 10-11 AM, the health club parking
,----.
I \
t '
demand is negligible. At mid-day, the office parking demand would total 51 spaces (
based on the ULI time of day parking demand data. Assuming that the mid-day
health club parking demand could ·be 50% of the evening peak, the health club
parking demand could be 42 spaces for a total site parking demand of 93 spaces.
Even if the health club parking were to reach it's peak at noon with a demand for 83
spaces, the total site parking demand at noon would be 134 spaces. The proposed
site plan provides 155 spaces, which is expected to met or exceed the existing and
proposed parking demands during the morning, mid-day and evening peak parking
demand periods.
SUMMARY
A traffic assessment of the potential traffic related impacts. associated with two
development proposals was conducted. It was found that the combination of the
traffic volumes generated by the tWo projects would total 576 ADT, 43 AM and 65 PM
peak hour trips.
The PM peak hour intersection operation for existing, baseline and build out
conditions indicate that the project would not create any significant impacts nor
exceed the City of Arroyo Grande impact thresholds.
The need for additional frontage improvements or driveway modifications are D:'ot
recommended at this time, based on the current site plan. On-site parking provisions
are adequate for the size and type of land uses proposed.
3 ITE Parking Generation, 2nd Edition, pages 73 and 74.
4 Urban Land Institute, Shared Parking, 1987, Page 86.
P&S Item 9.b. - Page 94
Mr. Henry Engen
June 2, 1999
Page 7
This concludes our traffic assessment for CUP No. 's 98-573 (Kennedy) and 98-572
(Sheppel). Should you have any questions, feel free to.contact me directly.
Very truly yours,
PENFIELD & SMITH
<J:JAO~.O.E.
Senior Traffic Engineer
Attachments
No. 1209
Exp. '1/~/oo
P&S Item 9.b. - Page 95
/----. ( \
. .-
. . "\ (-~
\., _ _,.
/ r
\ ',_.....-
ATIACHMENT7
OEG Ref 010204
April 30, 2004
Mr. Rob Strong
Community Development Director
City of Arroyo Grande
214 E. Branch Street
Arroyo Grande, CA 93421
Subject: Sheppel -Kennedy Parking Lot Operation Monitoring Results of Survey No. 1
·oear Mr. Strong:
In conjunction with the review of pending applications for conditional use permits, the City of -
AIToyo Grande has required that the parking facilities at the Sheppel -Kennedy site be·
monitored for a period of time to document the parking space occupation and utilization. The
following report has been prepared to summarize _our findings and recommendations after the
conclusion of the first survey. ·
Introduction and Overview
Currently, there have been times when apparent parking shortages have been reported to the
·Qty and to the property managers for the project site. Issues pertaining to where certain
patrons/ patients/tenants are parking, total spaces available, and adherence to the parking
restrictions currently on site.
The goal of the parking monltonng program is to evaluate the effectiveness of the parking
information being implemented by_ Kennedy Club Atness to dire:t their employees e:id guests to
parking in certain areas during certain times and the signage of Sheppel Medical Office parking
areas during certain times of the day.
The parking program includes the following elements that have or will be implemented as
needed during the course of the .monitoring program.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Parking area signage for Sheppel and Kennedy Club uses. (Done)
Parking information to be mailed to and shared with all Kennedy Club employees and
guests. (A large sign have been on display in the lobby since February 2004.)
Parking Lot modification near Sheppel 1 office building to physically separate the
Kennedy Oub parking from Sheppel parking.
Modify James Way driveways to facilitate one way in and one way out traffic flow. This
would include opening the existing dosed "upper'' driveway and modifying the parking
. space arrangement and signage to direct vehides in and out the correct way.
Obtain off-site parking areas for Kennedy Oub employees. (Done)
Construc;t additional parking areas on-site.
Item 9.b. - Page 96
Mr. Rob Strong
April 30, 2004
Page 2
Survey Methodology
. .
To address the parking concerns, it was· determined by the City's Planning Commission that an
independent parking survey should be conducted. The Planning Commission directed staff to
develop an appropriate scope of work and to conduct the survey. Orosz Engineering Group,
Inc. (OEG) was selected to conduct the monitoring program for the City.
The Public Works and OEG staff reviewed the· day to day and hourly variation of the Kennedy
Oub Fitness patrons that had been provided to the Qty during the last set of hearings on the
project. 1 As a result of this review, the City felt that a survey on a Monday and a Thursday
between the hours of 7 AM and 5 PM would capture the peak parking periods of the Health
Oub and medical office tenants. During this time frame, detailed parking observations would
be conducted. The obseMtions would indude: exactly where a vehicle was parked, how long
a vehicle was parked In a certain stall, and where the occupant was going to.
To accomplish this task, OEG representatives were on-site during the survey hours. At 30
minute increments, the type and color of vehicles were documented and logged on a survey
sheet. Similar information was obtained by the medical office and health dub staff at their ·
re5pective lobbies. A~er the survey, the duration of each vehicle by space was determined.
Once this was found, the parking area occupancy was found, as well as how long a space was
ocqJpied. · ·
The existing on-site parking area was separated into four logical parking areas. The following
table and map describes each parking area.
Area Number Restricted Uses Primary Number
Of Spaces Time Limits Tenants/Uses Handicapped
Parkino Soaces
A 22 Exclusive Parking for Exclusive Parking for 2
880 Oak Park Boulevard 880 Oak Park Boulevard
24 hours per day/ Medical Offices
7 davs cer week
B 70 24 spaces All site tenants 3
No Fitness Center Parking
Mon-Fr! 7:30-6 PM.
c 16 No Fitness Cen.ter Parking Parking for 880 and 860 0
24 hours per day/ Oak Park Boulevard
7 davs oer week Medical Offices
D 54 No Restrictions Kennedv Club Fitness 0
The parking survey also documented the total site parking space occupancy between the hours
of 7 AM and 6:30 PM. This information will be used to determine how much parking the
Kennedy Oub Fitness Is using during their peak operating times.
The last portion of the survey studied the operation.of the James Way aa::ess. PM peak hour
traffic counts were collected at the project driveway at 15 minute intervals and the number of
1 A copy of the Kennedy Oub hourly variations is attached to the rear of this letter.
Item 9.b. - Page 97
Mr. Rob Strong
April 30, 2004
Page 3
vehicles waiting to tum left at the Intersection with Oak Park Boulevard were documented. This
information was gathered to provide information to the Oty to assist them in making an
educated determination with respect to the potential affect of opening the upper site driveway
to incoming vehicle traffic. · .
Survey Results ·
The surveys were conducted on Monday, March 29, 2004 and Thursday, April 1, 2004. The mix
of site operations during the survey· days is summarized in Table 1. As shown in this table, the
survey days covered typiµil site operations. However, it is noted that the first floor of the 880
Oak Park Boulevard medical office building was vacant during the survey.
The summary data for each day's survey is provided in the appendix to this letter. The
averaged data for the survey period is provided in Tables 2, 3, 4 and 5. The following .
discussio·n pertains to the data found in these tables. In general, parking areas "appear" to be
full or at capacity when the occupancy rates reach 85-95% full.
During the survey, the medical office uses were operating within normal hours. Based on
information provided by the Kennedy Oub relative to the site usage during the surveys, Monday
was twice as many patrons as the Thursday survey day. The hourly variation of patron usage
for the Kennedy Oub can be found in the appendix to this report.
(,,.--.,, Overall Site· Usage -Table 2
·, ,
. Based on .the two-day average of the survey data, the overall site reached a.maximum
occupancy of 84.6% at 9:00 AM. At this point in time, there were 25 vacant parking spaces on-
site. During the 9:00 AM -11:00 AM time frame, sub areas A and B were operating at or
above the 85% space occupancy. Later in the day (5:30 -6:30 PM), the shared parking area B
and adjacent parking area D near the Kennedy Oub reached 85-93% occupancy.
In summary, the site as currently occupied operated within acceptable parameters. There were
very few people parking In the designated· parking areas in Area A and B, which did not go to
the buildings that the spaces were allocated too. Area D, that prohibits Fitness Center parking,
did have about half of the vehides observed using the health ':lub facility.
During the surveys, Sub Area A and D did experience 100% capacities for certain time periods.
Sub Area A did experience 100% occupancy at 2:30 PM, while Area D experienced 100%
occupancy between 8:30 and 9:00 AM. On Monday, Area A functioned at ov~r 85% parking
space occupancy between 9:00 AM and 1-0:00 AM, 11:00 AM and Noon, and between 2:30 PM
and 4:00 PM. Sub area B experienced over 85% occupancy between 9:00 AM and 11:00 AM
and between 3:30 and 5:30 PM. Area C never experienced over 50% occupancy all day. Area
D experienced over 85% occupancy between 8:30 and 9:00 AM and between 5:15 and 5:.q5
. PM.
During the Thursday sur\tey, only one sub area during one time period reached 100%
occupancy~ This sub area was Area A at 10:00 AM. For the other sub areas, 85% occupancy
or higher was reached between 9:00 AM and 11:00 AM for Area A, 10:00 to 10:30 AM and
6:15-6:30 PM for Area B, and Area D experienced the high occupancy between 9:00 -9:30 AM
and 5:30 to 6:15 PM. Area C reached a maximum occupancy of 62.5% at 6:30 PM.
Item 9.b. - Page 98
Mr. Rob Strong
April 30, 2004
Page 4
There were 3,780 square feet of medical offi_ce that was not occupied during the survey. Based
on the average of employees (2.8 spaces per 1000 square. feet) and patient (approximately 1 ·
space per 1000 square feet) parking demands observed, the vacant medical offices could
generate an additional parking demand of 15 spaces (4 spaces per 1000 square feet* 3.780
thousand square feet). ·
Even with the additional 15 spaces that could be associated with the vacant medical offices, the
site would still have 10 spaces vacant or 93.8 % full. However, there could some overcapacity
parking demands during peak times of the day, as the available parking in Sub Area B (the area
designated for the vacant office's parking) had less than 10 available parking spaces during the
peak 9:00 to Noon time frame.
Site Parking Space Utilization Data -Table 3
The data in this table was determined by matching the number of times a certain vehide was
observed occupying the same space during the surveys. A vehicle observed once· was
considered to be at the site 30 minutes or less. A vehicle observed twice was considered to be
at the site 60 minutes or less, etc. Vehides. observed for more than two hours were assumed
to be employees. The majority of the medical office visits were found to be in the less than 75
minute time frame, based on discussions with the doctor's offices. By observation and
confirmed by the health dub staff, it was noted that the Kennedy Club patrons were at the site
. between 60 and _90 minutes on the average. .
The data in this table. indicates that the.re is a significant amount of short temi parking
occurring in area's A, B and D. The usage of Area C is more balanced .between long and short
term parking. The affect of the long term parking on the short term availability in each parking
area is evaluated In Tables 4 and 5.
Long Term Parking Data -Table 4
The data summarized in this table attempts to determine the time of day when there is a
significant number of long term parkers relative to the total number of parked vehicles
observed.
As seen in this table, long term parking takes up approximately 50% or more of the total
·observed parking demands In Area A most of the day. At the peak parking time (1 PM), 75% of
the spaces occupied were long term vehi~es. At the least, 36% of the observed vehicles were
long term during the surveys •. The data indicates that about a third of the ·vehicles are long
term parkers in Area "A. · ·
In Area B, the long term parking as a percentage of the total observations ranged from 13%-
53%. The average percentage was between 40% and 50%. This information indicates that
there is a significant number of long term parking in a marked patient parking only area.
Similarly, in Area C tlie long term parking as ·a percentage of the to~I observations ranged from
20%-100%. The average percentage was over 50%. This parking area airrently functions as
an overflow parking area, with some employee parking already occurring. However, with about.
3-4 long term vehides .parking in this area, not all of the 54 employees on-site are parking in
this area.
Item 9.b. - Page 99
,-----~.
,. .... ,..--.......,.\
r ; Mr. Rob Strong
April 30, 2004
Page 5
Lastly, in Area D, the range of long term parkers was found to be 3-12%, with an average of
about iO%. This indicates that this parking area is used by mostly patients and patrons of the
site.
As seen in this tal;>le, a significant number of long term parking is occurring in the limited
parking area reserved for the 860 and 880 Oak Park Boulevard professional offices (Sub Areas A
and B). This indicates that employees of the offices are parking in the small designated parking
areas and occupying spaces that could be available. for patients. The combination the employee
parking and the two handicapped parking spaces in this area, limits the availability of these
spaces to be used by the general public/patients. Analysis of this data is expanded on in Table
5.
Long Term Parking Data for the Shared Kennedv/Sheppel Parking ·Area (Area B) -Table 5
The purpose of this analysis was to evaluate the affects of the long term.parking observed in
this area. In this sub area, 24 spaces were designated for Medical Office patient parking only
between 7:30 AM and 6:00 PM, Monday through Friday. Of these spaces, 8-15 spaces were
occupied by long term parkers that were observed to be employees of the medical offices
during the ·peak hours of 8:00 AM and 3:00 PM. By the strict interpretation of the parking signs
posted on the site, these vehicles could be towed and the spaces made available for patient
parking. .
(-. . ·-in the rt:malningpcrtibn of Area B, there are no r-estrid:ions on the 46 spaces in terms of .
parking. The long term parking comi:ionent of this area was 8-15 spaces between the hours of-
9:00 AM and 4:30 PM. The majority of these long term parkers were located in the parking
area farthest from the Kennedy Club Building and medical offices. Most of the spaces in front
of the Kennedy aub building were available for patrons.
(
.\ , __ .-'
James Way Intersection
The operation of the existing James Way driveway access was evaluated. During the afternoon
peak hours of .q:oo -6:00 PM, manual turning movement counts were conducted for the .
intersection focusing on traffic entering o~ leaving the site.
The results of the turning movement analysis are shown below in Table 6.
. Table 6 .
Intersection Turning Movemen~ at J~mes Way -Monday{Thursday
Time Rioht In Left Out Left In Right Out
4:30 PM 19 17 17 9 3 3 2 2
4:45 PM 20 30 20 11 1 3 9 0
5:00 PM 19 23 20 17 1 5 5· 5
5:15 PM 31 25 16 16 3 6 7 ·4
5:30 PM 12 18 20 16 6 3 1 5
5:45 PM 20 15 19 11 2 2 3 4
Total 121 128 112 80 16 22 27 20
Percentaoe 88% 85% 80% 80% 12% 15% 20% 20%
Item 9.b. - Page 100
Mr. Rob Strong
April 30, 2004
Page 6
The turning movement data indicates that the majority of traffic entering the site is oriented
toward Oak Park Boulevard -over 80%. Further during the traffic counts, entering vehicles
were observed to swing wide upon entering the site and cross over into the outgoing vehicle
paths on numerous occasions. Also at the first turn on-site into the parking fields, vehicles .
were also observed to cut the comer and travel into the other side of the drive aisle. With the
landscaping and vertical grade change that exists at this location, visibility is limited. Several
near misses were observed at this location.
The queue of vehides waiting for the left tum signal on James Way at the Oak Park Boulevard
intersection reached a maximum of five vehicles with the majority reaching four vehicles or less
during the PM peak hours. The left turn lane has adequate storage for 4-5 vehicles.{125 feet).
The dosest James Way driveway could be 226 feet. This indicates that the left turn traffic at
the Oak Park Boulevard intersection would not be expected to affect the operation of left turn
traffic at the proposed upper site driveway.
Summary and Analysis
To document the parking characteristics at the Kennedy -Sheppel medical office/health club
site, two surveys were conducted on a typical Monday and typical Thursday during the week.
The data indicated that the site overall has adequate parking available to tenants, patients and
patrons. However, the management of the parking spaces remains a problem. The problem
ste!":".s not from parkers using spaces that are not designated for their building, ·but employees
parking close in. Also, the designation of the parking area furthest from all of the buildings is
limited to the medical office buildings. The observed use of this parking area is for limited
employee usage and overflow for Kennedy aub patrons. ·
Based on the traffic volume data collected, over 80% of the vehicles entering or leaving t.he site
travel toward Oak Park Boulevard. Also, many vehicles traveling on-site do not utilize their own
travel lane.
Recommendations
The following recommendations have been developed by OEG staff and reviewed with the
Public WorkS Department to address the parking and vehicle operating behavior observed.
1: Strongly encourage all employees to utilize parking in Area C to allow the high turnover
patient/patron parking to utilize the close in spaces. This will include redesignating Area
C for employee parking only.
2. The property owner should install a~ditional parking lot lighting in Area C to provide
adequate nighttime visibility.
3. Open the westerly or upper driveway to the project site for right tum access only from
James Way. This would include appropriate signage, removal of the asphalt berm,
temporary removal of eight parking spaces immediately adjacent to the drtveway, and
the replacement of at least eight parking spaces on-site. These spaces could be
provided on road base only; no asphalted parking areas are required.
4. Install 50 linear feet of double yellow painted pavement stripe at the existing
entrance/exit to clarify the entry and exit lanes.
Item 9.b. - Page 101
,,..--.,
( ,' Mr. Rob Strong
April 30, 2004
Page7
I
\ --
5. Schedule a limited survey to assess the operation of the driveway modification and
parking lot occupancy after the modifications are co_mpleted.
This condudes the summary and analysis of the first Kennedy-Sheppel parking survey. Should
you have any questions, feel free to contact us. OEG, Inc. thanks you for the opportunity to
meet your needs on this exciting project.
Sincerely,
Stephen A. Orosz, P.E., P.T.O.E.
Orosz Engineering Group, Inc.
· Endosures
Item 9.b. - Page 102
,---.
Table 1
(~';
Summary of Site Tennats
Survey Number 1
860 Oak Park Boulevard Number Square
Hours Oa~s .Em2lo~ees Footage
Suite 101 BAM -5:00 PM M-F 6 5220
Suite 102 SAM-3:30 PM M-F 10
Suite 201 BAM -6:00 PM M-W .4 5220
BAM -6:00 PM Th-Fri 4
Suite 202 BAM-5:00 PM M-F 3
Suite 203 BAM -5:00 PM M-F 4
Suite 204 BAM -12 Noon M 5
1:15 PM -5PM w 5
Suite 301 By Appointment Only 900
Building Total 32 11340
Employees per 1000 Square Feet 2.82
eeo Oak Park Boulevard
Number . Square
Hours Da~s Em21o~ees Footaoe
Suite 101 Vacant NA NA
Suite 102 Vacant NA NA 3780
Suite 103 Vacant NA NA
Suite 201 7:30AM -5:30 PM M-Th 5 3780
Suite 202 7AM-7:00 PM M-F 4
Building Total 9 3780
Employees per 1000 Square Feet 2.38
(occupied space only)
Kennedy Club Fitness
SAM -10:00 PM M-F 10 to 16 18500
Building Total 13 18500
Employees per 1000 Square Feet 0.70
Site Total
Building Total 54 33620
Employees per 1000 Square Feet 1.61
i
\
Item 9.b. - Page 103
(~',
Table 2
-Site Parking Space Utllilillon Data by Subarea end Total
Spica 01X14>81CY by Ana Ale rage
Alt!ilable Sile
A B c D Tcul Soace1 A B c D l01BI
7:1D 2 34 2 14 51 111 7:00 9.1'4 48614 9.411. 25.0"4 31.MI
7:3) 3 28 3 13 46 117 7:30 11.4% 39.3"4 15.6".4 24.1"4 28111.
8:1D B 34 6 17 64 98 !00 33.4% 47.9"4 34.4".4 31.5% 39.5%
8:3) 13 49 6 37 IDS SB uo lili.8"4 70011. 37.5'4 6B.5'4 64.5%
B:ID 21 60 6 51 137 25 ltDD !l.2'11 lli.7% 31.4% 81A'4 111.1%
830 19 61 6 45 130 33 11:30 11.414 E.4'.4 31.4"4 824'4 79.811
lllOD 21 65 8 35 127 35 IO:IXl 85.1'4 111.!1'4 37.5"4 64B"4 7B.411
10:30 19 64 6 32 120 43 1030 111.1"4 91.4'.4 34.4"4 58.3'4 71811
11:CXl 20 62 7 24 112 51 11:00 II.I'll 87.8"4 40.6"4 44.4'4 68.8'4
11:30 17 56 7 27 106 55 11:30 n.3"4 79.W 40.6"4 500'4 65.4'4
12:txl 15 61 3 23 102 61 12:00 68.2% Bl.4'4 18.8"4 42B'4 62711
12:30 12 56 5 22 94 68 12.30 51.5"4 79.3"4 31.3"4 39B'4 SB.Oii
1:txl 14 47 5 IB 83 79 1:00 61.6"4 67.1'4 21.1'4' 32.4'4 51.2'4
1:3) 17 38 4 16 75 88 1:30 75.0'4 54.3'4 :Z.D'4 29.6'4 46.0ll
2:1D 15 48 5 15 82 llO 2:00 lll.2'4 68.6"4 21.1"4 2i.9'4 506'4
2:3> 21 51 4 15 90 73 2:30 D.2'.I. 72. 1"4 25.0% 26.9% 55.2'4
3DO 19 50 3 15 III 76 3:1Xl 84.1"4 71.4% 18.11% 27.811. 53.411
3:30 15 53 3 17 III 75 lll BB:Z'll 75.0"4 18.11% 306'4 53.7'11
4:00 16 56 4 27 llD 60 4:1Xl 72.7'11 ll0.0"4 21.fi liOD'4 63.3\1
4:30 14 40 7 17 78 78 4:30 63.6'11 57.1% 43.8"4 31.511. 48.1'4
5:00 11 54 7 37 109 109 5:1Xl a:l.0'4 77.1"4 43.11% 6B.511. 87 .311
5;15 11 59 6 44 118 44 5;15 47.7'11 ID.6"4 34.411. 80611. 72.811
6:30 11 60 7 51 127 35 5:3) 47.7'11 Iii.CJ% 4l.6% llU'.I. 18.4'11
5:45 8 58 7 51 121 39 5:45 $.4'11 82.1'4 41.1!'4 111'4 75.9%
6:txl 8 58 8 41 115 48 6:00 3l.6'11 82.1"4 Sl.D'.4 75.D1' 707'11
6:15 7 Bl 8 45 . 119 43 6.'15 :i!l.5'4 lli.D'll. Sl.0'4 Bl3'4 73.5'11
8:30 6 BO B 43 116 46 6:30 273% lli.'1'.4 4i.9"' 7!711. 71.6'4 (-i Capeclly 22 70 18. 54 1112 Capadly llO.o-.1 100.11'.1. 1C0.0'4 i00.0% llX>.0'4
/
i
\. ___ ,/
Item 9.b. - Page 104
Table 3
Sile Parking Space UIBitatiDn Data by Subarea and Total
ZoreA. ZineB Z...eC ZoreD Zora A 2cneB Z<neC Zore D
3J Mirvtm a less 62 235 12· 2113 3J MinLles or 1811 36.3% 32.2% 21H'IO '3.6%
31·60 Minues 39 220 14 148 3Hi0 Mini.des 22.!l'i4o 3J.1% 31.1% 31.8%
61-llOMinLlm 28 134 6 T7 61 ~o Mirwles 17.Cl'A. 18.4%. 1l3'4 16.5%
ID-120 Mini.Im 11 ol6 2 2B 90;120 MinUIDI 6.414 6.314 .U'A. 6.D"A.
Mora UIS\ 2 HD..ll'S 30 95 11 10 Mae tlSI 2 HaU'I 17.5% 13.0% 24.4% 2.1%
l(X>.D"A. 100.0% llX>.0% 1000%
(
Item 9.b. - Page 105
I . . fii·;N~RA~~;,;;v~RA~n~RA
Jicc~§==§;§;;&;;§§§ic&~
·J~·t~··~~·~······~···· ·!J~AftAaa •• ia~~oa'w~aAIA
•JJ•~':"A~~RRRRANARR:=~:
·•
' ' ~~_./
It
e
m
9.
b
.
-
Pa
g
e
10
6
7:00 .
7:30
8:00.
8:30
9:00
9:30
10:00
10:30
11:00
11:30
12:00
12:30
1:00
1:30
2:00
2:30
3:00
3:30
4:00
4:30
5:00
Capacity
,.,---..
I '
\
Total
7
6
10
14
16
19
20
20
19
21
19
18
19
13
16
14
14
16
18
11
8
24
B
Sheppel Percent
Lot Long Term
3 46%
5 83%.
9 85%
11 79%
13 81%
14 73%
14 72"/o
14 72o/o
14 73%
15 69%
15 76%
13 71%
11 57%
9 69%
9 58%
8 54% .
8 59%
7 45%
7 36%
6 55%
5 63'Yo
Table 5
Long Term Parking Space Utilization Data Subarea B
B
Kennedy . Percent Sheppel Kennedy Sheppel Kennedy
Total Lot Long Term ZoneB ZoneB ZoneB ZoneB
7:00 28 2 5%
7:30 23 2 9% 51 194 29.3% 34.4% 30 Minutes or.less
8:00 25 4 16% 64 154 36.8% 27.3% 31-60 Minu1es
8:30 37 5 14% 15 119 8.6% 21.1% 61-90 Minutes
9:00 45 8 17% 7 39 4.0% 6.go/o 90-120 Minutes
9:30 44 10 22% 37 58 21.3% 10.3% Mor~ than 2 Hours
10:00 46 13 ·21%
10:30 45 13 : 28% 100.0% 100.0%
11:00 43 15 35%
11:30 42 15 .36%
12:00 42 15 36%
12:30 38 14 36%
1:00 28 12 43%
1:30 25 12 46%
2:00 33 13 40%
2:30 36 12 34%
3:00 36 12 . 33%
3:30 . 38 12 31%
4:00 38 12 30%
4:30 29 9 ' .31%
5:00 46 7 15%
Capacity 46
\
\
.'_)
Item 9.b. - Page 107
._[NN[OY
St<[PP[L '
HO O&otr, ~a••
l)llh PAf\I.; f3(1LILl::V/\R(1
,-----.,,
\
J )
--··'
, .•.. , .. ,
~''[r"f-'(l
r.U'·[IJ-USE
!''"tlf"I"' t·--
....... ,C" •:O.U•'l
ca "":o
)Jr.I ':•---U[ \&II'( .... ,.,
C• t•)f"•_
l ·1'.'I• ... :
u•/ttt•.;:1 .. ..,
..........
)Oflloi.
,. ...
Item 9.b. - Page 108
January 17, 2006
Mr. Kim Hatch
PULTS Associates
34 So Broad Street, Suite 105
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
.. -~ ...
ATIACHMENTS
O::G
Or on ~nglneering Group, Inc.
OEG Ref 50303
Subject: Parking and Traffic Study for Sheppel Mixed Use Project (Sheppel 3 and 4)
Arroyo Grande, California
Dear Mr. Hatch:
Orosz Engineering Group, Inc (OEG) is pleased to provide you with this letter report evaluating
the trip generatio.n and parking requirements for the proposed project. The project js expected . .
tc :!dd 10 ti'.µ"ee-bedroom ·and 8 two-bedroom res.idential housing units to the existing .site
located at the corner of Janies Way and Oak Park Boulevard.· ·
We have reyiewed the project site plan and discussed the project concept with you. The
purpose of this parking study is to determine If there is adequate parking provision for. the
residential uses In addition to the existing Health Club and medical office uses.
Existing Site Development
The existing development on the project site consists of two medical office buildings totaling
18,900 square feet and a fitness club totaling 18,500 square feet. Parking for 162 vehicles is
provided currently. Access to the project site .is provided via one driveway on James Way. The
existing site uses are found on Attachment 1. ·
The portion of the project site .slated for the residential development i.s cl.i~rently vacan.t.
A parking study for the existing site uses was conducted by OEG, Inc at the direction of the City
in April 2004. The results of that survey indicated that the project site uses require a minimum
of 162 parking spaces. A copy of that parking survey is on file with the Community
Development department.
Proposed Project
The proposed project consists of 6 three-bedroom, 12 two-bedroom and 4 one-bedroom
residential housing units. The Oty's parking requirement for each multi-bedroom unit is two
covered parking spaces per unit and 0.5 spaces per unit open spaces. For the one-bedroom
~ .· units the parking requirement is LS spaces per unit. The project proposes 38 covered spaces
....._ _ __....~
1627 Calzada Avenue. Santa Ynez. CA. 93460. 805-688-7814 . oeg@quixnet.net
Item 9.b. - Page 109
Mr. Kim Hatch
January 17, 2006
Page 2
,.,,---._
and 18 uncovered spaces in th.e residential area. The proposed project contains a total of 2i8
parking spaces for the entire project site. .. .
Based on the existing parking demand of 162 spaces for the existing site uses ani:l the 51
spaces required for the residential uses, the project site would need to provide a minimum of
213 parking spaces. The project proposes 56 spaces in the residential area in addition to the
162 spaces allotted for the existing site uses for a total of 218 spaces allocated to specific uses.
Therefore, there would be a total of an 5 space surplus (218 provided -213 spaces required)
that would exist with the development as proposed.
At this time, the applicant is proposing to maintain the southerly driveway on James Way. The
proposed site plan depicting the residential units, parking supply and revised access is provided
in Attachment 2.
Trip Generation
The trip generation for the proposed uses was estimated using the San Diego Trip Generation
data published by SANDAG. For the proposed project, a total of 176 daily trips including 14 AM
and 18 PM p~ak hour trips would be expected to be generated by the project. During the AM
peak hour, the project would add 2 Inbound and 12 outbound trips from the project site.
Similarly during the PM peak hour, the project would add 13 inbound trips and 5 outbound trips
fro~ the project site. Base~ on. the existing and cumulative. operation of the Oak Park
Bcu!eva:-d and James Way.-jntersectio'ii being at.Level of Servjce A. during both the AM and PM.
peak hours (Los Robles Del Mar, Traffic Analysis 2003, City of Pismo Beach), the additional · ·
project traffic would not be expected to result ~n any significant impacts.
Summary
Based on the ot?served existing parking demands for the site uses found in the site survey, the
existing site requires a minimum of 162 spaces to meet the parking needs. The proposed
project will add 56 parking spaces with 22 residential units to the existing project site. The
proposed parking for the residential units meets the City parking code requirements. With the
addition of the proposed residential units, the project site would have a potential surplus of 5
parking spaces. As such, the parking and circulation patterns proposed would be adequate.
The additional traffic generation by the proposed project (176 dally, 14 AM Peak and 18 PM
· Peak Hour Trips) would not be expected to impact the existing circulation system.
This concludes the parking and traffic analysis for the proposed project. Should you have any
additional questions, feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
Sfe(1hen .1l. Orosz
Stephen A. Orosz, P .E •.
Traffic Engineer
Orosz Engineering Group, Inc.
Endosures ·
Item 9.b. - Page 110
June 3, 2013
City of Arroyo Grande
300 East Branch Street
Arroyo Grande, CA 93420
O::G
Orosz engineering Group. Inc.
Subject: Arroyo Grande Assisted Living & Memory Care Project; Dr. Russ Sheppel
AITACHMENT9
DEG Ref 50303
Orosz Engineering Group, Inc. (DEG) is the traffic engineering company used by Dr. Sheppel for nearly a
decade, regarding the property at Oak Park and James Way and the existing entitlements for Tentative
Tract Map 2813. We have analyzed the off-site traffic impacts and on-site parking impacts of the various
projects that have been proposed. Many of these studies are still valid, while some may require
updating. All of the studies are generally applicable to the requested modification to the entitlements,
Dr. Sheppel is seeking. The previous studies address various specific traffic needs of the site and the
development adjacent to the creek.
(-The modification from the existing entitled project to a senior assisted living facility will result in less
parking demand and less traffic impacts. Dr. Sheppel has discussed his updated project application to
amend the existing entitlements and we can support that request, based on the decreased parking
demands and similar traffic loads.
We look forward to assisting Dr. Sheppel on this new endeavor. Should you have any questions, we will
be glad to discuss them with you. Feel free to contact us as you need to during this process.
Sincerely,
S~A. Oren.
Stephen A. Orosz, P.E.
Traffic Engineer
Orosz Engineering Group, Inc.
PO Box 1262. Santa Ynez. CA. 93460. 805-688-7814.oeg@oegsite.com
_ _J Item 9.b. - Page 111
.---...
Jun 02 2004 1:41PN Triad ~lmes Associates
(~--~riad/holmes clvllen9lneerlng , . fond surveying
·. / . .. associates lend de~/~~:~
. mammoth lakes • bish_op • redwood clt1,1 • nopo
· son luis oblspo
June l, 2004
Pults & Associates .. ·
3450 Broad street, s~ite 1v6
San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 l
Facsimil~: (805)54 I -43 71
Attention: Kim Hatch
AITACHMENT 10
Subject: Top of Bank Study for Sheppcl.Propeny (APN Nos. 007-771-053 & 062)
De~r Kim,
Based on a review of survey data c-ollected in January of 200 l, it can be concluded iliat elevatio~ ·
of the b~ that constrains Meadow Creek to its channel ~lthe locati.on of the subject Sheppel
(··., Prryperty is: ~o greater than 73.82 feet (see Exhibit A). Furthermore, ~ased 0:11 a site; visit made on
May 26, 2004 it was discerned that the location of this survey shot was approximately 3 feet
higher than th~ easterly top of bank. Therefore, we feel that the highe~t top of bank for Meadow
. .
Creek. adjacent to the subject Sheppel Property is approximately 71 feet.
RECEIVED
Attachment
'•"SIO\'l\~l\.Shatt•JOSS-.l I .00160-00003\TOP OF B.Aw'lt: SJUDY .dee
.MA.Y 2 4 2005
Cl1Y OF AAROYO GRAND
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMB
• ~--n luls oblspo. co 93llD.S • (SOS) S4~B908 • fo" (805) S44-BQ32 • slo@tr~odholmes..com SSS chorro.screet. suite ol ._,
I.
Item 9.b. - Page 112
.Jun 01 2004 4:l8PM
' . )'13.
)) I I ;:
I I ,.
' I i
I l
I .
Triad/Holmes Associates 805-54 4-893.2
JAMES ·wAY
£L£"VA llON SHOT IN
GRIEB ORI~ __ _,
EXISTING 4'5' SLOPE
BANK ct ORA/NAG£"
EASEMENT PER 222.J O.R.
958
cx)~TING
PRVP£R TY LINE
SCAL~: 1·=-so·
APN NOs. 007-771-05.J &-007-771-06.2
TOP OF BANK STUDY
11.00164.2
EXHIBIT .'I
•".Slc•auft\Share'.JOBS·. 11 .0016':.2·000C3'.0RAWINGS\S TREA 1-lBANK'.TOB· EXHIBIT .OWG. &.'112004 5:13:39 PM, 101 . '
p.2
·----(
Item 9.b. - Page 113
INITIAL STUDY/
MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION
.!':·!.··.·:·-·.
($~:~~r\-Ei~~:~,_-.
Conditional Use Permit1.2-002 ··O'," .. y,~ .
L~:~ae:ij~~~~3 . :;::?~~>
Amended Vesting T~~tive Tract Map 12-001 ~;:~~~L
New 69-bed Assisted LivinglMemory Car~°Facility and"~~r,,,
,1L. . 8-Townh~ril~.c ·;"':~t~~~5t. -~i~;
\ 188010ak Park Boulevard':"'
(Southeast corner of eiik'Pai:1c:.Boulevard/Jari1es Way Intersection)
·:-· .. ,·. ,_.,,_;-'.{';.~
:. ........ . :.-.· -.-:· •'}·
August2013
ATIACHMENT 11
Item 9.b. - Page 114
Item 9.b. - Page 115
/
(,
(, . ._ ____ .
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
Project: Conditional Use Permit 12-002
Variance 12-004
Lot Merger 12-003
Amended Vesting Tentative Tract Map 12-001
Lead Agency: City of Arroyo Grande
Document Availability:
• City of Arroyo Grande
Community Development Department
300 East Branch Street
Arroyo Grande, CA 93420
• http://www.arroyogrande.org/
Project Description:
The proposed project is a phased residential development on. approximately 1.8 acres adjacent to
Meadow Creek with frontage on James Way. The overall site (3.74 acres) is identified as the Oak Park
Professional Plaza, which is currently developed with two medical office buildings and health club
(Kennedy Club Fitness). The project site is undeveloped with a portion currently used for overflow
parking. The . property has been disturbed from previous earthmoving activities for adjacent
development and therefore the soils consist primarily of fill material.
Phase I is a 69-bed assisted living and memory care facility located adjacent to Meadow Creek. Phase I
includes forty-four (44) Alzheimer care units (1-bed and studio units) and twenty-five (25) assisted living
units (1-bed and studio). Fifty-two (52) off-street parking spaces on approximately 1.2 acres are
provided in addition to the 69 care units. This parking area includes vehicular connections to the
adjacent property at 1260 James Way (Kennedy Club Fitness). The project also includes an ADA
compliant decomposed granite pedestrian path adjacent to Meadow Creek connecting James Way to
the hotel property at 850 Oak Park Boulevard.
Phase II is an amendment to Vesting Tentative Tract Map 04-006 and an entitled 8-unit townhouse
project located adjacent to and northwest of Phase I to provide better site utilization and interior floor
plan design. The amendment includes two-car tandem garages in place of the previously-approved
single-car garages. These garages would be relocated underneath the townhouses as basements,
resulting in a building height of twenty-nine feet (29'), representing a six foot (6') height decrease from
the original approval.
A variance and lot merger are being pursued concurrently with the conditional use permit and amended
vesting tentative tract map. The variance is necessary to deviate from the fifty foot (50') creek setback
from top of bank for Meadow Creek. A previously entitled multifamily housing project was approved for
the subject site with a creek setback of twenty-five feet (25'). New setbacks of approximately thirty-five
feet (35') from the top of bank are proposed. The lot merger will combine two of the lots for the
construction of Phase I and will help delineate Phase I from Phase II.
Page 3 of 50
Item 9.b. - Page 116
.. -----~-
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
Summary Document Preparation:
Pursuant to Section 21082.1 of the California Environmental Quality Act, the City of Arroyo Grande (the
City) has independently reviewed and analyzed the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for
the proposed project and finds that these documents reflect the independent judgment of the City. The
City, as lead agency, also confirms that the project mitigation measures detailed in these documents are
feasible and will be implemented as stated in the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
Page 4 of 50
(
\
Item 9.b. - Page 117
,,-· ..
!
,,,~. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
( \ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12"002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
Date
Date
(
Page 5 of 50
Item 9.b. - Page 118
,..-.-·--.
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
Table of Contents:
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 8
Introduction and Regulatory Guidance ..................................................................................................... 8
Lead Agency································:············································································································· 8
Purpose and Document Organization ....................................................................................................... 8
Summary of Findings ................................................................................................................................. 9
Project Description ...................................................................................................................................... 10
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 10
Location ................................................................................................................................................... 10
Background and Need for Project ........................................................................................................... 10
Project Description .................................................................................................................................. 10
Other Required Public Agency Approvals ............................................................................................... 10
Related Projects ...................................................................................................................................... 11
Environmental Checklist ............................................................................................................................. 12
Project lnformation ................................................................................................................................. 12
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ........................................................................................... 13
Determination ......................................................................................................................................... 13
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ..................................................................................................... 14
Environmental Issues .................................................................................................................................. 15
I. Aesthetics ............................................................................................................................................. 15
II. Agriculture and Forest Resources ....................................................................................................... 16
Ill. Air Quality .......................................................................................................................................... 17
IV. Biological Resources .......................................................................................................................... 20
V. Cultural Resources .............................................................................................................................. 23
VI. Geology and Soils ............................................................................................................................... 24
VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions ............................................................................................................... 26
VIII Hazards and Hazardous Materials .................................................................................................... 28
IX Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................................................................................. 29
X. Land Use and Planning ........................................................................................................................ 33
XI. Mineral Resources ............................................................................................................................. 34
XII. Noise ...................................................................... ~ .......................................................................... 35
XIII. Population and Housing ................................................................................................................... 36
XIV. Public Services ................................................................................................................................. 36
XV. Recreation ......................................................................................................................................... 37
Page 6 of 50
,.
i
\.
Item 9.b. - Page 119
_,,,-·-. )~-~--
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT U-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
(-.. ,
\. XVI. Transportation/Traffic ..................................................................................................................... 38
XVII. Utilities and Service Systems .......................................................................................................... 40
Mandatory Findings of Significance ............................................................................................................ 41
Summary of Mitigation Measures .............................................................................................................. 42
References .................................................................................................................................................. SO
Documents & Maps ................................................................................................................................ SO
Page 7 of SO
Item 9.b. - Page 120
~.I'-··. . 1.--.
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
Introduction
Introduction and Regulatory Guidance
The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) has been prepared by the City of Arroyo
Grande (the City) to evaluate the potential environmental effects of the proposed project. This
document has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA}, Public
Resources Code §21000 et seq., and the State CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations (CCR)
§15000 et seq.
An Initial Study is conducted by a lead agency to determine if a project may have a significant effect on
the environment (CEQA Guidelines §15063(a)]. If there is substantial evidence that a project may have a
significant effect on the environment, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR} must be prepared, in
accordance with CEQA Guidelines §15064(a). However, if the lead agency determines that revisions in
the project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant mitigate the potentially significant
effects to a less-than-significant level, a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be prepared instead of an
EIR [CEQA Guidelines §15070(b)]. The lead agency prepares a written statement describing the reasons
a proposed project would not have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, why an EIR
need not be prepared. This IS/MND conforms to the content requirements under CEQA Guidelines
§15071.
Lead Agency
The lead agency is the public agency with primary approval authority over the proposed project. In
accordance with CEQA Guidelines §15051(b)(l), "the lead agency will normally be an agency with
general governmental powers, such as a city or county, rather than an agency with a single or limited
purpose." The lead agency for the proposed project is the City of Arroyo Grande. The contact person for
the lead agency is:
Matthew Downing, Assistant Planner
City of Arroyo Grande
300 East Branch Street
Arroyo Grande, CA 93420
(805) 473-5420
Purpose and Document Organization
The purpose of this document is to evaluate the potential environmental effects of the proposed
project. Mitigation measures have been identified and incorporated into the project to eliminate any
potentially significant impacts or reduce them to a less-than-significant level.
This document is organized as follows:
• Introduction
This chapter provides an introduction to the project and describes the purpose and organization
of this document.
• Project Description
This chapter describes the reasons for the project, scope of the project, and project objectives.
Page 8 of 50
-~------
(
I
\
Item 9.b. - Page 121
r", \. .
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
• Environmental Setting, Potential Impacts and Mitigation Measures
This chapter identifies the significance of potential environmental impacts, explains the
environmental setting for each environmental issue, and evaluates the potential impacts
identified in the CEQA Environmental {Initial Study) Checklist. Mitigation measures are
incorporated, where appropriate, to reduce potentially significant impacts to a less-than-
significant level.
• Mandatory Findings of Significance
This chapter identifies and summarizes the overall significance of any potential impacts to
natural and cultural resources, cumulative impacts, and impact to humans, as identified in the
Initial Study.
• Summary of Mitigation Measures
This chapter summarizes the mitigation measures incorporated into the project as a result of the
Initial Study.
• References
This chapter identifies the references and sources used in the preparation of this IS/MND. It also
provides a list of those involved in the preparation of this document.
Summary of Findings
Section 3 of this document contains the Environmental {Initial Study) Checklist that identifies the
(-'-, potential environmental impacts (by environmental issue) and a brief discussion of each impact resulting
\. from implementation of the proposed project.
In accordance with §15064(f) of the CEQA Guidelines, a Mitigated Negative Declaration shall be
prepared if the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment after the inclusion
of mitigation measures in the project. Based on the available project information and the
environmental analysis presented in this document, there is no substantial evidence that, after the
incorporation of mitigation measures, the proposed project would have a significant effect on the
environment. It is proposed that a Mitigated Negative Declaration be adopted in accordance with the
CEQA Guidelines.
Page 9 of 50
Item 9.b. - Page 122
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
Project Description
Introduction
This Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) has been prepared by the City of Arroyo
Grande (the City) to evaluate the potential environmental effects of the proposed project.
The City contains 5.5 square miles and has a population of approximately 17,252 (2010 Census).
Tourism, retail sales, services, and agriculture form the core of the local economy. Arroyo Grande has
distinct areas of residential, commercial, and industrial land uses and future development is expected to
be through infill development, rather than through the conversion of undeveloped land to urban uses
outside of City limits.
Location
The proposed project is a phased residential project to be located on approximately 1.8 acres. The
property is located near the corner of Oak Park Boulevard and James Way, adjacent to Meadow Creek,
with access from James Way. Nearby land uses include medical offices, a health club, a hotel, a church,
and a residential subdivision across the creek.
Background and Need for Project
The Arroyo Grande City Council adopted Resolution No. 3921 on May 9, 2006, approving Vesting
Tentative Tract Map Case No. 04-006, Planned Unit Development Case No. 04-005, and Minor Exception
Case No. 05-015 for the subdivision of the subject property into nineteen (19) lots resulting in 24 density (
equivalent town homes and condominiums. Through numerous State map extensions, the project \ _ ,
remains entitled through May 9, 2016.
The proposed project will revise the previously approved creek setback from twenty-five feet (25') to
thirty-five feet (35'), increasing the amount of riparian habitat to be restored in conjunction with the
development. The proposed project will also result in a mix of housing options for elderly individuals,
including those with Alzheimer's. The project will also provide eight (8) townhomes in a mixed-use
setting within walking distance of many services needed for daily living.
Project Description
The proposed project is a phased residential development on approximately 1.8 acres adjacent to
Meadow Creek with frontage on James Way. The overall site (3.74 acres) is identified as the Oak Park
Professional Plaza, which is currently developed with two medical office buildings and health club
(Kennedy Club Fitness). The project site is undeveloped with a portion currently used for overflow
parking. The property has been disturbed from previous earthmoving activities for adjacent
development and therefore the soils consist primarily of fill material.
Phase I is a 69-bed assisted living and memory care facility located adjacent to Meadow Creek. Phase I
includes forty-four (44) Alzheimer care units (1-bed and studio units) and twenty-five (25) assisted living
units (1-bed and studio). Fifty-two (52) off-street parking spaces on approximately 1.2 acres are
provided in addition to the 69 care units. This parking area includes vehicular connections to the
adjacent property at 1260 James Way (Kennedy Club Fitness). The project also includes an ADA
compliant decomposed granite pedestrian path adjacent to Meadow Creek connecting James Way to
the hotel property at 850 Oak Park Boulevard. (
\.__ ..
Page 10 of 50
Item 9.b. - Page 123
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
(,.---.....,\
\ Phase II is an amendment to Vesting Tentative Tract Map 04-006 and an entitled 8-unit townhouse
project located adjacent to and northwest of Phase I to provide better site utilization and interior floor
plan design. The amendment includes two-car tandem garages in place of the previously-approved
single-car garages. These garages would be relocated underneath the townhouses as basements,
resulting in a building height of twenty-nine feet (29'), representing a six foot (6') height decrease from
the original approval.
A variance and lot merger are being pursued concurrently with the conditional use permit and amended
vesting tentative tract map. The variance is necessary to deviate from the fifty foot (SO') creek setback
from top of bank for Meadow Creek. A previously entitled multifamily housing project was approved for
the subject site with a creek setback of twenty-five feet (25'). New setbacks of approximately thirty-five
feet (35') from the top of bank are proposed. The lot merger will combine two of the lots for the
construction of Phase I and will help delineate Phase I from Phase II.
Other Required Public Agency Approvals
The applicant will be required to coordinate with the Regional Water Quality Control Board, the San Luis
Obispo County Air Pollution Control District, and the Army Corps of Engineers to obtain all necessary
permits to complete the project.
Related Projects
Vesting Tentative Tract Map 04-006
Planned Unit Development 04-005
Minor Exception 05-015
Oak Park Plaza Master Plan
Page 11 of SO
Item 9.b. - Page 124
INITIAL STUDY /MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
Environmental Checklist
Project Information
Project Title: Conditional Use Permit 12-002
Variance 12-004
Lot Merger 12-003
Amended Vesting Tentative Tract Map 12-001
Lead Agency Name & Address:
Contact Person & Telephone Number:
Project Location:
City of Arroyo Grande
300 East Brach Street
Arroyo Grande, CA 93420
Matthew Downing, Assistant Planner
(805) 473-5420
880 Oak Park Boulevard
Southeast corner of Oak Park Boulevard/James Way
intersection
Project Sponsor Name & Address:
Arroyo Grande, CA 93420
Russ Sheppel c/o Sheppel Enterprises
2218 Old Middlefield Way #C
Mountain View, CA 94043
General Plan Designation: Mixed-Use (MU)
Planned Development (PD)
Zoning: Office Mixed-Use (OMU)
Description of Project: Refer to page 10
Surrounding Land Uses & Setting: The project site is surrounded by· James Way and a
church to the north, medical offices, a fitness facility,
and Oak Park Boulevard to the West, a hotel and
commercial center to the south, and Meadow Creek
and a residential development to the east.
Approval Required from Other Public Agencies: None.
Page 12 of 50
,,----... ( .
\
'-
( .
'---·
Item 9.b. - Page 125
-~--.
(
'·
r.-'.
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
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:
181 Aesthetics 0 Agricultural Resources
181 Cultural Resources
181 Air Quality
181 Geology/Soils 181 Biological Resources
181 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
0 Land Use/Planning
0 Hazards & Hazardous Materials
0 Mineral Resources
181 Hydrology/Water Quality
181 Noise
0 Population/Housing 181 Public Services 0 Recreation ·
0 Transportation/Traffic 0 Utilities/Service Systems 0 Mandatory Findings of Significance
Determination
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
D I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
D
I find that, although the original scope of the proposed project COULD have had a significant
effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect because revisions/mitigations
to the project have been made by or agreed to by the applicant. 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 or its functional equivalent will be prepared.
. 0 I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially
significant unless mitigated impact" on the environment. However, at least one impact has
been adequately analyzed in an earlier document, pursuant to applicable legal standards, and
has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis, as described in the
report's attachments. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but It must analyze
only the impacts not sufficiently addressed in previous documents.
D I find that, although the proposed project could have had a significant effect on the
environment, because all potentially significant effects have been adequately analyzed in an
earlier EIR or Negative Declaration, pursuant to applicable standards, and have been avoided or
mitigated, pursuant to an earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are
imposed upon the proposed project, all impacts have been avoided or mitigated to a less-than-
significant level and no further action is required.
~· [-Z2-~/1
Matthew Downing
Assistant Planner
Date
Page 13 of SO
Item 9.b. - Page 126
. .-··~ ( .
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
1. A brief explanation is required for all answers, except "No Impact", that are adequately
supported by the information sources cited. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if
the referenced information sources show that the impact does not apply to the project being
evaluated (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be
explained where it is based on general or project-specific factors (e.g., the project will not
expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2. All answers must consider the whole of the project-related effects, both direct and indirect,
including off-site, cumulative, construction, and operational impacts. .
3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, the checklist
answers must indicate whether that impact is potentially significant, less than significant with
mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate when there is
sufficient evidence that a substantial or potentially substantial adverse change may occur in any
of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project that cannot be mitigated
below a level of significance. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries, an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required.
4. A "Mitigated Negative Declaration" (Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant with Mitigation
Incorporated) applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures, prior to declaration of
project approval, has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than
Significant Impact with Mitigation." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures and
briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level.
5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR {including a General Plan) or
Negative Declaration [CCR, Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA, § 15063(c)(3)(D)].
References to an earlier analysis should:
a) Identify the earlier analysis and state where it is available for review.
b) Indicate which effects from the environmental checklist were adequately analyzed in the
earlier document, pursuant to applicable legal standards, and whether these effects were
adequately addressed by mitigation measures included in that analysis.
c) Describe the mitigation measures in this document that were incorporated or refined from
the earlier document and indicate to what extent they address site-specific conditions for
this project.
6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate references to information sources for potential
impacts into the checklist or appendix (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances, biological
assessments). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should include an
indication of the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7. A source list should be appended to this document. Sources used or individuals contacted
should be listed in the source list and cited in the discussion.
8. Explanation(s) of each issue should identify:
a) the criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate the significance of the impact addressed by
each question and
b) the mitigation measures, if any, prescribed to reduce the impact below the level of
significance.
Page 14 of 50
C ..
Item 9.b. - Page 127
,.,--" ( '
I
(
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
Environmental Issues
I. Aesthetics
Environmental Setting
The City is mostly built-out, with distinct residential, commercial and agricultural districts and several
mixed-use areas. The City also contains portions of three creeks and several open space areas. The City
has been recognized as a "Tree City" for each of the last 30 years.
The proposed project will develop an approximately 1.8-acre site that is partly vacant and partly utilized
for overflow parking for the nearby medical office. Phase I is a 69-bed memory care facility. Phase II is a
revision to 8 townhomes previously approved and currently entitled to provide better site utilization
and interior floor plan design. Although the area is currently vacant, previous grading has been
performed in conjunction with the existing commercial development known as the Oak Park
Professional Plaza. The previous commercial development has already impacted the public view along
the Oak Park Blvd. and James Way corridors.
The 8-unit townhouse component of the proposed project is proposed to be redesigned for basement-
level tandem parking with the buildings totaling twenty-nine feet (29') in height. The memory care
facility is proposed be two stories with a basement level and will have a maximum height of thirty feet
(30'). The site will be visible to adjacent residential condominiums (Leisure Gardens) to the east across
the adjacent riparian corridor and from James Way.
Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including,
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the site and its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in
the area?
Discussion
a, b: No impact
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
Less Than Less Than Significant
with Significant
Mitigation Impact
No Impact
D D
D D
D [gJ D
[gJ D D
c: The proposed project will alter the views from the existing residential development across Meadow
Creek. These alterations, however, will not be significant as commercial development already exists
within the Oak Park Professional Plaza. The project also includes restoration of the riparian corridor
along the western creek bank that will enhance the natural environment and soften the visual impact of
the proposed development. The building will be more residential in style several different materials to
add complexity to the architecture. Materials include cement fiber lab siding and smooth cement
plaster in green and beige hues as well as cement fiber trim in a brown hue. Eldorado stone river rock
Page 15 of SO
Item 9.b. - Page 128
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
will be used on some of the lowest portions of the building. The roof is proposed to be multicolored,
lightweight concrete roof tiles that complement the siding, trim, and rock materials. · Less than
significant impact
d: The proposed project includes the addition of new exterior lighting fixtures on both phases of the
project. However, all exterior lighting is required to comply with Development Code requirernents
including Sections 16.48.090 and 16.48.120. Less than significant with mitigation
MM 1-1: The applicant shall submit a lighting plan verifying that all exterior lighting for the
development is directed downward and does not create spill or glare to adjacent properties and
riparian habitat.
References: 1, 3, 5, 6
II. Agriculture and Forest Resources
Environmental Setting
The City of Arroyo Grande contains approximately 460 acres of active farmland, most of which is Prime
Farrnland consisting of Class I and Class II soils. The subject property is not located near Agricultural
land. There are no forest resources located within the City.
Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farrnland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning
of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by Government
Code section 51104(g))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use?
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
D
D
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
No Impact
• In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the
California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Madel (1997), prepared by the California Department of
Conservation as an optional model for use in assessing impacts an agricultural and farmland. In determining whether impacts
to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled
by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest land, including the Forest
Page 16 of SO
(
\,.
Item 9.b. - Page 129
. ..-~---
r,_' '
;
\ ... ____ _
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology
. provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board.
Discussion
a-e: No impact
References: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 11
Ill. Air Quality
Environmental Setting
San Luis Obispo County is in non-attainment status for ozone (03 ), respirable particulate matter (PMlO)
and vinyl chloride under the California Air Resource Board (CARB) standards. The County is in
attainment status for all other applicable CARB standards. The proposed project will provide sixty-nine
(69) beds in a residential care facility specializing in Alzheimer's care and assisted living. The project will
also revise eight (8) townhomes previously approved and currently entitled to provide better site
utilization and interior floor plan design.
Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of
any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
non-attainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard (including releasing
emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for
ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
D
D
Less Than
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
No Impact
D
D
D
• Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district
may be relied on to make these determinations.
San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (APCD) Specific Comments
APCD reviewed the proposed project and submitted a letter dated June 24, 2013 outlining
recommended mitigation measures. These measures have been incorporated into this Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. APCD encourages a balance of residential and commercial infill
within the existing County URL/VRLs, as this is consistent with the land use goals and policies of the
APCD's Clean Air Plan. Enabling residents the opportunity to live, work and shop within areas that utilize
land use principles that reduce the need to drive and minimizes vehicle exhaust emissions which
account for over 50% of the County's air pollution including greenhouse gas emissions. Increasing
Page 17 of 50
Item 9.b. - Page 130
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
density can reduce trips and travel distances and encourage the use of alternative forms of
transportation.
APCD specifically commended the applicant on the following elements of the project design:
1. The project provides development within the city limits with nearby access to commercial
services and transit service, which will reduce dependence on driving;
2. The project provides development within the URL where such development is planned for and
expected;
3. The proposed residential buildings are two stories, resulting in a greater floor to area ratio. This
creates a higher density land use, making transit services more viable and effective.
In light of these elements of the project design, the APCD supports this project.
Discussion
a-b, d: Based upon the emissions estimates provided by APCD, the construction phase emissions are
anticipated to exceed APCD's daily emission threshold, resulting in an estimated 173 lbs/day of Reactive
Organic Gases (ROG) + Nitrous Oxides (NOx) being emitted. This exceeds the 25 lbs/day ROG + NOx
threshold in Table 3-2 of the 2012 CEQA Handbook. Implementation of mitigation measures, however,
will reduce the overall air quality impacts from the project to a level of insignificance. Less than
significant with mitigation
Construction Phase Emissions
MM 111-1: Based on the recommendation by APCD, the applicant shall demonstrate how the
construction phase impacts will be below the level of significance as identified in APCD's CEQA / \
Handbook prior to grading permit issuance and at least three months before construction \.
activities are to begin.
MM 111-2: The following standard mitigation measures for construction equipment shall be
implemented to reduce the ROG, NOx, and diesel particulate matter (DPM) emissions during
construction of the project:
a. Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer's
specifications;
b. Fuel all off-road and portable diesel powered equipment with ARB certified motor
vehicle diesel fuel (non-taxed version suitable for use off-road);
c. Use diesel construction equipment meeting ARB's Tier 2 certified engines or cleaner off-
road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State Off-Road Regulation;
d. Use on-road heavy-duty trucks that meet the ARB's 2007 or cleaner certification
standard for on-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State On-Road
Regulation;
e. Construction or trucking companies with fleets that do not have engines in their fleet
that meet the engine standards identified in the above two measures (e.g. captive or
NOx exempt area fleets) may be eligible by proving alternative compliance;
f. All on-and off-road diesel equipment shall not idle for more than 5 minutes. Signs shall
be posted in the designated queuing areas and or job sites to remind drivers and
operators of the 5 minute idling limit;
g. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors is not permitted;
h. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors;
i. Electrify equipment when feasible;
Page 18 of SO
(
I \,'------"'".·
Item 9.b. - Page 131
,,,--( .
I
'"-
(
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
j. Substitute gasoline-powered in place of diesel-powered equipment, where feasible; and
k. Use alternatively fueled construction equipment on-site where feasible, such as
compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane or biodiesel.
MM 111-3: Prior to any construction activities at the site, the project proponent shall ensure that
a geologic evaluation is conducted to determine if Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA) is present
within the area that will be disturbed. If NOA is not present, an exemption request must be filed
with APCD. If NOA is found at the site, the applicant must comply with all requirements outlined
in the Asbestos Air Toxins Control Measure (ATCM) regulated by the California Air Resources
Board (ARB) and may require development of an Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan and an Asbestos
Health and Safety Program for approval by APCD.
MM 111-4: Prior to any demolition activities or the removal or relocation of utility pipelines at the
site, if necessary, the project proponent shall notify APCD to ensure the activities occur in
accordance with the requirements stipulated in the National Emission Standard for Hazardous
Air Pollutants (NESHAP).
MM 111-5: The following mitigation measures shall be implemented during construction to
manage fugitive dust emissions such that they do not exceed APCD 20% opacity limit (APCD Rule
401) or prompt nuisance violations (APCD Rule 402):
a. Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible;
b. Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust
from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency will be required whenever wind
speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed (non-potable) water shall be used whenever
possible;
c. All dirt stockpile areas should be sprayed daily as needed;
d. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and
landscape plans shall be implemented as soon as possible, following completion of any
soil disturbing activities;
e. Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month
after initial grading shall be sown with a fast germinating, non-invasive, grass seed and
watered until vegetation is established;
f. 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;
g. 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 o soil binders are used;
h. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved
surface at the construction site;
i. 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;
j. Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash
off trucks and equipment leaving the site;
k. 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;
I. All PM 10 mitigation measures required shall be shown on grading and building plans; and
Page 19 of 50
Item 9.b. - Page 132
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
m. The contractor or building shall designate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive
dust emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as necessary to
minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below 20% opacity. Their duties
shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The
name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD Compliance
Divisions prior to the start of any grading, earthwork or demolition.
MM 111-6: Prior to any construction activities on the site, the project proponent shall contact the
APCD Engineering Division to obtain all necessary permits for portable equipment used during
the construction and operational phases of the project. Typical equipment requiring a permit
includes, but is not limited to, the following:
• Diesel engines;
• Portable generators and equipment with engines that are SO horsepower or greater;
• Electrical generation plants or the use of standby generators; and
• Portable plants (e.g. aggregate plant, asphalt batch plant, concrete batch plant, etc.
MM 111-7: Proposed truck routes shall be evaluated and selected to ensure routing patterns have
the least impact to residential dwellings and other sensitive receptors, such as schools, parks,
daycare centers, nursing homes, and hospitals.
Operational Phase Emissions
MM 111-8: The project proponent shall coordinate with and obtain all necessary equipment and
operation permits that are required by APCD. Typical equipment requiring such permits
includes, but is not limited to, the following:
• Portable generators and equipment with engines that are SO hp or greater;
• Electrical generation plants or the use of standby generators;
• Boilers;
• Internal combustion engines;
• Sterilization unit(s) using ethylene oxide and incinerator(s); and
• Cogeneration facilities.
c, e: No impact
References: 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 12, 13
IV. Biological Resources
Environmental Setting
The project site has been disturbed with previous grading activities and imported fill material.
Consequently the site topography has been altered creating a manmade berm at the top of Meadow
Creek and a manmade wetland. A previous ''Top of Bank Study" conducted by Triad/Holmes, Assoc.,
dated June 1, 2004, identified the top of bank is the 71-foot contour line.
The City approved a project consisting of 24 density equivalent townhomes and condominiums (22
physical units) in eleven (11) buildings in May of 2006 that was not constructed. Modification of part of
that project is proposed as part of the current project. As part of the previous project approvals, the
Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) required mitigation for disturbance of the manmade wetland.
Specifically, the ACOE issued a Section 404 permit under the Clean Water Act to the applicant on August
Page 20 of 50
I
I
\
/
( .
'----
Item 9.b. - Page 133
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
22, 2002. As part of the Section 404 permitting process, a Wetland Mitigation Plan was prepared by the
Morro Group, Inc. dated May 21, 2002 that outlines restoration of the 0.18-acre riparian area along the
bank of the Meadow Creek drainage basin.
On September 17, 2010 a wetland survey was completed by SWCA Environmental Consultants that
indicated a reduced area of manmade wetland. The original 0.09 acres of wetland has been reduced to
a 0.006 acre area. The project proponent has elected to continue with the previously developed
Wetland Mitigation Plan for the current proposal even though the area of wetland has since been
reduced. This extra mitigation will reduce any potentially significant impacts to less than significant
levels.
Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status
species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community identified
in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and
Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal,
filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or
with established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
Discussion
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
D
D
Less Than
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
D
No Impact
D
D
D
D
a-d: Construction of the project will fill a manmade depression area that currently acts to detain
stormwater runoff and recharge the groundwater. Although this wetland is considered "waters of the
United States", it is also considered low value due to its manmade origin and composition of non-native
Page 21 of SO
Item 9.b. - Page 134
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
plant species. Mitigation is required and outlined in the Wetland Mitigation Plan to enhance the
riparian corridor.
Riparian vegetation provides habitat and streamside shading for Steelhead and California red-legged
frogs, which are protected species that likely occur along the project reach of the creek during at least
some portion of the year. Although no direct project-related impacts are expected to occur within the
Meadow Creek riparian corridor, establishment of a 35-foot setback from the top of bank would provide
future protection of the riparian habitat, as well as implementation of proper erosion control methods
during site construction. Less Than Significant with Mitigation
MM IV-1: The applicant shall revegetate the 0.18-acre mitigation area as outlined in the
"Wetland Mitigation Plan" prepared by the Morro Group, Inc., dated May 21, 2002. Any plants
that do not survive shall be replaced in kind and monitored until established. Temporary
irrigation shall be provided for all planting areas for three (3) years or until plants are
established. An independent consultant specializing in biological resources shall be hired by the
City and paid for by the applicant to monitor the mitigation for a minimum of five (5) years.
MM IV-2: The applicant shall consult and coordinate with the Regional Water Quality Control
Board (RWQCB) and the United States Corps of Engineers (USACE) regarding the project. The
applicant shall obtain all permits required for the construction, operation, or mitigation of the
project. If permits are not required, the applicant shall provide written verification as such from
the appropriate agency.
,,,---,
MM IV-3: The applicant shall obtain compliance with Section 1602 of the California Fish and (_
Game Code (Streambed Alteration Agreements) in the form of a completed Streambed
Alteration Agreement or written documentation from the CDFG that no agreement would be
required. Should an agreement be required, the applicant shall implement all the terms and
conditions of the agreement to the satisfaction of the CDFG. The CDFG Streambed Alteration
Agreement process encourages applicants to demonstrate that the proposed project has been
designed and will be implemented in a manner that avoids and minimizes impacts on riparian
habitat and the stream zone.
MM IV-4: All non-native plant species shall be eliminated from the 35' wide creek setback area.
MM IV-5: The developer shall record an irrevocable offer of dedication open space agreement
and thirty-five foot (35') creek easement on the property measured from top of bank. No
structures shall occur within the 35' creek setback area, in accordance with Section 16.44.050 of
the Municipal Code.
MM IV-6: Siltation/sedimentation control measures shall be implemented along the entire
eastern property boundary prior to site construction. Such control measures shall include
sediment fences and/or hay bales placed into the crux of the bank of Meadow Creek.
Erosion/sediment control barricades shall be placed around the perimeter of each construction
zone with the potential to drain to Meadow Creek.
MM IV-7: Soil shall not be stockpiled in areas located nearthe eastern property margin adjacent
to Meadow Creek, or in areas that have potential to drain to Meadow Creek. Stockpiled soil
Page 22 of 50
/
\_ ' ____,,
Item 9.b. - Page 135
(-·
f
\,
'
, INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
should be properly covered at all times to avoid wind and water erosion, and consequent
siltation to Meadow Creek.
MM IV-8: No heavy equipment shall be allowed within the Meadow Creek corridor.
e, f: No Impact
References: 1, 3, 4, 5, 6
V. Cultural Resources
Environmental Setting
Previous investigations have indicated the presence of Native Americans within the present-day City
Limits during prehistoric times. There are a handful of designated historical resources within the City,
including the IOOF Hall, the Pauling House and the Bridge Street Bridge.
A Phase I Archaeological Survey of the project area was conducted on October 9, 2000 by Heritage
Discoveries, Inc. The survey produced negative results for the presence of cultural resources. According
to the study, no cultural materials were observed during the two meter transects made across the
property. Since the site has been previously graded, the site area lacks original ground surfaces and only
sub-soils remain. Additionally, previous archaeological surveys of the adjacent building areas also
produced negative results.
Potentially Less Than Less Than Significant Significant with Significant No Impact
Impact Impact Would the project: Mitigation
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in § D 181 D D
15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to D D D
§ 15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic D D D 181
feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those D 181 D D interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Discussion
a, b: It is unlikely that cultural resources exist on the subject property. As a precaution, however, if
cultural resources are encountered during the construction process, development activities at the site
shall cease until a qualified archaeologist has been employed to view and assess the discovery and
prepare a mitigation plan. Less than significant with mitigation
MM V-1: If a potentially significant cultural resource is encountered during subsurface
earthwork activities, all construction activities within a _100-foot radius of the find shall cease
until a qualified archaeologist determines whether the uncovered resource requires further
study. A standard inadvertent disc~very clause shall be included in every grading and
Page 23 of SO
Item 9.b. - Page 136
/~-···
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
construction contract to inform contractors of this requirement. Any previously undiscovered
resources found during construction shall be recorded on appropriate California Department of
Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance in terms of California
Environmental Quality Act criteria by a qualified archaeologist. Potentially significant cultural
resources consist of, but are not limited to, stone, bone, glass, ceramic, wood, or shell artifacts;
fossils; or features including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. If the resource is
determined significant under CEQA, the qualified archaeologist shall prepare and implement a
research design and archaeological data recovery plan that will capture those categories of data
for which the site is significant. The archaeologist shall also perform appropriate technical
analysis, prepare a comprehensive report, and file it with the appropriate Information Center
and provide for the permanent cu ration of the recovered materials.
c: No Impact
d: The proposed project will require grading and ground disturbance, which may disturb human
remains, including those that have been interned outside of formal cemeteries. Less than significant
with mitigation
MM V-2: If human remains are encountered during earth-disturbing activities, all work in the
adjacent area shall stop immediately and the San Luis Obispo County Coroner's office shall be
notified immediately. If the remains are determined to be Native American in origin, the Native
American Heritage Commission shall be notified and will identify the Most Likely Descendent,
who will be consulted for recommendations for treatment of the discovered remains.
References: 5, 6, 7, 15
VI. Geology and Soils
Environmental Setting
There are two faults within City Limits, the Pismo Fault and the Wilmar Avenue Fault. The Pismo Fault is
an inactive fault, and presents a low risk to Arroyo Grande. The Wilmar Avenue fault is a potentially
active fault that runs through the City, generally parallel to US 101.
Approximately half of the City is at moderate risk for liquefaction caused by strong seismic ground
shaking during an earthquake. These areas are primarily located south of US 101 and in the eastern part
of the City.
The majority of the City is at low risk for landslides. The areas at greatest risk are hillsides where greater
slopes are located. The potential for slope stability hazards in valley areas is low to very low. The areas
at greatest risk for landslide are just north of US 101 in the hillsides and in the eastern portions of the
City.
A Soils Engineering Report was prepared for the project site by Earth Systems Pacific dated October 30,
2006. The project site has been subject to previous grading activities. Standard construction grading
and design-specified soil compaction will occur with the project.
Page 24 of 50
Item 9.b. - Page 137
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or
death involving:
1) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map, issued by the
State Geologist for the area, or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? (Refer
to Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.)
2) Strong seismic ground shaking?
3) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
4) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable,
or that would become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in on-or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or
collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-
1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating
. substantial risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the
disposal of waste water?
Discussion
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
No Impact
D
D
D
D
a: The Wilmar Avenue Fault is a potentially active fault, and could trigger an earthquake, causing strong
seismic ground shaking and ground failure due to liquefaction. Any potential impacts to the proposed
project will already be mitigated to an acceptable level of risk by following the Uniform Building Code
development standards. Less than significant impact
b: Ground disturbance associated with the proposed project could cause soil erosion and loss of topsoil,
and increase the rate of stormwater runoff, also causing soil erosion and loss of topsoil. However, the
proposed project will comply with the provisions of Municipal Code Section 13.24, "EXCAVATION,
GRADING, EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL" and therefore would not result in substantial soil
erosion or the loss of topsoil. Less than significant impact
c, d: A soils engineering report was prepared for the project site which identified the potential for
differential settlement due to the variety of soil and rock profiles, presence of fill soil, and non-
( uniformity of the upper soil conditions due to disturbance. The report concludes that these concerns
' , '~-... -
Page 25 of 50
Item 9.b. - Page 138
.~.
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
can be alleviated with incorporation of several recommendations from the report into the project plans
and specifications. Less than significant with mitigation
MM Vl-1: All construction plans shall incorporate the recommendations of the soils engineering
report prepared for the project site by Earth Systems Pacific dated October 30, 2006.
e: No impact
References: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 14
VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Environmental Setting
The City of Arroyo Grande emitted approximately 96,549 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
(C02e) in the baseline year 2005. The transportation sector was by far the largest contributor to
emissions (57.0%), producing approximately 55,030 metric tons of C02e in 2005. Emissions from the
residential sector were the next largest contributor (24.6%), producing approximately 23,778 metric
tons of C02e. The commercial and industrial sectors accounted for a combined 12.3% of the total.
Emissions from solid waste comprised 6.0% of the total, and emissions from other sources such as
agricultural equipment comprised 0.1%.
The maj~rity of emissions from the transportation sector were the result of gasoline consumption in
private vehicles traveling on local roads, US Highway 101, and state highways. Greenhouse gas (GHG)
figures from the waste sector are the estimated future emissions that will result from the decomposition
of waste generated by city residents and businesses in the base year 2005, with weighted average
methane capture factor of 60.0 % '
Potentially Less Than Less Than Significant Significant with Significant No Impact
Would the project: Impact Mitigation Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly
or indirectly, that may have a significant effect on the D !81 D D
environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation
adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of D !81 D D
greenhouse gases?
c) Result in the exposure of local residents to hazards D D D !81 associated with climate change?
Discussion
a, b: The proposed project will generate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from daily operation of
buildings and potentially from traffic generation. While the California Air Resources Board (CARB) has
not yet developed a statewide threshold, as directed under Senate Bill 97, the City has determined that
the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) 2008 White Paper, which includes
possible methodologies and thresholds for project-level GHG emissions, provides the best and latest
information on establishing cumulative impact thresholds. This paper has determined that a
conservative threshold where a project's impact may be considered 'cumulatively considerable' is 900
Page 26 of 50
r'--\ ! )
(,.-·-.
I
(
\, _____ .
Item 9.b. - Page 139
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
(-\. metric tons or more of GHG emissions per year. The following table provides a general summary of
project types and sizes that generate 900 metric tons of GHG emissions per year:
,/
(,_
Project Type Size that Generates 900 Metric Tons of GHG Emissions per Year
Single-family residential 50 units
Apartments/condominiums 70 units
General commercial or office space 35,000 square-feet
Retail space 11,000 square-feet
Supermarket/grocery store 6,300 square-feet
Based on the above assumptions, the proposed project is estimated to generate approximately 1,031
metric tons of GHG emissions per year. This is approximately 1.15 times the threshold of 900 metric
tons per year that is considered to be a 'cumulatively considerable' impact. The San Luis Obispo Air
Pollution Control Board (APCD) has established mitigation measures to reduce project-level GHG
emissions. Less than significant with mitigation
MM Vll-1: All construction plans shall reflect the following GHG-reducing measures where
applicable. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit impact reduction
calculations based on these measures to the APCD for review and approval, incorporating the
following measures:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Incorporate outdoor electrical outlets to encourage the use of electric appliances and
tools.
Provide shade tree planting in parking lots to reduce evaporative emissions from parked
vehicles. Design should provide 50% tree coverage within 10 years of construction using
low ROG emitting, low maintenance native drought resistant trees.
Provide conduit for future fueling of electric vehicles (one space in parking area) .
No residential wood burning appliances .
Provide employee lockers and showers. One shower and 5 lockers for every 25
employees are recommended.
Trusses for south-facing portions of roofs shall be designed to handle dead weight loads
of standard solar-heated water and photovoltaic panels. Roof design shall include
sufficient south-facing roof surface, based on structures size and use, to accommodate
adequate solar panels. For south facing roof pitches, the closest standard roof pitch to
the ideal average solar exposure shall be used.
Increase the building energy rating by 20% above Title 24 requirements. Measures used
to reach the 20% rating cannot be double counted.
Plant drought tolerant, native shade trees along southern exposures of buildings to
reduce energy used to cool buildings in summer.
Utilize green building materials (materials which are resource efficient, recycled, and
sustainable) available locally if possible.
Install high efficiency heating and cooling systems .
Design building to include roof overhangs that are sufficient to block the high summer
sun, but not the lower winter sun, from penetrating south facing windows (passive solar
design).
Utilize high efficiency gas or solar water heaters .
Utilize built-in energy efficient appliances (i.e. Energy Star®) .
Utilize double-paned windows .
Page 27 of SO
Item 9.b. - Page 140
INITIAL STUDY/MmGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
• Utilize low energy street lights (i.e. sodium) .
• Utilize energy efficient interior lighting.
• Install energy-reducing programmable thermostats.
• Use roofing material with a solar reflectance values meeting the EPA/DOE Energy Star~
rating to reduce summer cooling needs.
• Eliminate high water consumption landscape (e.g., plants and lawns) in residential
design. Use native plants that do not require watering and are low ROG emitting.
• Provide on-site bicycle parking both short term (racks) and long term (lockers, or a
locked room with standard racks and access limited to bicyclist only) to meet peak
season maximum demand. One bike rack space per 10 vehicle/employee space is
recommended.
• Require the installation of electrical hookups at loading docks and the connection of
trucks equipped with electrical hookups to eliminate the need to operate diesel-
powered TRUs at the loading docks.
• Provide storage space in garage for bicycle and bicycle trailers, or covered racks /
lockers to service the residential units.
c: No impact
References: 12, 13, 14
VIII Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Environmental Setting (
There are no known hazardous materials sites in the City, nor are there any airports within the vicinity of '-..
the City. The project is not within a high severity risk area for fire.
Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
D
D
0
0
Less Than
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
No Impact
Page 28 of 50
Item 9.b. - Page 141
,,--..., ' \ ( ' \
,--···
(
(
·-.
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including
where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or
where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
Discussion
a-h: No impact
References: 4, 5, 6, 7, 14
IX Hydrology and Water Quality
Environmental Setting
D D D
D D D
D D D
D D D
The City of Arroyo Grande draws its water supply from a combination of the Lopez Reservoir and
groundwater wells. Wastewater service is provided by the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation
District. The City adopted interim low-impact development (LID) guidelines to address stormwater
runoff issues in 2009.
A preliminary Drainage Study was conducted for the project site by Triad/Holms As~ociates, dated May
2005. The project site has varying slopes between 2% and 10% and stormwater surface runoff follows
the topography easterly towards Meadow Creek. Subsurface detention and LID measures are required
for the proposed project. Two (2) existing outfall locations convey stormwater from the Oak Park
Professional Plaza to the creek. The detention facilities are designed to reduce the peak flow rate
resulting from a post-development 100-year storm and limit the release flow rate from the site to the
pre-development flow resulting from a 100-year storm event. The detention areas will outlet to the
existing storm drain system.
Page 29 of 50
Item 9.b. - Page 142
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such
that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a
lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the
production rate of preexisting nearby wells would drop
to a level which would not support existing land ~ses
or planned uses for which permits have been
granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of
the site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, in a manner which would
result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of
the site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, or substantially increase
the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on-or off-site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation
map?
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures
which would impede or redirect flood flows?
i) Expose-people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury, or death from flooding, including flooding
resulting from the failure of a levee or dam?
j) Result in inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
Discussion
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
No Impact
D
D
D
a: Development of the proposed project would result in an increase in the amount of impervious
surface area and an associated increase in the rate and volume of stormwater runoff from the site.
Construction activities have the potential to disrupt soil and cause erosion and increase sediment runoff.
An Erosion Control Plan will be prepared prior to any ground disturbance activities to provide the details
of the erosion control measures to be applied on the site during construction. The Erosion Control Plan
will include Best Management Practices (BMPs) designed to minimize sediment in site runoff during
construction. BMPs designed to reduce erosion of exposed soil may include, but are not limited to: soil
stabilization controls, watering for dust control, perimeter silt fences, placement of hay bales, and
Page 30 of 50
(----..,
\
Item 9.b. - Page 143
/
i
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
(,
\_ sediment basins. Any disturbed portions of the project area will be revegetated following construction
/--
(
'
f
\ .... _ ___. .•. /
activities. Less than significant with mitigation
MM IX-1: A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be developed and
implemented in consultation with the City, Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and
other regulatory agencies. The SWPPP shall include BMPs to reduce potential impacts to
surface water quality through the construction and life of the project. The SWPPP shall adhere
to the following requirements:
• The SWPPP shall include measures to avoid creating contaminants, minimize the release
of contaminants, and water quality control measures to minimize contaminants from
entering surface water or percolating into the ground.
• The water quality control measures shall address both construction and operations
periods.
• Fluvial erosion and water pollution related to construction shall be controlled by a
construction water pollution control program that shall be filled with the appropriate
agency and kept current throughout any site development phase.
•
•
•
•
•
•
The water pollution prevention program shall include BMPs, as appropriate, given the
specific circumstances of the site and project.
The SWPPP shall be submitted for review and approval to the RWQCB .
A spill prevention and countermeasure plan shall be incorporated into the SWPPP .
Designation of equipment and supply staging and storage areas at least 150 feet from
the outside edge of the Meadow Creek 35-foot setback area. All vehicle parking,
routine equipment maintenance, fueling, minor repair, etc., and soil and material
stockpile, shall be done only in the designated staging area.
Major vehicle/equipment maintenance, repair, and equipment washing shall be
performed off site.
A wet and dry spill cleanup plan that specifies reporting requirements and immediate
clean up to ensure no residual soil, surface water or groundwater contamination would
remain after clean up.
• Designating concrete mixer washout areas at least 100 feet from the outside edge of the
Meadow Creek 35-foot setback with the use of appropriate containment or reuse
practices.
• A temporary and excess fill stockpile and disposal plan that ensures that no detrimental
affects to receiving waters would result.
• Requiring all grading and application of concrete, asphalt, etc. to occur during the dry
season fr9m April 15 to October 15.
• Required site preparation and erosion control BMPs for any work that may need to be
completed after October 15.
MM IX-2: To reduce erosion hazards due to construction activities, grading shall be minimized
and project applicants shall use runoff and sediment control structures, and/or establish a
permanent plant cover on side slopes following construction.
MM IX-3: Erosion control and bank stabilization measures shall be implemented to ensure that
the creek bank does not erode. In addition, alternative bank protection methods, such as
restoration of native vegetation, root wads, or other bioengineering methods of stabilization,
Page 31of50
Item 9.b. - Page 144
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
shall be used whenever possible. In order to reduce long-term effects of soil compaction and
changes in topography, construction vehicles and personnel shall not enter the low flow channel
and wet areas. Construction mats and other devices shall be used whenever possible to reduce
impacts associated with soil compaction.
MM IX-4: All temporary fill placed during project construction shall be removed at project
completion and the area restored to approximate pre-project contours and topography.
MM IX-5: No construction debris or materials shall be allowed to enter the creek bed, either
directly or indirectly. Stockpiles shall be kept far enough from the banks of the active channel
and protected to prevent materials from entering the creek bed.
b: No impact
c: Stormwater runoff from the proposed project will be captured in a subsurface detention system as
well as in vegetated bioswales and other Low Impact Development (LID) BMPs. The
bioswales/detention system is designed to retain and infiltrate stormwater runoff from a 100-year
storm. Stormwater in exceeding the bioswales/detention system capacity would be conveyed into the
existing storm drain system. A maintenance agreement for the upkeep of drainage facilities will be
required to be recorded if the project is approved. Less than significant impact
d, e: No impact
f: The Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) requires municipalities, via the
Municipal General Storm Water Permit, to minimize negative impacts on aquatic ecosystems and
degradation of water quality to the maximum extent practicable. Permittees must implement Best
Management Practices (BMPs) that reduce pollutants in stormwater runoffto the technology-based
standard of Maximum Extent Practicable (MEP) to protect water quality. The goals of post-construction
BMPs are to prevent and control erosion and sedimentation, provide source control of potential
pollutants, control and treat runoff, and protect wetlands and water quality resources. Post-
construction BMPs are required to achieve stormwater quality standards through site-planning
measures. Vegetative swales or other biofilters are recommended as the preferred choice for post-
construction BMPs for all projects with suitable landscape areas, because these measures are relatively
economical and require limited maintenance. For projects where landscape based treatment is
impracticable, or insufficient to meet required design criteria, other post-construction BMPs should be
incorporated. All post-construction BMPs must be maintained to operate effectively. Less than
significant with mitigation
MM IX-6: The following water quality BMPs shall be incorporated into the project:
•
•
•
Run-off Control. Maintain post-development peak runoff rate and average volume of
runoff at levels that are similar to pre-development levels.
Labeling and Maintenance of Storm Drain Facilities. Label new and existing storm drain
inlets with "No Dumping -Drains to Ocean" to alert the public to the destination of
stormwater and to prevent direct discharge of pollutants into the storm drain.
Common Area Litter Control: Implement a trash management and litter control program
to prevent litter and debris from being carried to water bodies or the storm drain ·
system.
Page 32 of 50
Item 9.b. - Page 145
,,,r··--
\ ,'
"~---
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
•
•
•
•
•
g-j: No impact
Food Service Facilities. Design the food service facility to have a sink or other area for
cleaning floor mats, containers, -and equipments that is connected to a grease
interceptor prior to discharging to the sanitary sewer system. The cleaning area shall be
large enough to clean the largest mat or piece of equipment to be cleaned.
Refuse Areas. Trash compactors, enclosures and dumpster areas shall be covered and
protected from roof and surface drainage. Install a self-contained drainage system that
discharges to the sanitary sewer if water cannot be diverted from the areas.
Outdoor Storage Controls. Oils, fuels, solvents, coolants, and other chemicals stored
outdoors must be in containers and protected from drainage by secondary containment
structures such as berms, liners, vaults or roof covers and/or drain to the sanitary sewer
system. Bulk materials stored outdoors must also be protected from drainage with
berms and covers. Process equipment stored outdoors must be inspected for proper
function and leaks, stored on impermeable surfaces and covered. Implement a regular
program of sweeping and litter control and develop a spill cleanup plan for storage
areas.
Cleaning, Maintenance and Processing Controls. Areas used for washing, steam
cleaning, maintenance, repair or processing must have impermeable surfaces and
containment berms, roof covers, recycled water wash facility, and discharge to the
sanitary sewer. Discharges to the sanitary sewer may require pretreatment systems
and/or approval of an industrial waste discharge permit.
Street/parking lot Sweeping: Implement a program to regularly sweep streets, sidewalks
and parking lots to prevent the accumulation of litter and debris. Debris resulting from
pressure washing should be trapped and collected to prevent entry into the storm drain
system. Washwater containing any cleaning agent or degreaser should be collected and
discharged to the sanitary sewer.
References: 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
X. Land Use and Planning
Environmental Setting
The City encompasses approximately 5.5 square-miles and is bisected north/south by US Highway 101.
There are several distinct land use categories and zoning districts for residential, commercial, industrial,
agricultural and mixed uses. The City is adjoined by the cities of Pismo Beach and Grover Beach to the
west and unincorporated areas of San Luis Obispo County to the north, east and south.
Page 33 of SO
Item 9.b. - Page 146
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTlNG TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Conflict with the applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of any agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to, a general plan,
specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation
plan or natural community conservation plan?
Discussion
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
No Impact
a-c: Surrounding land uses are identified on Page 12 of this Initial Study. The proposed project was
reviewed for consistency with policy and/or regulatory documents relating to the environment and
appropriate land use (e.g., City's Land Use Element, Development Code, Zoning Map, etc.). The project
was found to be consistent with these documents and codes. Land use and zoning designations for the
property are consistent with the proposed use and compatible with surrounding land uses. The project
is not within or adjacent to a conservation plan area, although it is subject to the City's required creek
setback, which has been reduced from fifty feet (SO') to thirty-five feet (3S'). No impact
References: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
XI. Mineral Resources
Environmental Setting
There are no known mineral resources in the City of Arroyo Grande.
Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that is or would be of value to the region and
the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site delineated
on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use
plan?
Discussion
a-b: No impact
References: 1, 4, 5, 6
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
Less Than Less Than Significant
with Significant No Impact
Mitigation Impact
D D
D D
Page 34 of SO
,
f
\
Item 9.b. - Page 147
~-,
INITIAL STUDY /MmGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 1:2-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
t ' XII. Noise
(
Environmental Setting
Noise exposure throughout the City is primarily caused by automobile traffic on surface streets and US
Highway 101, with intermittent noise generated by agricultural operations and construction activities.
The project site is located in close proximity to U.S. Highway 101 and existing commercial development
where the ambient noise levels are already elevated.
Would the project:
a) Generate or expose people to noise levels in excess
of standards established in a local general plan or
noise ordinance, or in other applicable local, state, or
federal standards?
b) Generate or expose people to excessive
groundborne vibrations or groundborne noise levels?
c) Create a substantial permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the vicinity of the project (above levels
without the project)?
d) Create a substantial temporary or periodic increase
in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project, in
excess of noise levels existing without the project?
e) Be located within an airport land use plan or, where
such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of
a public airport or public use airport? If so, would the
project expose people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise levels?
f) Be in the vicinity of a private airstrip? If so, would
th~ project expose people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise levels?
Discussion
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
D
No Impact
D
D
D
a, b, d: During construction of the proposed project, the use of construction vehicles and equipment has
the potential to generate excessive levels of noise; however, this is only a temporary increase. All
construction activities will comply with applicable City policies regarding noise. Additional impacts can
be mitigated to less than significant levels by implementing the below mitigation measures. Less than
significant with mitigation
MM Xll-1: Construction activities shall be restricted to the hours of 8 a.m. and 6 p.m. Monday
through Friday. No construction shall occur on Saturday or Sunday. Equipment maintenance
and servicing shall be confined to the same hours. To the greatest extent possible, grading and
construction activities should occur during the middle of the day to minimize the potential for
disturbance of neighboring noise sensitive uses.
MM Xll-2: All construction equipment utilizing internal combustion engines shall be required to
have mufflers that are in good condition. Stationary noise sources shall be located at least 300 feet
Page 35 of 50
Item 9.b. - Page 148
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
from occupied dwelling units unless noise reducing engine housing enclosures or noise screens are
provided by the contractor.
MM Xll-3: Equipment mobilization areas, water tanks, and equipment storage areas shall be
placed in a central location as far from existing residences as feasible.
c, e, f: No impact
References: 1, 3, 4, 5, 6
XIII. Population and Housing
Environmental Setting
Arroyo Grande has a population of 17,252 (2010 Census) with an average household size of 2.4 persons.
The project will be an infill development creating new housing opportunities for the community as well
as providing housing opportunities for a specific subset of the local population, including elderly
individuals. The project will not result in the need for new housing and will not displace existing
housing.
Potentially Less Than Less Than Significant Significant with Significant No lmpac:t
Would the project: lmpac:t Mitigation Impact
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by proposing new homes D D [gi D and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through
extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing D D D
elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing D D D
elsewhere?
Discussion
a: The proposed project will provide eight (8) new townhomes on the site as well as 69 beds in a
residential care facility. However, the increase in housing is not considered to be substantial and
therefore a less. than significant impact will directly result from the proposed project. No substantial
population growth will indirectly result from the project. Less than significant impact
b-c: No impact
References: 1, 2, 4, 5, 6
XIV. Public Services
Environmental Setting
The City of Arroyo Grande administers its own police department and parks and recreation facilities.
Fire protection is provided by the Five Cities Fire Authority through a joint powers agreement (JPA). The
Page 36 of 50
-~--
(
I
\
{
\
Item 9.b. - Page 149
\ ...... _.,.1
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
Lucia Mar Unified School District (LMUSD) provides K-12 educational facilities. Public services to the
project site are readily provided by the City of Arroyo Grande.
Potentially Less Than Less Than Significant Significant with Significant No Impact
Would the project: Impact Mitigation Impact
a) Result in significant environmental impacts from
construction associated with the provision of new or
physically altered governmental facilities, or the need
for new or physically altered governmental facilities, to· D D D
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or
other performance objectives for any of the pu~lic
services:
Fire protection? D D D [81
Police protection: D D D [81
Schools? D [81 D D
Parks? D D D [81
Other public facilities? D D D [81
Discussion
a: The construction of eight (8) townhomes and a 69-bed residential care facility on an infill site
adjacent to other services necessary for daily living is expected to add approximately five (5) school-
aged children to the Lucia Mar Unified School District based on a student yield factor of 0.7. As allowed
by State Law, the Lucia Mar Unified School District has a development impact fee established by the
school district for new residential and commercial construction to finance any new classrooms. Less
than significant with mitigation
MM XIV-1: The applicant shall pay the mandated Lucia Mar Unified School District impact fee.
References: 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 14
XV. Recreation
Environmental Setting
The Recreation Department oversees recreational activities throughout the City and manages the City's
various parks and open· spaces. The project will not affect any existing park or other recreational
resource and will not create additional demand for recreational facilities.
Would the project:
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational facilities, such that
substantial physical deterioration of the facility would
occur or be accelerated?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
D
Less Than
Significant No Impact
Impact
D
Page 37 of 50
Item 9.b. - Page 150
·~. !,....-
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
b) Include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities that
might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
Discussion
D D D
a, b: An offer to dedicate a six-foot (6') wide path/trail access easement parallel to Meadow Creek along
the length of the project site was recorded in December 2002. As part of the project description, the
applicant will improve the path/trail to City specifications. The applicant will be required to abandon
the existing easement and offer a new easement for dedication in the as-built location of the proposed
pedestrian path. No impact
References: 1, 2, 4
XVI.Transportation/Traffic
Environmental Setting
The City's street network consists of a hierarchy of street types which serve different functions. These
include freeways, arterials, collectors, local streets and alleyways.
Freeways route traffic through the community and are characterized by large traffic volumes and high-
speed travel. Arterials link residential and commercial districts and serve shorter through traffic needs.
Due to the heavier traffic on arterials, adjacent land uses are intended to be a mix of commercial and
multi-family residential. Collector streets link neighborhoods to arterials and are not intended for
through traffic but are nonetheless intended to move traffic in an efficient manner. Local streets are
designed to serve only adjacent land uses and are intended to protect residents from through traffic
impacts.
Access to the project site is from an existing driveway off of James Way, with a secondary emergency
access located on the southern portion of the property connecting to the adjacent motel site. A Parking
and Traffic Study was conducted by Orosz Engineering Group, Inc. (OEG), dated January 17, 2006 to
address parking and traffic-related impacts resulting from development of the project and existing uses
within the established professional plaza. OEG has reviewed the current proposed project and
continues to support the findings of the previous study based upon similar traffic and parking loads.
According to the City's traffic study policy, a traffic impact study must be prepared for projects
generating twenty (20) peak hour trips or more. The trip generation for the project is less than twenty
(20) peak hour trips, and therefore a traffic study was not required.
Page 38 of 50
(
\.
Item 9.b. - Page 151
.. -._
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
Would the project:
a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy
establishing measures of effectiveness for the
performance of the circulation system, taking into
account all modes of transportation including mass
transit and non-motorized travel and relevant
components of the circulation system, including but
not limited to intersections, streets, highways and
freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass
transit?
b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management
program, including, but not limited to level of service
standards and travel demand measures, or other
standards established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or
highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections)
or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian
facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or
safety of such facilities?
Discussion
Potentially
Significant
Impact
0
0
0
0
0
0
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
0
0
0
0
0
0
Less Than
Significant
Impact
0
0
0
No Impact
0
0
0
a, b: Parking and circulation patterns are adequate with the proposed project and trip generation would
not significantly impact any road segments or intersections. Less than significant impact
c: No impact
d: Previous project approvals at the site included investigation of project site driveway configuration,
including the two currently installed full ingress and egress driveways serving the project site and the
nearby fitness center. The driveway configuration was considered to provide reasonable operation for
site access. The driveway configuration is considered to continue to be adequate to support the current
project. Less than significant impact
e: The project is required to maintain emergency access on the southern portion of the property
connecting to the adjacent motel site. No impact
f: No impact
References: 1, 3, 5, 6, 12, 13
Page 39 of 50
Item 9.b. - Page 152
,
'
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
XVII. Utilities and Service Systems
Environmental Setting
Water and sewer utilities are provided by the City of Arroyo Grande and the South San Luis Obispo
County Sanitation District.
Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment restrictions or
standards of the applicable Regional Water Quality
Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new water
or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of
existing facilities?
Would the construction of these facilities cause
significant environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing
facilities?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources or
are new or expanded entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination, by the wastewater
treatment provider that serves or may serve the
project, that it has adequate capacity to service the
project's anticipated demand, in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste
disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations as they relate to solid waste?
Discussion
a-g: No impact
References: 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
No Impact
Page 40 of 50
(
\ ' -----~/
Item 9.b. - Page 153
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Would the project:
a} Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
' project are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of other
current proje~s, and the effects of probable future
projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
Discussion
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
D
D
D
a: The proposed project completes an infill property within the City Limits. A major component of this
project is the filling of a 0.006 acre man-made wetland and mitigating the wetland with riparian
vegetation and habitat restoration adjacent to Meadow Creek. Although the potential for adverse
impacts on Meadow Creek exists, as with any project requiring grading and construction, the restoration
of the creek area will result in beneficial improvement to the environment in the vicinity of the project
site. Less than significant impact
b: The impacts of the proposed project are individually limited and not cumulatively considerable. All
environmental impacts that could occur as a result of the proposed project would be reduced to a less
than significant level through implementation of the mitigation measures recommended in this Initial
Study and, when viewed in conjunction with other closely related past, present or reasonably
foreseeable future projects, would not be significant. Less than significant impact
c: As described in this Initial Study, the implementation of the proposed project could result in
temporary impacts during its construction period. Implementation of the mitigation measures
recommended in this Initial Study would ensure that the proposed project would not result in
environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings. Less than
significant impact
Page 41of50
Item 9.b. - Page 154
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
Summary of Mitigation Measures
MM 1-1: The applicant shall submit a lighting plan verifying that all exterior lighting for the
development is directed downward and does not create spill or glare to adjacent properties and
riparian habitat.
MM 111-1: Based on the recommendation by the APCD, the applicant shall demonstrate how the
construction phase impacts will be below the level of significance as identified in the APCD's
CEQA Handbook prior to grading permit issuance and at least three months before construction
activities are to begin.
MM 111-2: The following standard mitigation measures for construction equipment shall be
implemented to reduce the ROG, NOx, and diesel particulate matter (DPM) emissions during
construction of the project:
I. Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer's
specifications;
m. Fuel all off-road and portable diesel powered equipment with ARB certified motor
vehicle diesel fuel (non-taxed version suitable for use off-road);
n. Use diesel construction equipment meeting ARB's Tier 2 certified engines or cleaner off-
road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State Off-Road Regulation;
o. Use on-road heavy-duty trucks that meet the ARB's 2007 or cleaner certification
standard for on-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State On-Road (~
Regulation;
p. Construction or trucking companies with fleets that do not have engines i.n their fleet
that meet the engine standards identified in the above two measures (e.g. captive or
NOx exempt area fleets) may be eligible by proving alternative compliance;
q. All on-and off-road diesel equipment shall not idle for more than 5 minutes. Signs shall
be posted in the designated queuing areas and or job sites to remind drivers and
operators of the 5 minute idling limit;
r. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors is not permitted;
s. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors;
t. Electrify equipment when feasible;
u. Substitute gasoline-powered in place of diesel-powered equipment, where feasible; and
v. Use alternatively fueled construction equipment on-site where feasible, such as
compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane or biodiesel.
MM 111-3: Prior to any construction activities at the site, the project proponent shall ensure that
a geologic evaluation is conducted to determine if Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA) is present
within the area that will be disturbed. If NOA is not present, an exemption request must be filed
with the APCD. If NOA is found at the site, the applicant must comply with all requirements
outlined in the Asbestos Air Toxins Control Measure (ATCM) regulated by the California Air
Resources Board (ARB) and may require development of an Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan and
an Asbestos Health and Safety Program for approval by the APCD.
MM 111-4: Prior to any demolition activities or the removal or relocation of utility pipelines at the
site, if necessary, the project proponent shall notify the APCD to ensure the activities occur in
Page 42 of 50
Item 9.b. - Page 155
f
\
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
accordance with the requirements stipulated in the National Emission Standard for Hazardous
Air Pollutants (NESHAP).
MM 111-5: The following mitigation measures shall be implemented during construction to
manage fugitive dust emissions such that they do not exceed the APCD 20% opacity limit (APCD
Rule 401) or prompt nuisance violations (APCD Rule 402):
n. Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible;
o. Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems. in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust
from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency will be required whenever wind
speeds exceed lS mph. Reclaimed (non-potable) water shall be used whenever
possible;
p. All dirt stockpile areas should be sprayed daily as needed;
q. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and
landscape plans shall be implemented as soon as possible, following completion of any
soil disturbing activities;
r. Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month
after initial grading shall be sown with a fast germinating, non-invasive, grass seed and
watered until vegetation is established;
s. 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;
t. 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 o soil binders are used;
u. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed lS mph on any unpaved
surface at the construction site;
v. 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;
w. Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash
off trucks and equipment leaving the site;
x. 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;
y. All PM 10 mitigation measures required shall be shown on grading and building plans; and
z. The contractor or building shall designate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive
dust emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as necessary to
minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below 20% opacity. Their duties
shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The
name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD Compliance
Divisions prior to the start of any grading, earthwork or demolition.
MM 111-6: Prior to any construction activities on the site, the project proponent shall contact the
APCD Engineering Division to obtain all necessary permits for portable equipment used during
the construction and operational phases of the project. Typical equipment requiring a permit
includes, but is not limited to, the following:
• Diesel engines;
• Portable generators and equipment with engines that are SO horsepower or greater;
• Electrical generation plants or the use of standby generators; and
• Portable plants (e.g. aggregate plant, asphalt batch plant, concrete batch plant, etc.
Page 43 of SO
Item 9.b. - Page 156
(
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
MM 111-7: Proposed truck routes shall be evaluated and selected to ensure routing patterns have
the least impact to residential dwellings and other sensitive receptors, such as schools, parks,
daycare centers, nursing homes, and hospitals.
MM 111-8: The project proponent shall coordinate with and obtain all necessary equipment and
operation permits that are required by APCD. Typical equipment requiring such permits
includes, but is not limited to, the following:
• Portable generators and equipment with engines that are 50 hp or greater;
• Electrical generation plants or the use of standby generators;
• Boilers;
• Internal combustion engines;
• Sterilization unit(s) using ethylene oxide and incinerator(s); and
• Cogeneration facilities.
MM IV-1: The applicant shall revegetate the 0.18-acre mitigation area as outlined in the
"Wetland Mitigation Plan" prepared by the Morro Group, Inc., dated May 21,· 2002. Any plants
that do not survive shall be replaced in kind and monitored until established. Temporary
irrigation shall be provided for all planting areas for three (3) years or until plants are
established. An independent consultant specializing in biological resources shall be hired by the
City and paid for by the applicant to monitor the mitigation for a minimum of five (5) years.
MM IV-2: The applicant shall consult and coordinate with the Regional Water Quality Control /'··-,
Board (RWQCB) and the United States Corps of Engineers (USACE) regarding the project. The
applicant shall obtain all permits required for the construction, operation, or mitigation of the
project. If permits are not required, the applicant shall provide written verification as such from
the appropriate agency.
MM IV-3: The applicant shall obtain compliance with Section 1602 of the California Fish and
Game Code (Streambed Alteration Agreements) in the form of a completed Streambed
Alteration Agreement or written documentation from the CDFG that no agreement would be
required. Should an agreement be required, the applicant shall implement all the terms and
conditions of the agreement to the satisfaction of the CDFG. The CDFG Streambed Alteration
Agreement process encourages applicants to demonstrate that the proposed project has been
designed and will be implemented in a manner that avoids and minimizes impacts on riparian
habitat and the stream zone.
MM IV-4: All non-native plant species shall be eliminated from the 35' wide creek setback area.
MM IV-5: The developer shall record an irrevocable offer of dedication open space agreement
and thirty-five foot (35') creek easement on the property measured from top of bank. No
structures shall occur within the 35' creek setback area, in accordance with Section 16.44.050 of
the Municipal Code.
MM IV-6: Siltation/sedimentation control measures shall be implemented along the entire
eastern property boundary prior to site construction. Such control measures shall include
sediment fences and/or hay bales placed into the crux of the bank of Meadow Creek. (
\..__, ..
Page 44 of 50
Item 9.b. - Page 157
(
(
\ / . __ __/
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
Erosion/sediment control barricades shall be placed around the perimeter of each construction
zone with the potential to drain to Meadow Creek.
MM IV-7: Soil shall not be stockpiled in areas located near the eastern property margin adjacent
to Meadow Creek, or in areas that have potential to drain to Meadow Creek. Stockpiled soil
should be properly covered at all times to avoid wind and water erosion, and consequent
siltation to Meadow Creek.
MM IV-8: No heavy equipment shall be allowed within the Meadow Creek corridor.
MM V-1: If a potentially significant cultural resource is encountered during subsurface
earthwork activities, all construction activities within a 100-foot radius of the find shall cease
until a qualified archaeologist determines whether the uncovered resource requires further
study. A standard inadvertent discovery clause shall be included in every grading and
construction contract to inform contractors of this requirement. Any previously undiscovered
resources found during construction shall be recorded on appropriate California Department of
Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance in terms of California
Environmental Quality Act criteria by a qualified archaeologist. Potentially significant cultural
resources consist of, but are not limited to, stone, bone, glass, ceramic, wood, or shell artifacts;
fossils; or features induding hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. If the resource is
determined significant under CEQA, the qualified archaeologist shall prepare and implement a
research design and archaeological data recovery plan that will capture those categories of data
for which the site is significant. The archaeologist shall also perform appropriate technical
analysis, prepare a comprehensive report, and file it with the appropriate Information Center
and provide for the permanent cu ration of the recovered materials.
MM V-2: If human remains are encountered during earth-disturbing activities, all work in the
adjacent area shall stop immediately and the San Luis Obispo County Coroner's office shall be
notified immediately. If the remains are determined to be Native American in origin, the Native
American Heritage Commission shall be notified and will identify the Most Likely Descendent,
who will be consulted for recommendations for treatment of the discovered remains.
MM Vl-1: All construction plans shall incorporate the recommendations of the soils engineering
report prepared for the project site by Earth Systems Pacific dated October 30, 2006.
MM Vll-1: All construction plans shall reflect the following GHG-reducing measures where
applicable. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit impact reduction
calculations based on these measures to the APCD for review and approval, incorporating the
following measures:
• Incorporate outdoor electrical outlets to encourage the use of electric appliances and
tools.
• Provide shade tree planting in parking lots to reduce evaporative emissions from parked
vehicles. Design should provide 50% tree coverage within 10 years of construction using
low ROG emitting, low maintenance native drought resistant trees.
• Provide conduit for future fueling of electric vehicles (one space in parking area).
• No residential wood burning appliances.
Page 45 of 50
Item 9.b. - Page 158
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
•
•
•
Provide employee lockers and showers. One shower and 5 lockers for every 25
employees are recommended.
Trusses for south-facing portions of roofs shall be designed to handle dead weight loads
of standard solar-heated water and photovoltaic panels. Roof design shall include
sufficient south-facing roof surface, based on structures size and use, to accommodate
adequate solar panels. For south facing roof pitches, the closest standard roof pitch to
the ideal average solar exposure shall be used.
Increase the building energy rating by 20% above ntle 24 requirements. Measures used
to reach the 20% rating cannot be double counted.
• Plant drought tolerant, native shade trees along southern exposures of buildings to
reduce energy used to cool buildings in summer.
• Utilize green building materials (materials which are resource efficient, recycled, and
sustainable) available locally if possible.
• Install high efficiency heating and cooling systems.
• Design building to include roof overhangs that are sufficient to block the high summer
sun, but not the lower winter sun, from penetrating south facing windows (passive solar
design).
• Utilize high efficiency gas or solar water heaters.
• Utilize built-in energy efficient appliances (i.e. Energy Star®).
• Utilize double-paned windows.
• Utilize low energy street lights (i.e. sodium).
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Utilize energy efficient interior lighting .
Install energy-reducing programmable thermostats.
Use roofing material with a solar reflectance values meeting the EPA/DOE Energy Star®
rating to reduce summer cooling needs.
Eliminate high water consumption landscape (e.g., plants and lawns) in residential
design. Use native plants that do not require watering and are low ROG emitting.
Provide on-site bicycle parking both short term (racks) and long term (lockers, or a
locked room with standard racks and access limited to bicyclist only) to meet peak
season maximum demand. One bike rack space per 10 vehicle/employee space is
recommended.
Require the installation of electrical hookups at loading docks and the connection of
trucks equipped with electrical hookups to eliminate the need to operate diesel-
powered TRUs at the loading docks.
Provide storage space in garage for bicycle and bicycle trailers, or covered racks I
lockers to service the residential units.
MM IX-1: A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be developed and
implemented in consultation with the City, Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and
other regulatory agencies. The SWPPP shall include BMPs to reduce potential impacts to
surface water quality through the construction and life of the project. The SWPPP shall adhere
to the following requirements:
• The SWPPP shall include measures to avoid creating contaminants, minimize the release
of contaminants, and water quality control measures to minimize contaminants from
entering surface water or percolating into the ground.
Page 46 of SO
..-··-. .,,._
('-__ .
Item 9.b. - Page 159
/---~
(
\ ·------·-·
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
• The water quality control measures shall address both construction and operations
periods.
• Fluvial erosion and water pollution related to construction shall be controlled by a
construction water pollution control program that shall be filled with the appropriate
agency and kept current throughout any site development phase.
• The water pollution prevention program shall include BMPs, as appropriate, given the
specific circumstances of the site and project.
• The SWPPP shall be submitted for review and approval to the RWQCB.
• A spill prevention and countermeasure plan shall be incorporated into the SWPPP.
• Designation of equipment and supply staging and storage areas at least 150 feet from
the outside edge of the Meadow Creek 35-foot setback area. All vehicle parking,
routine equipment maintenance, fueling, minor repair, etc., and soil and material
stockpile, shall be done only in the designated staging area.
• Major vehicle/equipment maintenance, repair, and equipment washing shall be
performed off site.
•
•
•
•
A wet and dry spill cleanup plan that specifies reporting requirements and immediate
clean up to ensure no residual soil, surface water or groundwater contamination would
remain after clean up.
Designating concrete mixer washout areas at least 100 feet from the outside edge of the
Meadow Creek 35-foot setback with the use of appropriate containment or reuse
practices.
A temporary and excess fill stockpile and disposal plan that ensures that no detrimental
affects to receiving waters would result.
Requiring all grading and application of concrete, asphalt, etc. to occur during the dry
season from April 15 to October 15.
• Required site preparation and erosion control BMPs for any work that may need to be
completed after October 15.
MM IX-2: To reduce erosion hazards ci'ue to construction activities, grading shall be minimized
and project applicants shall use runoff and sediment control structures, and/or establish a
permanent plant cover on side slopes following construction.
MM IX-3: Erosion control and bank stabilization measures shall be implemented to ensure that
the creek bank does not erode. In addition, alternative bank protection methods, such as
restoration of native vegetation, root wads, or other bioengineering methods of stabilization,
shall be used whenever possible. In order to reduce long-term effects of soil compaction and
changes in topography, construction vehicles and personnel shall not enter the low flow channel
and wet areas. Construction mats and other devices shall be used whenever possible to reduce
impacts associated with soil compaction.
MM IX-4: All temporary fill placed during project construction shall be removed at project
completion and the area restored to approximate pre-project contours and topography.
MM IX-5: No construction debris or materials shall be allowed to enter the creek bed, either
directly or indirectly. Stockpiles shall be kept far enough from the banks of the active channel
and protected tci prevent materials from entering the creek bed.
Page 47 of SO
Item 9.b. - Page 160
-----i
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
MM IX-6: The following water quality BMPs shall be incorporated into the project:
• Run-off Control. Maintain post-development peak runoff rate and average volume of
runoff at levels that are similar to pre-development levels.
• Labeling and Maintenance of Storm Drain Facilities. Label new and existing storm drain
inlets with "No Dumping -Drains to Ocean" to alert the public to the destination of
stormwater and to prevent direct discharge of pollutants into the storm drain.
• Common Area Litter Control. Implement a trash management and litter control program
to prevent litter and debris from being carried to water bodies or the storm drain
•
•
•
system.
Food Service Facilities. Design the food service facility to have a sink or other area for
cleaning floor mats, containers, and equipments that is connected to a grease
interceptor prior to discharging to the sanitary sewer system. The cleaning area shall be
large enough to clean the largest mat or piece of equipment to be cleaned.
Refuse Areas. Trash compactors, enclosures and dumpster areas shall be covered and
protected from roof and surface drainage. Install a self-contained drainage system that
discharges to the sanitary sewer if water cannot be diverted from the areas.
Outdoor Storage Controls. Oils, fuels, solvents, coolants, and other chemicals stored
outdoors must be in containers and protected from drainage by secondary containment
structures such as berms, liners, vaults or roof covers and/or drain to the sanitary sewer
system. Bulk .materials stored outdoors must also be protected from drainage with
berms and covers. Process equipment stored outdoors must be inspected for proper
function and leaks, stored on impermeable surfaces and covered. Implement a regular
program of sweeping and litter control and develop a spill cleanup plan for storage
areas.
• Cleaning, Maintenance and Processing Controls. Areas used for washing, steam
cleaning, maintenance, and repair or processing must have impermeable surfaces and
containment berms, roof covers, recycled water wash facility, and discharge to the
sanitary sewer. Discharges to the sanitary sewer may require pretreatment systems
and/or approval of an industrial waste discharge permit.
• Street/parking lot Sweeping: Implement a program to regularly sweep streets, sidewalks
and parking lots to prevent the accumulation of litter and debris. Debris resulting from
pressure washing should be trapped and collected to prevent entry into the storm drain
system. Washwater containing any cleaning agent or degreaser should be collected and
discharged to the sanitary sewer.
MM Xll-1: Construction activities shall be restricted to the hours of 8 a.m. and 6 p.m. Monday
through Friday. No construction shall occur on Saturday or Sunday. Equipment maintenance
and servicing shall be confined to the same hours. To the greatest extent possible, grading and
construction activities should occur during the middle of the day to minimize the potential for
disturbance of neighboring noise sensitive uses.
MM Xll-2: All construction equipment utilizing internal combustion engines shall be required to
have mufflers that are in good condition. Stationary noise sources shall be located at least 300 feet
from occupied dwelling units unless noise reducing engine housing enclosures or noise screens are
provided by the contractor.
Page 48 of 50
( __
Item 9.b. - Page 161
( / ... ___ ....
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
MM Xll-3: Equipment mobilization areas, water tanks, and equipment storage areas shall be
placed in a central location as far from existing residences as feasible.
MM XIV-1: The applicant shall pay the mandated Lucia Mar Unified School District impact fee.
Page49 of 50
Item 9.b. - Page 162
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2013
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-002; VARIANCE 12-004; LOT MERGER 12-003; AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12-001
References
Documents & Maps
1. City of Arroyo Grande General Plan
2. City of Arroyo Grande Land Use Map
3. City of Arroyo Grande Municipal Code
4. City of Arroyo Grande Zoning Map
5. Project Description
6. P_roject Plans
7. Arroyo Grande Existing Settings Report & Draft Arroyo Grande Existing Settings Report (2010)
8. Arroyo Grande Urban Water Management Plan
9. Arroyo Grande Water System Master Plan (2012)
10. Arroyo Grande Wastewater Master Plan (2012)
11. San Luis Obispo Important Farmland Map (California Department of Conservation, 2006)
12. CEQA & Climate Change White Paper (CAPCOA, 2008)
13. Air Quality Handbook (SLO APCD, 2012)
14. Arroyo Grande Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (2012)
15. Historical Resources Evaluation Report (Carr & MacDonald, 2008)
16. APCD letter dated June 24, 2013
17. Top of Bank Study by Triad/Homes, Assoc. dated June 1, 2004
18. Wetland Mitigation Plan by the Morro Group, Inc. dated August 22, 2002
19. Wetland Survey by SWCA Environmental Consultants dated November 4, 2010
20. Phase I Archaeological Survey by Heritage Discoveries, Inc. dated October 9, 2000
21. Soils Engineering Report by Earth Systems Pacific dated October 30, 2006
22. Preliminary Drainage Study by Triad/Holmes, Assoc. dated May 2005
23. Parking and Traffic Study by OEG dated January 17, 2006, and earlier parking studies
Page 50 of 50
Item 9.b. - Page 163
(~)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION
1550 Harbor Boulevard
West Sacramento, CA 95691
(916) 373-3715
(916) 373-5471 -FAX
e-mail: ds_nahc@pacbell.net
September 3, 3013
Mr. Matthew Downing, Assistant Planner
City of_ Arroyo Grande
300 East Branch Street
Arroyo Grande, CA 93420
ATTACHMENT 12
Edmund G Brown Jr.,, Governor
RECEIVED
SEP 0 4 2013
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
RE: SCH#2013081075 CEQA Notice of Completion; proposed Mitigated
Negative Declaration for the "Sheppel Memory Care Facility and
Townhouse Project;" located in the City of Arroyo Grande; San Luis Obispo
County, California
Dear Mr. Downing:
The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) has reviewed the
CEQA Notice regarding the above referenced project. In the 1985 Appellate
Court decision (170 Cal App 3rd 604), the court held that the NAHC has
jurisdiction and special expertise, as a state agency, over affected Native
American resources impacted by proposed projects, including archaeological
places of religious significance to Native Americans, and to Native American .
burial sites.
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) states that any project
eresource, which includes archeological resources, is a significant effect
requiring the preparation of an EIR (CEQA guidelines 15064.S(b). To adequately.
comply with this provision and mitigate project-related impacts on archaeological
resources, the ·Commission recommends the following actions be required:
Contact the appropriate Information Center for a record search to
determine :If a part or all of the area of project effect (APE) has been previously
surveyed for cultural places(s), The NAHC recommends that known traditional
cultural resources recorded on or adjacent to the APE be listed in the draft
Environmental Impact Report (DEIR).
· If an additional archaeological inventory survey is required, the final stage
is the preparation of a professional report detailing the findings and
recommendations of the records search and field survey. We suggest that this
be coordinated with the NAHC, if possible. This area is known to the NAHC to
be very culturally sensitive. The final report containing site forms, site
significance, and mitigation measurers should be submitted immediately to the
Item 9.b. - Page 164
planning department. All information regarding site locations, Native American (·;
human remains, and associated funerary objects should be in a separate
confidenti~I addendum, and not be made available for pubic disclosure pursuant
to California Government Code Section 6254.10.
A list of appropriate Native American Contacts for consultation concerning
the project site has been provided and is attached to this letter to determine if the
proposed active might impinge on any cultural resources. Lack of surface
evidence of archeological resources does not preclude their subsurface
existence.
Lead agencies should include in their mitigation plan provisions for the
identification and evaluation of accidentally discovered archeological resources,
pursuant to California Health & Safety Code Section 7050.5 and California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) §15064.S(f). In areas of identified
archaeological sensitivity, a certified archaeologist and a culturally affiliated
Native American, with knowledge in cultural resources, should monitor all
ground-disturbing activities. Also, California Public Resources Code Section
21083.2 require documentation and analysis of archaeological items that meet
the standard in Section 15064.5 (a)(b)(f). Lead agencies should include in their
mitigation plan provisions for the disposition of recovered artifacts, in consultation
with culturally affiliated Native Americans. Lead agencies should include
provisions for discovery of Native American human -remains in their mitigation (-.
plan. Health and Safety Code §7050.5, CEQA §15064.5(e), and Public
Resources Code §5097.98 mandates the process to be followed in the event of
an accidental discovery of any human remains in a location ther than a
dedicated cemetery.
CC: State Clearinghouse
Attachment: Native American Contacts list
Item 9.b. - Page 165
r...dverly Salazar Folkes
1931 Shadybrook Drive
Thousand Oaks, CA 91362
folkes9@msn.com
805 492-7255
(805) 558-1154 -cell
folkes9@msn.com
,,_,_
(
Chumash
Tataviam
Ferrnandeno
Santa Ynez Band of Mission Indians
Vincent Armenta, Chairperson
P.O. Box 517 Chumash
Santa Ynez • CA 93460
varmenta@santaynezchumash.
(805) 688-7997
(805) 686-9578 Fax
BarbarenoNentureno Band of Mission Indians
Julie Lynn Tumamait-Stennslie, Chair
365 North Poli Ave Chumash
Ojai , CA 93023
jtumamait@sbcglobal.net
5) 646-6214
Lei Lynn Odom
1339 24th Street
Oceana , CA 93445
(805) 489-5390
Chumash
This llst Is cunant only • of the date of this document.
Native American Contf·-'1i
San Luis Obispo Cou•. 1
September 3, 2013
Judith Bomar Grindstaff
63161 Argyle Road
King City , CA 93930
(831) 385-3759-home
Salinan
San Luis Obispo County Chumash Council
Chief Mark Steven Vigil .
1030 Ritchie Road Chumash
Grover Beach CA 93433
(805) 481-2461
(805) 474-4729 -Fax
Peggy Odom
1339 24th Street Chumash
Oceana 93445
(805) 489-5390
Salinan Tnbe of Monterey, San Luis Obispo Counties
John W. Burch, Traditional Chairperson
14650 Morro Road Salinan
Atascadero • CA 93422 Chumash
salinantribe@aol.com
805-460-9202
805 235-2730 Cell
805-460-9204
Distrtbutlon of this list does nat rallava any parson of the statutory rasponslblllty as dafined In Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safuty Code,
Sr Tl 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code and Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code.
his list s only applicable for contacting local Native Americans with regard to cultural resources for the proposed
SCH#2013081075; CEQA Notice of Completion; proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Sheppel Care Facility and Townhouse
Project; located in the City of Arroyo Grande; San Luis Ooblspo County, California.
Item 9.b. - Page 166
Santa Ynez Tribal Elders Council
Adelina Alva-Padilla, Chair Woman
P.O. Box 365 Chumash
Santa Ynez , CA 93460 ·
elders@santaynezchumash.org
. (805) 688-8446
(805) 693-1768 FAX
Randy Guzman -Folkes
6471 Cornell Circle·
Moorpark · , CA 93021
ndnRandy@yahoo.com
(805) 905-1675 -cell
Xolon Salinan Tribe
Chumash
Fernandeno
Tataviam·
Shoshone Paiute
Yaqui
Johnny R Eddy Jr, Chairperson
3179 Garrity Way #734 Salinan
Richmond , CA 94806
831-210-9771
Salinan Nation Cultural Preservation Association
Doug Alger, Cultural Resources Coordinator
PO Box 56 Salinan
Lockwood , CA 93932
fabbq2000@earthlink.net
This list Is cunant only BB of the date of this doc:umant.
Native American Cont(--~
San Luis Obispo CouL.f
September 3, 2013
Salinan Nation Cultural Preservation Association c\;
Robert Duckworth, Environmental Coordinator
4777 Driver Rd. Salinan
Valley Springs CA 95252
dirobduck@thegrid.net
831-578-1852
Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation
Michael Cordero, Chairperson
P.O. Box 4464 Chumash
Santa Barbara CA 93140
CbcnTRIBALCHAIR@gmail.com
yak tityu tityu -Northern Chumash Tribe
Mona Olivas Tucker; Chairwoman
660 Camino Del Rey Chumash
Arroyo Grande CA 93420
(805) 489-1052' Home
(805) 748-2121 Cell
olivas.mona@gmail.com
Matthew Darian Goldman
495 Mentone
Grover Beach CA 93433
805-7 48-6913
Chumash
Dlstr1butlon of this Ost does nat relleva any person of the statutory rwponslblllty as defined In Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safaty Code, (---:
Section 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code and Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code. \.~ /
his list s only applicable for contacting local Native Americans with regard to cultural resources for the proposed
SCH#2013081075; CEQA Notice of Completion; proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Sheppel Care Faclllty and Townhouse
Project; located In the City of Arroyo Grande; San Luis Oobispo County, CalHomla. ·
Item 9.b. - Page 167
.nta Ynez Band of Mission Indians
-, ribal Admin/Counsel Sam Cohen
P.O. Box 517 Chumash
Santa Ynez , CA 93460
into@santaynezchumash.org
(805) 688-7997
(805) 686-9578 Fax
Salinan Nation Cultural Preservation Association
Gregg Castro, Administrator
5225 Roeder Road Salinan
San Jose , CA 95111
glcastro@pacbell.net
(408) 219-2754
Salinan-Chumash Nation
Xielolixii
3901 Q Street, Suite 318
Bakersfield , CA 93301
8-966-8807 -cell
Northern Chumash Tribal Council
Fred Collins, Spokesperson
Salin an
Chumash
67 South Street Chumash
San Luis Obispo CA 93401
fcollins@northernchumash.
org
(805) 801-0347 (Cell)
This llst Is cum1nt only a of the date of this documant.
Native American Contr--s
San Luis Obispo Cou. __ ,
September 3, 2013
Frank Arredondo
PO Box 161 Chumash
Santa Barbara CA 93102
ksen_sku_mu@yahoo.com
Santa Ynez Tribal Elders Councif
Freddie Romero, Cultural Preservation Conslnt
P.O. Box 365 Chumash
Santa Ynez , · CA 93460
805-688-7997, Ext 37
freddyromero 1959@yahoo.
com
BarbarenoNentureno Band of Mission Indians
Kathleen Pappo
2762 Vista Mesa Drive Chumash
Rancho Pales Verdi;s CA 90275
31 0-831-5295
BarbarenoNentureno Band of Mission Indians
Raudel Joe Banuelos, Jr.
331 Mira Flores Court Chumash
Camarillo , CA 93012
805-987-5314
DIRtrtbuUon of this llst does not relieve any pel"BOll of the statutary rasponslbmty a defined In Sadlon 7050.5 of the HBBlth and Safaty Code,
on 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code and Section 5097.98 of the PubDc Resources Code.
his list s only applicable for contacting local Native Americans with regard to cultural resources for the proposed
SCH#2013081075; CEQA Notice of Completion; proposed MHigated Negative Declaration for the Sheppel Care Faclllty and Townhouse
Project; located in the City of Arroyo Grande; San Luis Oobispo County, California.
Item 9.b. - Page 168
Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation
Janet Darlene Garcia
P.O. Box 4464 Chumash
Santa Barbara CA 93140
805-689-9528
Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation
Crystal Baker
P.O. Box 723 Chumash
Atascadero • CA 93423
805-466-8406
Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation
Michael Cordero
5246 El Carro Lane Chumash
Carpinteria • CA 93013
805-684-8281
This list la currant only • of the date of this document.
Native American Contr-"s
San Luis Obispo Cou~ _ ./
September 3, 2013
Disb1bution of this Ost d088 not rall8V8 any parson of the statutmy rasponslblllty • daftned In Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safaty Code,
Section 5097 .94 of the Publlc Resources Code and Section 5097.98 of the Public Resoun:es Coda.
his list s only applicable for contacting local Native Americans with regard to cultural resources for the proposed
SCH#2013081075; CEQA Notice of Completion; proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Sheppel Care Facility and Townhouse
Project; located in the City of Arroyo Grande; San Luis Ooblspo County, Calttomia.
Item 9.b. - Page 169
Matt Downing
r'om:
'----... ent:
To:
Subject:
,,,,,-.........
I
Ginger
Saturday, August 24, 2013 4:55 PM
Matt Downing
Meadow Creek Development
Dear Planning Commissioners and City Council Members.
ATIACHMENT 13
Re : http: /{www .a rroyogra nd e .org/ static/ n otices/pu bl ic ·notices/pub lie· hea ri n g/08/23/2013/ pu bl ic-hea ring-con d itiona 1-u se-perm it-12-002. pdf
I just sold a condo in Oak Park Leisure Gardens (Aug 2"d 2013), attend Kennedy Club Fitness, attend New Hope Church
and have live on Erhart Road.
I vote a resounding "No" for the proposed project in Oak Park Professional Plaza on Meadow Creek
1. There is Not Enough Space for this large development Phase I (69 units) Phase II (8 units, double occupancy or
more).
2. There is Not Enough Parking for this number of units (residents, caregivers, guests).
3. There would be significant Day and Night Traffic Increase (residents, caregivers, guests).
which would promote a Major Traffic Hazard on James Way and Oak Park Road.
4.
(> 5.
•, , 6.
It would Destroy the Rural Residential Community ambiance and Decrease Property Values.
The Environmental Impact to the Creek would be detrimental (deviating from the 50' setback).
Local businesses would be adversely impacted by construction, traffic and use.
20 year Arroyo Grande taxpayer and resident,
Ginger Lordus
(
......_ __ ...
1
Item 9.b. - Page 170
Matt Downing
f5_r..<:1m:
( \
'\ ;·
To:·
Subject:
Attachments:
Hi Matt,
Jill Lowe
Friday, A s
Matt Downing
RE: Sheppel Memory Care Facility Plans
Map 2008.pdf; Map.pdf
ATTACHMENT 14
Thank you for letting me know. I was planning on attending Tuesday. Is the Planning Commission meeting open to the
public?
You probably have these already, but I'm attaching the maps I have regarding parking. Our building was to have 8
parking spaces in Area A (designated ours from 7:30AM -6:00PM M-F). We'll contact Sheppel's property manager Mark
London (Asset Management) about this. As I told you when we chatted, we haven't previously since our employees and
those of other Pismo Medical Properties tenants park in the dirt area now.
Please let me know if I can provide you with any information.
Thank you again and have a great holiday weekend!
Jill
2r1l(
1
<D. Lowe
b~_/ness & Finance Manager
Bov~&
J' center
Thomas D. Ferro, M.D.
860 Oak Park Blvd, Suite 101
Arroyo Grande, CA 93420
(805)4.Sl-3685 X-11
(866)250-2730 Fax
ilowe@bone iointcenter. com
From: Matt Downing [mailto:mdowninq(ci)arroyogrande.orq]
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2013 1:21 PM
To: Jill Lowe
Subject: RE: Sheppel Memory Care Facility Plans
Hi Jill:
Thanks for your questions. First things first, since you and I fast spoke, we decided to continue the public hearing for the
item-to the Planning Commission meeting of September 17. I wanted to clarify the history of parking in the center in
or(_ ·~o be able to present the clearest information I could. The item will be presented for continuance on Tuesday,
Septe-mber 3 as was planned, but no action other than continuing the public hearing will occur. Because we are
1
Item 9.b. - Page 171
r-~----.. ,,,--.
continuing the item to a specific date, you wi1 .. ..>t be receiving another notice. I thought .Nas important to make you
aware.
That leads to the question you had r~garding who the notice ~a5ient to. Typically we only send the notices to property 1__. ~
owners within 300' of the boundaries of the project site(s). In this case I sent notices out to 500', but still only to ·
property owners. If you think you should forward to all of the tenants, that is up to you, but please advise them of the
date change for the meeting.
Now to the bulk of your email. There are currently 10 established (paved and striped) parking spaces adjacent to the
dirt lot that I think you said your employees park in. They are proposing to remove approximately 4 spaces for the
access driveway/curb improvements to the 14 new parking spaces that will be established in that dirt lot. However,
they are re/establishing 8 total spaces below the new access so the total parking spaces along that side will remain at
10. It is essentially just relocating the access to the dirt area from the bottom right corner to that upper-middle area.
Let me know of anything else you might think of.
Matthew Downing
Assistant Planner
City of Arroyo Grande
(805) 473-5420
.A Please consider the environment before printing this email
From: Jill Lowe
Sent: Friday,Augus
To: Matt Downing
Subject: RE: Sheppel Memory Care Facility Plans
Hi Matt,
Thank you for forwarding the link. I do have a couple questions. It looks like they removed 4 parking spaces to add the
14 in the row by our parking lot. Is that correct? The other question is about the notice that was sent out. Was that
sent to all the suites in our building? I'm wondering if I should forward it to all of Pismo Medical Properties tenants.
Thanks,
Jill
Ji{[(]). Lowe
Business & Finance Manager
Botl.e_RT
To'b?it J 1 ·center
Thomas D. Ferro, M. D.
860 Oak Park Blvd., Suite 101
Arroyo Grande, CA 93420
(805)481-3685 X-11
(866 )250-2 730 Fax
ilowe@boneiointcenter.com
2
Item 9.b. - Page 172
From: Matt Downing [mailto:mdowning@arroyogrande.org]
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 2: 16 PM
-r---··-.Jill Lowe
I ' ~ . _ ject: Sheppel Memory Care Facility Plans
Hi Jill:
Below is a link to the electronic plans associated with the memory care facility/townhomes proposed at the property at
Oak Park Boulevard. The project address is 880 Oak Park but the project is proposed on the undeveloped areas of that
complex. As I mentioned on the phone, please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions or concerns you might
have.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/xp0sotlcgh67g4k/Meadow%20Creek%20Plans%208-9-13.pdf
Matthew Downing
Assistant Planner
Community Development Department
City of Arroyo Grande
300 E. Branch Street
Arroyo Grande, CA 93420
(805) 473-5420
~ Please consider the environment before printing this email . .~~
3
Item 9.b. - Page 173
JAtr.-12-2)04 14:16 BELSHER & BECKER 18055429949
rt~~vc. ;,~~ r~ •to.
tr' fC,. ""'° 6 '( ~~~L-· -----
• ..• -:)·.~-~~
v:.~ -~ iJ .0J_:~J
Q ~~ITCCTURAL srt! PLAN
TOTAL P .003
Fll657 P .003/003 (-;
.. ;
1 ··-
( j
Item 9.b. - Page 174
EXHIBIT "J"
JAMES WAY
SCA!.E: 1·-5()'
{
\, I --../
Item 9.b. - Page 175
t/-1-f ~
Best Western
Casa Grande Inn
ATTACHMENT 15
RECEIVED
SEP 0 4 2013
CITY OF AECROVO GRANDE
COMMUMITV D:VElOPi\Jl.ENT
OBCT£cnotJ5--tj-CO m 111Guc<7
rcJ 5f/Ef PE C P t--1 IJ 5
/7Po«1
flit( ButJ AJ/5-L c__
850 Oak Park Road
Arroyo Grande. CA 93420
{805) 481-7398 Fax (805) 481-4859
' For Reservations Cafi 1 -800-528-1234
Best Western Hotels are ir.trepenciently owned and operated
Item 9.b. - Page 176
TELECOPIER COVER SHEET
DATE: 2-13 -of3
TO:
COMPANY:
FAX NUMBER:
D OF PAGES
(including this cc~er sheec)
SEP 0 4 2013
CITY OF Ai'J?OYO GRANDE
" • I ' ' -El.O?ME'\!T
RsGARDlNG: <:!ASA 6/MAJPE EA5EIYIPIJT5 b..cf'IEt... /1itNE:r
FROM' f?.AY B_UN/JEL(. /i/ol/&7 ~~
_,:::; ! co~~ENTS
A&ir/
Bunnen ccr.stn:::Jon, inc.
141 Suburban Roac!. P:-5
San Luis ObisPo. CA 93401
ROfi/54~-4300 FAX BC-5/541-3985
Item 9.b. - Page 177
TELECOPIER COVER SHEET
DATE: 2 -13 -c)e.
TO: kcV!IJ kE/JA/E.D ·y·
COMPANY:
FM NUMBER:
D OF PAGES 5
(including chis ccver sheet)
REGARDING:
FROM: R,Ei y· .B()/v ;,,1 c LL
BmmeH Con~or-. inc.
141 Suburban Roed. A-5
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
ROfi!S.U.-4300 rAX 8051541-3985
COM."1£NTS
No
RECEIVED
SEP 0 4 20!3
CllY OF AP.ROVO GRANDE
co. 1N!1V !'l::VZ:LOPr.'J;Nr
Item 9.b. - Page 178
TELECOPIER COVER SHEET
DATE: 2-1
TO: Ir/ARK to/J l?O A.}
COMPANY:
FAJ<. NUMBER:
5 D OF PAGES
(including this cc·Jer sheet)
REGARDING:
FROM:
ORIGINAL TO FOLLOW EY·MAIL:
B11mineJC C~tiior ... In:::.
141 Suburban Road. A-5 •
San L!Jis Obispo, CA 93401
Rnfi/!'>44-4300 Fp.;j. 805/541-3985
COMMENTS
Yes
______ _,(
RECEIVEO
SEP 0 4 2013
,.. . l"lt f'W '"'2ANt>E.
COMMUNIT'i DEVELO!'MENi
No
(
Item 9.b. - Page 179
,.,.. .........
' i
at&t
From: ray.bd@att.net
To: rsheppel@sbc:global.net (Russell Sheppel)
Subject: Trucks
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 04:53:35 +0000
Russell:
Page 1 oi
(F"rint] [;los_e:
RECEIVED
SEP 0 4 ZOi3
CnY OF A!?:?OYO GRl'.NDE %
COMMUNm' DMl.O?MEfl;'T l
Thanks for calnng this problem to my attention. I certainly agree with you that my customers should not be
using the health club parking lot to turri around their large trucks. We were not aware this was happening until
you spoke to Matthew. Matthew did take immediate steps to solve this problem by informing the drivers they
were encroaching on your property and could not continue to do so. He also discussed the situation with my
management company, Western Inns (Michael Kidd). We are now asking our good truck driving customers to
park 18 wheelers aff site or to leave the trailers off site. We betreve the problem of entering your pubnc areas
has been resolved. If you or your associates see a problem occurring, we would apprec;:iate being notified so _
that ii:nmed~e _action cary be taken. ~K~p~lr:i. mjnd that trucks-are alloWed cm pui-easement :or aey ;.te!mpora ry .;:
;,:~"9:~~#iaf~s~m~r.rt:f' ' ·' · · · -'-. _. · ., · · · · , .. ·· · · -· · · · · · ,_ ·
al~~r•l•~~~~~-~~!f~,
-~~E;rtf;iffiC.: At our fast meeting with you a.nd Rob Strong, your engineers were dearly advised of this and
·-:~oiI"'were tO·submft that design to us for our review and approval. 1 have yet to receive that destgn and the
;uof that it wlll accommodate our traffic. A photo of one of the same trucks you photographed was presented
to you and your consultants at that meeting.
We are on public record on several occasions discussing the issue of our truck and bus traffic In relation to your
design, density, and proposal to relocate and realign our easements. Our easements existed long before you
purchased this property and as far as I am concerned take priority. This brings up the issue of the upper
driveway which you now propose to remain as our easement. I poJryl:ed out to you .and your cQnsultants that .
*-~~iiiiif'i~;FJ/j~-~~£iilnf*
You state that 18 wheelers can not be allowed to enter.the .upper entrance next to the health dub which I ndo
not yet have easement access to usen /'You are -compj~y-iri :er:ror;.c:. That is in fact my easement and I do have
the right to enter and exit with hotel traffic of ~frly kind. I agree that we can not use your parking aisle as a tum
around area.
I have no problem utilizing the lower driveway temporarily, as you are apparently requesting, .but certainly can
not guarantee no one wm U!;e thf:! upper driveway since they are both c;>Pem and there is~() signage to_preve.n(
,~~J\~~~t~~tf~,~P~~~j~Wf~,$~~~~:$:r:g~,ir~tt~~W~~at the 9cy;has _:.
ifi;li~~lf~:f~~~-~;ii1~1;f~ti~~ffinr~a:.n~ ·
I will be in Texas for the next two months, but will be avaifable by phone, fax, and email. If you have trouble
reaching me, you can call my office at 805-544-4300. If you are not satisfied with Matthew at the hotel, you
rttp://webma.il.att.net/wmc/n/wm/473539910007C65AOOOG353E22230647629B0-~2D29B9BOEBF070CO... 111912007
Item 9.b. - Page 180
can caU Michael Kidd at Western Inns (our management company) at 805-773-6996.
Sincerely,
Ray Bunnell
rb:gb
cc: Fred Glick, Attorney
Matthew Martin, Manager, Best Western casa Grande Inn
Michael Kidd, Western Inns
RECEIVED·
SEP 0 4 ZOB
Ctrl OF A!??.'OYO GRANDE
coMMUNm' IJEVEl..OPM'ON'i
Page 2 o:
·(
1ttp://webmai1.att.netlwmc/n/wm/473539910007C65A0000353E22230647629BOA02D29B9BOEBF070CO... I 1/9/2007
Item 9.b. - Page 181
November l 0, 2007
TO: Rllss SheppeJ
FAX:. 925-552-9775
FROM: Ray Bunnell
RE: FoUow Up to Trucks E-Mail
Rnss:
REC~"VElD
SEP 0 4 20i3
crrv OF AR?.OYO G~NliE
COMMUNfrl' DEVEtOPMCNi
As a follow up to my e.-mail to you ofNovmiber ~, 2001.;i~:~~'j,pga:,c(Jpy_ofJ!Ql,1[::9.Q!Jc:ijtjonS of
~~~k~Th(~!k~~~1~~~=r~~~~~~·bur
~ent .doeS not restrict,ow-use :to a specifieii type.of'Veniele: ..
--¥--~~i~?ft1~~~~,~~~~~~~~e1:tl=Z~0=~ *
uSithe easementproperly and do not encroach into your space. As a courtesy to you, and in the interest of
safety, we will also ask them not to back in and to parkthe 18 wheelers elsewhere.
-* fa'isc{~you.dis!?_I05e-'?ll:i-Ca5ement :to any]ioimfial ·buyers faclnding1he1Y,P~:0ftraffic.;'to be _,·
~~~ana the fact that tlieie-isno~~~-tbe-Casa Graiu!e~~~ ThiS5ho1ikhilso!~SJ>elled
outmmsc]Osun:s to final bome"buyers... . -. ' . ·. . . . ..
~me~
~....___(/
R1lyBunneU
RB:gb
c::: Matthew Martin, Best Western Casa Grande Inn
Michael Kidd. Westem lnns
Fred Glick, Attorney
3iinne!E Oons::ructia~, Uc::..
141 Suburban Road. A-5
San Luis Obisoo, CA 93401
805r::>44-4300. FAX 805/541-$85
Item 9.b. - Page 182
•.
RESOWTJON NO.
VTTM 04-006; PUD 04-005; MEX 05-015
PAGE 7of28
..
RECE~V:ED
SEP 0 4 Z013
CITY OF Al?P.OYO GRANDE
COMMUN.ITV DEVELOPME.t.IT
19. The applicant shall prepare a plan for a right pocket tum lane within the public right of
way for review and approval by the Public Works Director. if a right ·pocket tum lane is
determined· to be a substantial public safety enhancement within a five (5) year
· tirnetrame· based on traffic projections.
)
20'.:: The appficant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director that
-.. .· --= the turning radiuses within the proj_ec:t site ca~ j3ccommociate a range ~! ~~h~des_ fr°. m
~ trucks~d"!\buses~ ~.pears •. fOT,.4he: ~pm]ect sha1l-iretm1Fto ·.-fll& ~city Co1:Jncil-· ·Tor
--'.addmooiilkv:iewcario 0,madificallen:-<-
21. Speed bumps shaD be instaDed between the hotel gate and the third town house.
---ARCHITECilJRAL RF;VtEW COMMITTEE (ARC) CONDITIONS
., ..
-D.
27.
Soften the two purple building colors of the town homes.
Provide '!.1_'?!.0 Ja_Dd~ir19.:ir1. fh.~c tj°lree. ~lands where the cantilevered building projects
out {petaditi"g:ii0'~1oss}bf~paoons'f" $paces).
Plant two Uquidambars in the diamonds on the no~ side of the condos.
Change the Flax plants to Pittosporum undulab.Jm and change the planter area to
project as far as possible into the parking space on the west side of the condos on
either side of garage doors.
Submit a final landscape to the Architectural Review Committee for review and
approval prior to issuance of building permit
Provide decorative paving in the driveways between garages of the town homes.
NOISE
28. AB residential units shall be designed to mitigate impacts from non-residential project
noise. in compliance with the City's noise regulations.
29~ Construction shall be limited to between the hours of Barn and 6pm Monday through
Friday. No construction shall occur on Saturday or Sunday.
DF\IE OPMFNI CODE
30. Development shalJ Confonn to the Office Mixed Use (OMU) zoning requirements except
as otherwise approved.
31. All ranees and/or walls st-.al! not exceed six feet (6') in height unless otherwise approved
with a. Minor Exception or Variance application.
Item 9.b. - Page 183
HP Officejet 7310 Log for
Personal Printer/Fax/CopierJSc:anner
Feb 13 2008 12:49PM
Last Transaction
Identification Duration Paces Result
Feb 13 12:43PM Fax Sent 4730386 5:23 7 OK
REC;tV:!O \
SEP 0 4 20'13 \
. cnv Of A!m0¥0 GP.N~"lE \.
COMM!Jfi!m' !)EVElO?T.f!Hf·J
Item 9.b. - Page 184
HP Officejet 7310
Personal Printer/Fax/Copier/Scanner
Last Transaction
Identification
Feb 13 12:52PM Fax Sent 4812906
Log for
/".
I
.. i
Feb 13 2008 12.""54PM
Duration Pages Result
1:23 5 OK
RECEIVED
SEP 0 4 2013
cm OF ARP.OYC>GRANDE .
cOMMUNITT' oE\fB.OPMEh"i
Item 9.b. - Page 185
HP Officejet 7310
Personal Printer/Fax/CopierJScanner
n
Last Transaction
Identification
Feb 13 11 :58AM Fax Sent 4664213
(
......._ ___ _,·
Log for
Feb 13 2008 12:00PM
Duration Paces Result
1:28 5 OK
-c!""nc;:.n R~ ciV ;.id'
Item 9.b. - Page 186
.rrolll • .1\.U:SSt:ll "'Ut:!JjJCl
at&t
("'i
r··::,::1 r, .. -.'..·,: .. :r·:
From: Russell Sheppel <rsheppel@sbcglobal.net>
To: ray bunnell <ray.bci@att.net>
Subject: Fw: trucks
Date: Thu, S Nov 2007 17:52:08 +0000
Here are photos 16-21.
Russell M. Sheppel
Sheppel Enterprises
925.858.0776 cell
-Original Message -
From: "ray.bci@att.net" <ray.bci@att.net>
RE CE MD
SEP 0 4 2013
cm' OF AP.P.OVO GRANDc
COMMUNl1Y DMLOPMENi
To: Russell Sheppel <rsheppel@sbcgiobaLnet>
Sent Wednesday, November 7, 2007 11:05:21 PM V\
Subject Re: trucks ,
~
Russ, this is first I have h~d of the pro~lern and will look into it immediantly. I would appretiate a copy of all t"
the photos as soon as posSJble. I am leaving town on Saturday for two months. Thanks, Ray Bunnell c·--\
-----Original message from Russell Sheppel <rsheppel@sbcglobal.net>: ~ ----
Ray,
· I've attached some troubling photos for you to review. There are 20 digital picttrres I have of th.e
· problematic sequence, though I am only sending the first 6, since more will be a downloading/memory
issue. If you would like the remainder of the photos, let my property mgr know and a CD will be burned
for you. The probiem is apparent in the photos, but 18-wheelertrucks are driving over unauthorized areas
. which is dangerous and illegal, due to the fact that they have no easement rights in the area, and have
· specifically been requested on multiple occasions (by me) to stop any further such acrivi!y. Even more
troubling is the fact that despite my repecri.ed discussions with yow: manager, Matt, there has been no
apparent change to this truck activity over the properties on Oak Park. The assurances I have received
from him that either he or you would personally call me and proVide written proof that such activity would
· cease, have never mat"'..rialized. -
Rzy, we have not been at odds, we have conducted business civilly, and the intent is to keep it that
· way. But) 8,:wbeeler trucks cannot b.e allowed to enter on our UJ2Eg entrance next.to the h_9-lth club __ _, \./
-(which yollclo not et have easement access to use • drive at least 100 feet up the parking aisle, then begin '--r"'
" a dangerous backing up maneuver reposinoning a huge trucking rig 180 degrees that is done completely
by mirror vision. This is chewing up our ashpalt and parking areas unnecessarily, and puts patrons and
their cars at extreme risk. The ti.mes I have witnessed this action a minimum of 5-10 back and fonh
movements, some blinded, with patrons walking back and forth to and from the health club, surrounded by
parked cars, were required to successfuliy position the truck so that the driver could then back the rig the
remaining 200 feet onto your property. Once on motel property they easily take up 10 or more
parking spaces in parallel parking next to the creek .. .\!times they have not parked on motel property
adjacent to the creek, but have parked in the dirt on the Sheppel property. All oftlris activity is
hnp://webmail.att.nethvmc/n/vvm/8i81721435990197?cmd=Print&sid=cO&folde1-INBOX&uid=78l l 7&p... l i/8/2007
Item 9.b. - Page 187
.·:
UTlON RO. 3921 ----' !
S:?ECIAL CONDITIONS
7. Consistent with the City's Housing Element policies, the project shall restrict fifteen
percent (15%) of the units, or 3.3 units, to qualified families earning a moderate-
income (based on the City's affordable housing standards). The developer shall pay
an affordabte housing in-lieu fee for any fraction of a unit (see also MM 9.1).
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
18.
19.
The Final Tract Map shall show an irrevocable offer to dedicate the 25' creek setback
area to the Crty, including the pedestrian path.
Prior to issuance of building permit, the applicant shall record a new, non-exclusive
pedestrian tran easement that coincides with the project plans. The applicant shall
submit construction plans for the pedestrian trail for review and approval by the
Departments of Public Works and Parks, Recreation and Facilities. Prior to issuing
a certificate of occupancy, the developer shall install the pedestrian trail in
accordance with the approved construction plans. The pedestrian trail shall either be
maintained by a homeowners association with maintenance responsibilities outlined in
the CC&Rs, or by the City if the offer of dedication is accepted.
The pedestrian trail shall connect to the pubric sidewalk on James Way by means of
an ADA ramp and stairs.
Only native plants shall be planted within the 25' creek setback area.
Signs shall be posted prohibrting the use of herbicides or other toxic substances
potentially harmful to creek habitat.
The CC&Rs shall prohibit privately installed lighting adjacent to the creek.
The City shalJ receive all documentation submitted to the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers to satisfy requirements outlined in the "Wetland Mitigation Plan".
The project shall provide bicycle parking in a location acceptable to the Community
Development Director.
Fencing shall be instaned along the pedestrian creek path that does not prohibit
migration of fauna between the path and riparian area.
0,··i~'1lifcl1~~wi>:'e~::1e~~~l=~:~ ...
it nri-:--A ~r~,,,.,"; ~""'' #-1 ,A,-Lf, ,--v~ ~ 11 '--=1~..,.~....-;_.;.i ~ 11 ..........--
All impact trees shall be a minimum 36" box in size.
The applicant shall prepare a plan for a right pocket tum lane within the public right of
way for review and approval by the Public Works Director, if a right pocket tum lane is
determined to be a -substantial public safety enhancement within a five (5) year
timeframe based on traffic projections. ~---av-~
n.ti:\,;=.c -::u
Sl='P 0 .:t in~~ .. -_u . ...J
f
I
! •
_ ~ITY or ARP.OYO GtANu:: (
-coMMUft:~-t:i=""~~ .
Item 9.b. - Page 188
\
t~f\] Tl~ I\ A) e. ~
o rs.,.J
RECEIVED
SEP 0 4 2013
"'""''"
ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN
'--·-·-· -·-
·,..---..\
H!AtlO"C:RUllC.
CHl.AeU.61 DAafl
'·\-.
--~ .. ~rr="r!;" f,l:f!;;:r • ..,; ..._. .......
-r"A.Rtt.IHGC:.OVHT
KfNM!CtT' !11 !f"lr.G!!i
!tH~rPl!L t J t &P'.AoCt&·
8H!PP'l!!L ::I sciaP.>oces
!Hef"P"i=!L a • o1&9,..AC.!5
i!lt•rUL..! ·-'-6.i!.Jtell"~~
TOT"L 21ae ... ,1.c:.ea
...... ~ .. ..__,,." ..... .-:1 ... ,..,.,,,..,.,_.,.,, •• , .,, ...... ,. .... ,,.._ .. ,,.
~ .. ;. ....... ,,..,....,..,., _, .... ..,.~-a.-....,. ....
·~:=.c:-··
' "'''"'· )
SHEPPEL3 &4 /
MDC ED-USE
IAEADOV'/ CREEK
MUlll·FAMILY
":=:i;::2~~.
'""
RUBBEU
IH!.PPl!L
·~:tf!:NQI
ll:ISllU-1104
1a.u ..... n1•
frVIUU. lllf'Utl
.. ")
"'''
/"1U',_/
}J}J:.i,
••21
AC-1
()
Item 9.b. - Page 189
GtlRGll
RECEIVED
SEP 0 4 2UIJ
CITY OF Af!R.OYO GRANDE
COIVIM!JNllV PEVELOPMENf <IMGl.~MRllll'I~~
I·-... __ ...... _
9HEFPB. 1
\ ··-------------
ARClllTECTURAL SITE PLAN ~''(!)~fj~f{@JL;;.
1·.aro· ~.
OAK PARK
1ll!MIOrlWE.B<
DRAll.Adl!!. BM!irll
·PR':: SE 1~V~ 5
/:JI SEM /E-1-..J r
PA Rf<t tJ ~
. 'I
,,.,1:' ........ lll.,.tilfl'-.w.-drdu.W
.-di·•d.:ftr~lrf'J~I (N11 • .11J
.tlL'2rt't .. llllfl•rr/..utu>1.,.1lr
a...-.1-·/#t"'1P1ltrqr:zif:d"''"
.-td,IJ1Dl.1,..JJ1L~•rdr.lil.o '"Jtti°"' ... .,..,,,_d .... ,, ,,_,....,,., ....
6HEPPEL3 &4
MIXED-USE
MEADOW CREEK
MUL 11-FAMIL V
IDD OA~PARK
AhRDIO OllA/10!
cA HUD
RUSSELL
SHBPPSL
P:O C'Mll.E LAI E
,ILJJ,O
CA D-t!07
19251 &9i!-7DOI
ornm11
0111! PlAll
N'llln
i}1.\ .
01112
"''"
AC-1
Item 9.b. - Page 190
~ ·~-~~---------~-.-~--~~~~~~~~ ... ~,.... ..... ~..-~~-~--~~~~~~~..-~~--~~~~--~~~-~~-1-~~.....;.;;;....~~~~~~~
-dW
--~
-'"'"
----'""!
\rZnd
NOISS3~0tld
HllWdllYO
,,.. .. ., ,._ . ...,...,. ..... -..... ,..., ... ,.,~ _..,.,._"4_...,....,
-n ..... ~-",.. "-II'~ .... ,.. -.,-""T!-T ... .
'""""VI• ~,,.._,~ .. ,_,
~~
·1::11AUJ1UMllDllllbll'lt1•
10tlHOI
d'IW UINljlA ,.
>liUHi17 9NlddOH9
r•HIWI ~ t "9_, 11U>f ODDft lotl ~.~=· ,··~· ·~ °:,'
OHMft••-· ...... ,..,,..--~· llllllltl
'"'°''°'"'IN .. '"' .... .,.,, l!~llll~D~
10 .. lilD•tUltHllS.'fl"-.nt!ll.-.. 'Um.-~7:...-'.:1~~::'\.
~-------IDallll.11131'138)1'
' i• ·------------~.!~~-~~~~~:!!..~--------'~
• "<:Jll.,Q >l>!Vd >1¥0 i•
llll·ll'l••JI•·• ., ..........
,r.;i.;;o:OilllCt:J:a:;tuf.itl;:Q~i;I:l:ii:lii:i:ii:;ci~ti:Iiiitj;t]~r;r!.;i;1;:t:IIJ,J;:OcDl:I<U::O:~ ...... ::,~~::.:r;.;.~1,'~
,,.,-·~ WIQnlll•t•'IDM_.1 ... 1 Hrllh'Glll0-11.,...ott
1D1NGIUJWolllllUDJl9M01UOlhU.....-V1iu ..... llll ,
-mt00•~::.:-.:"'r~:-i:·i::::~:t:
'111 .. DYI ato--.iltlnDl' ........ flSWDI .. Mlll1'-
'U)H41:Jl lbn.f.,lfl~1111Hlftl.,..,.ILl"'" IU ·:
"2\'1cwu19.i_,.~-..ivnww••"'"J111111re..01G11
....... ,,1~tnll>t°1lfl .. •J91CW'Ullclll•HD'f,llll "' . . ...
tre1nv11
nn11."W IU'1W
1111111~ ., ....
,,..;, .....,, ,Dft
...
a..,lll IDllfn3•htMHrtl•tYllHl•\tflY
-10tY.l.DllUrll'1~ .. "°' ... "''""'"' '11111.DWI ~ • .,, IN-D
........ ,...... .... iml ................ ......
·~::=:: ,a.:r.::~~:f~•:i:
.. 1111pu-..v.a111...u
•u~:.~~~':;=~~=11::=
-...rrh4 IDl'U ICll 1prr.itiqt.-UIUIW•ll
..,.~:'.ra~~io:"~~~:
..
n
"
U•H ,., .... IDIN all I 1Dr'l'lithl11 tlH1 ri
-IOll•• D• IOl'l,UQ.lllYUIUS
''°'" ro11Cft.to..-111"u .. "'"'
....._.1tl11r1Mt&Ol•I•• rr"Jf,,...tDn•
UD-11 lflDlrrol.IJ~
.... ... , .....
" .... "'"" ...
SEP 0 4 ZOIJ
CHY OF ARROVO GRANDE
COMMutUIY DEVliLOf!M2!,~.
--..::m•· ·.::'* .. c-n "" -
51FT7 5 Fl £5
CA 51\ 0RAN OE
/ IJ rc;f$.<;_§ t-
eG~S
£31t5.£M e.N T
f3i!-SY -rD
Nlr\/ t61f-~
Qt..A~6ts
Vcl-41CL.G-5
---..... . )
_..,/
Item 9.b. - Page 191
I
l._
60UTH EL!V>-TIOH EAST ELEVATION
(
NORTH ELEVATION ~EeT t:LINATION
~,,...·fi"~~,,, .... J\
RN~\ftlJi 1
sGlE~ q !n1g ·1
·..-.-.. ---·-~· ......... , .......... ,4-.. ,.-•. "---«t--.... ... ...... _ ... _ ..... _ ... l"'r4
.,.,,, ...... --......... ... •f'~-·p...t.-~ .,.... .. .-..
di ....
SHEPPEL
OFFICE
8\llLDIHG
3
llCIOUrARll
o1onnoYD cn'-HDI
CA ~II•
llUll&IU!.~IL
IQ)~~gu.rm:
'" tt::.01
......
....
.....
Item 9.b. - Page 192
-~
A NON-EXCLUSl\'E EASEMENT FOR INGR!iSS Ai"ID EGP.ESS 0-VER TIIA.T PO.lm"ON OF PAR.ca 3 OF
PARCEL MAP AG...g2-35, ™THE CITY OF AUOYO GRANDE. rN THE COUNTY OP SAN LUIS OBlSP'O.
S!ATE OF CAI.lFOP..NlA, .t\o;oaDJNG ro v..AP-ru;c<1.RD.Eo,r~2$; l9B2lNBOOK 31 • .PAGE 31 OF
.PARCEL MA~, 1N THE OfflCE O~TBE~TI' RECORDER dF SAID COUNTY,.~YING 11.S FEET'·
ON.EACH .SIDE OF Tim FOlJ.DWil"1G. DESCRlBED IJNE: . -,. .. . ~-. -. . . : ~· ' . ~ .
BE.GINNING AT A POINT ON !HE SOUTIIWESTERLY lJNE OF SAID. PARCEL 3, WHICH POlNT .81='--ARS
SOU!H 72"48'5"9" EAST, 35.05 f=I FRO.M-!P.E MOSI' W-.:;:.STElU.Y CORNER THEREOF; THENCE
NORTH 20°1s·o.;· EAST, Ja:!.lZ rEEr TO A POINrlN U-~NOR.Tc-U.S'TERLY UNE OP SAIO PAR.ca
3. THE SIDE LINES OF SAID UNE TO Ee EX.TENDED 0'.R SHORTENSD TO MEET AT nra
NOR.'I'F.ERLY /V.'JD SOtrrh"liP.!.Y LINES OF -SAID PARc:a J. .
PARCELS:
A NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT z=oR PARK.ING PURPOSES OVER THAT PORTION OP PARCEL 3 OF
PARCEL MAP AC-sl-35, IN T'"dE CITY OF A.RROY.O GRANDE, IN:rHE COUNn" OF .sAN LOIS OBISPO,
STATE (Jf CA!...IFOR.NlA, ACCORDil'iu 70 MAP~.ED JUNE~.lmlNlJOOK 54. PAUE 31 OF
PARCEL MAPS, ·IN nm OFFJa OF THE COtJNnrRECORDER OF SAID c61JNTY. DESCRlBEJ) AS
FOU.OWS:
BEGINNING ./\ T T'riE MOST WEST.ER.LY CORNER OF SAID P ARCEI..J;,!liENCESOU"Tii 72 °48'59" EAST,
ALONG 'lli:E SO~Y L.JNE OF SAID PARCEL LZLS.:::;E'l~'TE"ENCE NORTH 211"15'().:[1'
EAST, js~~ 'F.J:.::.l; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY tN A" DIP..Ec:T LINE "ro A POINT, lN nm_,
NORnfwEsrE:u..Y m OF SAID PARCEI.3, WHIO:I POINT B~ NORTH 20" rs•04• E>.S"r;ias";:-!i..::.L "L
PP.QM TRE POINT OF BEGINNtN~ TiraNCE SOUTR.20"15'04" WEST. AL.ONG LE! NOR.l'1JWESTERL Y
LI UNE OF SAID PARCEL, 165 F.::..E.1 TO TEE POINT OF BEGINNING .
••
TOTAL P.004
RECE!VED
SEP 0 4 20!3
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDF
COMMUNl1Y DEV:l.O!>MEP-iT
Item 9.b. - Page 193
~A~-05-2005 16:31
PARCELL
PAR.CSL 2 Of .?ARCE!. .MAP NO. AG-82-3S ZN TH.t::. CITY OF AF.ltOYO GR..~~ COUNI'Y .OF~ LUIS
OBISPO, SfATE OF CALl?ORNIA, ACCOP..DING TO MAP R.ECClRDE.OniN£·2s: !Jn!2JNBOOK32, PAGE
31 OF PAR.CE!.. MAPS, !N rn Omc:E OF 1~ CO'l:"NTY RECOR.DER OF .SAID COtJ'NTY.
PARCEL 2.:
... ANON-EXCLU~.FOR.:nm CONSTRUCTION, USE AND.MAIN:raNANCE O.F~·~Jiodt .
.. :RoAifPO:R 'lNGRESS:M!'t> EGP.ES--~ ~:ro.RTION'OFPARCEI..:B:OF'.P.ARCEL.MA?·~d.~~:is
· Thi° nra crrr OF AllRoYO ~ ~c:QUNO'.' Of."~w J..Uls~nsISPo, STAT.: OF CALIFoRN'.rA..
ACCORDINO TO MAP RECORDS!'J~dl.JlY.29~ t98l. INJIDOK3J.,;PAGE 47 OF.PARCEL MAPS. INTIIE:
. O.FFJCE OF THB COUNTY RECORDE:i dt SAJD COtJNn LYING ns .:-E.e.1 'ON CA.CK SIDEO.f.:Tm>
.:F.OJ.:1DWING.AND'MOlS.PAlt~~£DUN£:-. . .· ·:
-"' -• ' -' -,J. --.----. • • . . -~;:-:-. ' -
BEGINNING AT A POINT a~ TME NORThu..LY LIN~ OF PARCEL B OF PARCEL MAP AG-79-83&,
· 1AN:Ui!ff :Z"ID'.:I98.2 lN-~OOK~ PACE 47 OF P.ARCEL MAPS. lN THE OFFICE 0¥ nra COUNTY
~riR:oa~·§A!D-c0UJ..7Y; SAID POINT .BEAP..S NORTH i2•~752• WEST, 61.Z PEET ALONG 1liE.
NORTHERLY~ OF SAID PARi:f FROM Al INCF. IRON PT?E WITH PLASTIC CAP STAMPED
-R..C.E.. 25.366, LOCATED ATTHE1"1CRT'iic.ASTERL.Y COP~ OP SAID PARCEL; TMENCE212.61.FEET
ON A LINE PAR.ALLEL wrra. nm ~y LmE Of SAID PA1'£a to A POINT ON THE
SOUI"'.dERLY LINE O.FSAID P~CSI.;SA.IP POJ!lt"T BEING A CURVE CONCA''.E TO TEE SOUTHWEST,
5A.VING A UDJl."S OF 50..00 fE::.l, wrra Tira RAD!AL 1'0 SAID POlNT BEING NORTH 40°0!'304
Sb.ST, SAID POfNT B.EiNG Zi.50 Fc:r NORT~Y ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE
raROtJGH .A caqp.A!,._ANO-LE OF 31·3o•sz• FROM A POINT OF R=.'""'1EP-.S'f CU"F.VE; SAID P.EVERSE
CUR~ B:nNG CONCAVE TO THE NORTHEAST RA V!NG A RA.Drus OF so.co ¥'=..El'. SAID POINT OF
REVERSE BEING 44.36 F.E.E1" AI.ON"G lira A'R..C OFTh"B R.EV:e.asE ~ AND TiiltOUOH CENTRAL
A.NGU; OF 51 ftz4·1r-FROM r.-m }>OJhT OF BEGlNND>JG OF nm .REVERSE CURVE. SAID POINT OF
»EGINNINO BElNG .Al INCH lRON PIPE. WITI:! PLASnC CA.? STAMPEO R..C.E. :ZS,366. THE SID:E
UN"ES OF SA.IP I.JNE TO BE EXTENDED OR SHORTENED TO .~..EET AT Tim NORTHERLY AND
SO'til'BERL Y LINES OF SAID PARCEL B.
PARCEL3:
-.EXCLUSIVE ~..ENT FOR ING.RESS AND EGRESS TO PARCELS 2 AND J PARC-cl..
1S SH PARCEL MAP AG-82-~S, RECOltDEC JUNE 29, 198:< IN BOOK , • AGE 31 OP P.o\RC-;:'!
MAPS, IN THE -~ OF 'IEE COUN'IY RECORD:.R. OF SAID • 1 OVER T..~ POU.OWING
DESCIUBED PROP-R :
EXCEY.rtNG 1"H OM A PRIVATE ROAD EASEMENT SB OWN Ori ~
0 ~ satrrHERLY PARCEL WF.E OF PA.Rc;":..S c AND D.
--~·v-o R~-~ !!: ..
SEP 0 4 2013
Item 9.b. - Page 194
Item 9.b. - Page 195
~ -••. :, .. l. 'l ~
. --., ._ ': t;
., .... _ . .:... '·
Item 9.b. - Page 196
Item 9.b. - Page 197
. ·"~. .· =--
. ·. ·~ ·---·
·u
.• --t ..
i --------·-.. Item 9.b. - Page 198
.'ii·· i :r.~', · ·.~'
··:;~;',~~i-.:· ~::,:.~~~~·~:~,,·,~1:· i ·:~;'.; ;'
Item 9.b. - Page 199
'Jul•27 OS 11:5lp Russe 1/-·Sheppe l
(
C925J SS?-·9775 p. l . . .
/
)
Dear Mr. Bunnell, July 26, 2005
Thanlcyou for your endorsement ofthe redes~ed mixed-use project in our July 11 phone convezsatioJL
'Ibis..ldl:C:is:to rcmfinn dmtllll.cferslemfirng, w=.htnietlust BDJ mw. ~will.nspectthe mm-exi::lmivc
pzkiug r11•e•ient you.have on the opilill side ortnc mad access that we share. We will not impede or
encroad1 on 1bat easemeat.
Once we have formal approval of this plan ilom the City of Arroyo Grande, our intent. is to d...-velop the
sm per plan (auachcd.) Om:e die final. lmild-aul is.c:omplC!b:d, we..will hoc. Trlad..Halm::s..Eog:ing
~ an "'as. built" document to be recorded; clarifying the new access easement(s) for the Casa G!ande
Motel, and the nan-exclusi~ parking spaces in the defined casement area. We estimate there will be a
maximum of J 8 spaces .available in the parking ememeut area, but the configuration with planting areas.
etc. have yet to be defined by the Cily. The area size and gmcral. location will remain the same but of
course the City dictates the final design and number of spaces tllowed.
I will keep you abreast of the plans as they develop, and of course you can call either myself or Rob
Strong at my time. For your records I have included the attached three page document I faxed you and we
reviewed earlier this month. as the bmis for the agreement in .principle to this revised design.
Once again, thank you for worlcing together to arrive at a suitable solution.
~-"; /}
Russ Shep~~
925.984.4664
rsheoocl@sbcglobal.net
Cc:
RobSboug
Jolm Belsher
RECE;VED
SEP 1 6 [ui3
CITY OF ARROYO G2Al\!DE
COMMUNTTYD~
Item 9.b. - Page 200
I
I
I
I
I L __
~----
_, .......
\ I "-' 0 I 0
""1.CMITl!CTI ___ .. _
_ .n __ _
...... -.. -~
SHEP PEL
Enteri2rises
2218 OlD M1001.HE1D WAV. IC
MOUN1AIN VIEW. CA 9~0~3
L E G E N D
UNIT TYPE A-1
SEESHEfl Al.4 FOR ADaTlONAL IMR>.
D UNITTYPEA-2
3.Ef SHEET A 1,4 FOi AoaTIONAL "'FO.
D SERVICE AREAS
UTtnY. mct£N .. OTHER SERVICE AREAS . D OUTDOOR SPACES
WAUWAY. PA1D5 ANO DECXS
D rk~~,~~J;s&irt'..It~M~IT
IJillllllll!ll ----·----·--· -. ' ... ·-
Item 9.b. - Page 201
Jun 25 Russe]-1-.Sheppe l
! .
R;CEIVED
SEP I 6 2013
ClTV OF ARROYO GRANDE
COMMUf'..lliV DEVELOPMENT
C S25l 55/'--:~775
I ,
'
,'.: FR=c;rv...,._ii.Jss_ 's'ti~PPE·t:~:·::
.. -··-~ <--:r~ .:_-_ ·>--.:~~"';'-:._._·-~ :<:~-·, --.--~:-.·-· · .. .._;-_: ~,:_L-:1
Fax:
To: RayBunneD Fntn1: RussellSheppel
Fa: 925-552-9775 Date: June 25, 2005
Phone: 925-552-7804
0 U...-nt D Fer R8view 0 Please Racycle
Ray,
H_.s ablputfil lhe ntdesigaof tllle ~ect. Tllent is.no lmpe::t •allenll&on oll lbe·aabna
al the -=:ass er 1wot w llm pmkina -a. Wa hawa..,.. ..-ma than nndad •
City CDCIG. wn. lwpt It naz.t tD the drive llllBI• and clase ta the ma1111. Reldignrnent af the
enpmenls la necaamuy, ..... eNlal"BllCI Illy . .... Clt,y. Cwreally, wfflb Iha Clt;r claslng
~ street a:nas, lllllm we ......., :pu lmhlli:alty wDI lmue no atnet a:cass
usauWlt. W. nsed tD cou-=t that. You can alao w en the dlllk hatched plan al 20D2
vJhicll was antlillad &ml a;rprvved, the parki~ v.nm reelfsnmcl so es not Ill» be rmokeal and
un11taallle You came Ollt wHh ll1Df9 usable a:c.a and 1111Ure paricing 18&tnll&lll:. Tli:!sin the
best mlrle aabdian far Ill!! GI llD.
I wiD be mil ol DAIB uatll the 46 of .July. Wiii calD for your c:mmmants lalllr in tile week of the
4th.
C::: Rob Strong, John Belsher
Item 9.b. - Page 202
Jun 26 ns 01:16a Russer--.Sheppe 1 C925l 5F .. 9775
.
P• 1
J ~
,f ·-
~-ft
1-l'-":
i
(~__i w;sisr ...i.sn.s "'1 ,;z ~ ~ ~NDtfW:I-
. 6-~ ti~ "?:Z: ~ M .bii ,91' •?:' L. M J ~ , ti~ ..J.S/1..3
~~~~~-~~ . . I M oi:--c i---
ia en
&nO _J
~-w @w~ IL. ~ G'" IL. w <~ :c IL< .sl
SEP 1 6 2013
CITY OF AP.JlOYO GP.ANOE I
. COMMUNITY DEV£lOPMEffT
I
\
(
Item 9.b. - Page 203
('-: . '\ .
\ -·
Jun 26 O 5 a l : 1 6 a
~:
I
l
I
I -I .... I I I I .a.a I I .Q I --1 I 10
-
r-
.w
()
I I .... , I I .a.a I .2 I I I
I I m
I " ~
I 1--1111
Oil
I I "'
I I I
I I
I I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I I
Ll
I
~~ I
I
-----I
Russel.'--Sneppel
(
(925) 55?-~9775
/-
..J w ....
0 x
C)
Ill
:il
2-
~ -
-
RECE!V~D
SEP 1 6 2013
I
I
I
CllY OF.ARROYO GRANDE
COMMUNITY DEVELO?MENT
-
-
-
-
Item 9.b. - Page 204
September30,2013
Planning Commission
City of Arroyo Grande
Mathew Downing
200 E. Branch
Arroyo Grande, CA 93420
. .-..
(
• Best Western
Casa Grande Inn
RE: CUP 12-002, Variance 12-004, Tract Map 12-001,
Russ Sheppel, Meadow Creek Development
Dear Mr. Downing:
,.-
(
SEP 3 0 2013
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
I first want to say that I approve of the proposed care facility as being a good use for the property and is much more desirable
than the previously approved residential project. However, the design as proposed is too large for the site and encroaches on
my parking and ingress/egress easements which I am not willing to have moved or altered in any way. Mr. Sheppel has not
discussed this project with me until recently when he emailed me what he called a "final plann .
. --puring the previous development plan approval process I was willing to allow some adjustments to my easements with the
( nderstanding that my ingress/egress easement would be relocated to the lower (most easterly) driveway, which we have been
··----asing for the past 10+ years. THIS WAS ALSO THE ROUTE PREFERRED AND INSISTED UPON BY SHEPPEL IN ORDER TO KEEP MY
TRAFFIC OUT OF THE UPPER DRIVEWAY AND PARKING LOT. When the Crty decided at the last hearing to close the lower
driveway I WAS NOT IN AGREEMENT. This would force all traffic, including my bus and truck traffic, to go through the Kennedy
Club Fitness parking lot, creating unnecessary safety hazards and congestion for all concerned.
The current design of the new project creates these same hazards. In the past Sheppel insisted we use the lower driveway
because of these hazards and the congestion. Now, with his current design, he is insisting we use the Kennedy Club Fitness
parking lot route. His design shows my easement through the Kennedy lot to be 24 feet. However my easement is actually 28
feet, which was agreed to by Sheppel, Kennedy Club Fitness and the owners of Casa Grande in 1989 to accommodate the
Sheppel/Kennedy Club Fitness development. The easterly parking spaces in that lot are encroaching into my easement by 4 -5
feet. I have pointed this out previously, but nothing has been done to correct this encroachment. lfmy easement is to remain at
the upper level, then the full 28 feet must be utilized for traffic with the parking spaces moved further to the east.
As to the 8 unit multifamily (condo) project, these units cannot be built as shown due to the location of my parking easement,
which I am not willing to relocate. The previously approved plan has garages and the entrances on the west side, which leaves
my parking easement undisturbed. If they are to be built at all, this is the way they need to be.
I personally have reservations about creating an island of narrow lot condos in the middle of a medical and fitness center. This
adds 8 different property owners to further complicate the current problem issues. The Commission should strongly consider
Staffs reservations about 2 car tandem garages and parking. This is not a good design. It should be denied.
It seems that a better solution to allowing some residential use in this situation would be a mix of studio and 1 and 2 bedroom
apartments. This would leave the ownership with the developer and would be great for the employees that would like to live
.... ----.......
(\·~.~-~· .....
850 Oak Park Road
Arroyo Grande, CA 93420
(805) 481-7398 Fax (805) 481-4859
For Reservations Call 1-800-528-1234
www.bestwestemcasagrande.com
Best Western Hotels are independently owned and operated
I
Item 9.b. - Page 205
/
close to their work but cannot afford to buy a condo. This particular location in the project would also be good for professional r
offices related to the care facility use. Narrow lot condos in this location just do not fit. \.
Another issue is the reference to EMERGENCY ACCESS EASEMENT on the plan and the condition in the Negative Declaration
Study that requires the project to maintain emergency access on the southern portion of the property connecting to the adjacent
motel site. Sheppel has no legal assess through the Casa Grande property. Therefore this is a condition that can not be met.
The reference to EMERGENCY ASSESS EASEMENT on the plan is not correct. MY EASEMENTS ARE FOR UNRESTRICTED FUU
INGRESS AND EGRESS.
In the past I have consistently advised Mr. Sheppel that I would only agree to possible adjustments to my easements if my access
was improved. The current design does not satisfy that condition. Now that both driveways to James Way are to remain open,
as they should, there is no good reason to direct my traffic through the upper driveway. The care facility should be redesigned
with a smaller footprint to allow my easement to be relocated to the lower access route. Again, this route has been in use by
Casa Grande for the past 10+ years and works well. This would also serve as an emergency exit for Sheppel.
The most recent plan shows a parking lot at the south end of the care facility with 13 spaces. Apparently it is intended to replace
my parking easement. This is not acceptable as it only has 13 spaces and does not allow for truck or bus parking as the current
easement does. Even though it is approximately the same square footage, it is not equal or better. My easement allows for 18
normal spaces or 3 -4 trucks and buses. The plan also attempts to restrict Casa Grande's use to certain hours. Our current
easement has no restrictions and we will not agree to any.
In summary, my easements were recorded in 1982, prior to Sheppel's ownership. He has consistently ignored my easements
with his many designs until I find out about it and become involved. I was not aware of this current project until notified by the
City on August 26, 2013. While I whole heartedly appreciate the concept of a care facility, he has no authority to alter or
encroach on my easements. The increased setback at the creek from 25 -35 feet is great, but it forces him to encroach on my
easements in order to build what he envisions. It appears the 25 foot setback would allow him to build the current design with /
some minor modifications and also allow room for two way traffic to and from the lower entrance. Keeping the condos facing (,~ ..
west as previously approved would also eliminate the need to disturb my parking easement, which is not an option.
Mr. Sheppel needs to design to fit the space he purchased without encroaching on my easements. I am willing to cooperate
ONLY if a mutually agreeable solution can be reached.
Thanks for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Ray Bunnell
Owner, Casa Grande Inn
RB:gb
cc: Fred Glick, Attorney
Enclosures: Site Plan with notes
Site Plan showing Bunnell easements and encroachment
Description of Bunnell upper easement
July 26, 2005 letter from Sheppel
2006 Site Plan showing access route agreed to by Bunnell
RECEIVED
SEP 3 0 2013
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Item 9.b. - Page 206
jltJ m
0 m < m
0
EXISTING
HOTEL
-nf-t=l?.E_ Is /Jo
If a:E-S s -r~u
CASA <£!, l:YrlJD~
OAK PARK ROAD
p fri;Rl'/~~iilllllilt~=~~
PFoftJSGD
f 11 R.t<t ;J ~
CASGMeJ..:JC-
/ 5 NeJ(
A-cc.EFT!) 13
PARKING & VICINITY SITE PLAN
I
(
---,
EXISTING
CHURCH
I T/ff!l<E-1 s.
\ NO~tc
: 77f/?..U CltSA
I C9hrtJt:> c_
I
I
I
I
I
I
SHEPPEL
Enterr2rises
ITV DI O
•kCHITICTI ------2218 OID MIDOORElDWAY. IC
MOUNIAIN VIEW. CA 94043 ---ca-----.-.--.c .. =:.::==
L E G E N D
II PARKING FOR SHEPPEL l
22 DE51GNATED PARlJNO SPACES
PARKING FOR SHEPPEL 2
Zi bESiGNA1ED PAillMG !PAC:U-
(ZJSJANDARD 2 ACCESSlllLEJ \
PARKING FOR KENNEDY
57 DESIGNAIEO SPACES
PARKING FOR ASSISTED LIVING
il DESIGNATED PARl:ING SPACES
(23 SIANDAID 3 ACCBSIBl.£J
PARKING FOR MULTl-FAMIL Y
2D DESIGNA.IE PARltNO SPACES
18 2-CAR GARAGES 4 GUEST SPACES!
NON-DESIGNATED SPACES
26 PAftlNG SPACES
123 STANDARD 3 ACCWIBLEI
STATISTICS
l!Xl1RNCJ PAHING 10 l!MAIN
SHEPPEll 1
SHEPPEll 2
KENNEDY FfiNESS
NON-OESIGNAIED
TOTAL exisnNCJ
N!W PAlllNCJ
MULT1-l'AMILY
OAR.AGE Id SPACES
GUf.51 4SPACB
ASSISTED LIVING
NON-DESIGNATED
TOTAL N!W PAHINCJ
OIALPAIUNCJ
22SPACES
22 SPACES
SB SPACES
25SPACES
127 IPACr-·-· .•
20SPACL.
3' SPACES
19 SPACES
73SPACU
230•PACU
Meadow Creek
X11iH•d Lh·lng, M,moq c.,,
1 n d M o I t I • P 1 111 I I I
Arroyo Grande, California
PARKING AND VICINITY l.!!l!!Lru!.
SITE PLAN®™
U-"~ : I Al.O 11•1' 1 .. 1111C•lt: r•tOoO"
2 ... MIHllllCMl:l"•J0'-0"
Item 9.b. - Page 207
go
:!: ~
~o en c: "" z> ni
~ !I -0
co ~
m -< <::> ~~ ,.....,
c::> I~ w
"' 0 ~ '"
ISTING
OTEL
.. ,
:::::::::::::~~~2._L:.::--E:-::::::::: .. ( .... :·:··:_~:::O:::::::~::::::::::.:·:::::::::::::::::::.~:::::.~::::::::::~::::::::::::··············=·-: .. :=:::::.:::.:.::::::::~~-::' .. :.==:::.:: .. :::.::::-.... -..... -.... -.. --...11
v ···.:::::::···· .. ·············· .. ······~ ..................................................... ::::::::.~·
.,
:~
)>
>·<
Item 9.b. - Page 208
CITY OF ARROY GRANDE
COMMUNITY D: fCI t"\D cm
: ; mnmzro=> P'P' : ~o
t~ ' ~t :&Dea OO/.i.'Z'"066r ax:;,oa·.%fle.A-;rzr .,oa D'odsJ=cro s~'I rres :ao. d"F='sea
3
CASA-GJCkJJD tA5EMWI
7H !2u u ?PEP:.... C>~J v E.-
LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR
PROPOSID ACCESS
AND DAI VEWAY EASENENT
88-486
Waring Group
September 28, I 989
Those portions of Parcel ·e· as shown on Parcel Map AG-79-8J8 as
recorded tn Book JI of Parcel Maps at Page 'fl thereof, records of the
County Recorder or San Luis Obispo County. State of Ca11fomta, and more
particularly described as follows:
f?arc:el I
~!Stmp:of land .28;o0,feet wide; _the center11ne'be1ng deScr:tbed as Jo nows: ,
' . .
Commencing at a r tron ptpe tagged RCE 25366 as shown on said parcel ·
Map AG-79-838, said ptpe being the most easterly.comer of said Parcel
'B'; thence North n-47 52" West.along the northeasterly line of satd
Parcel '8°, 39.63 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING of the cente.·ltne or said
28.00 foot wtde strip of land to be deScrtbed; thence South 17" I Z 08"
West, 142.40 feet; thence South 20· IS" 04"' West, 94.61 feet to a point on
a curve concave to the northeast and having a radius of 50.00 feet; a radial
beartng to said point bears North oo• 02' 34" East; said point also being
the southwesterly line of said Parcel 'B'; said point being the southerly
tennlnus of said 28.00 foot wide strip of land; said point bears North 49•
SI' Ir West, 34.03 feet from the most southeasterly comer of Parcel 'B'
of said Parcel 11ap AG-79-838. The side Jines of said 28.00 foot wide
strip of land shall be prolongea or shortened to terminate on the
northeasterly and southwesterly lines of said Parcel 'B'.
The above described strip of land contains 6601 ~ ft more or less.
~HIBIT -6 ~YUL 3 498 PAGE 481
Item 9.b. - Page 209
Jul ~7 u~ i1:~1p t<usse.11 ::;neppe1
/
Dear Mr. Bunnell, July 26, 2005
1lumlc you for your endmsemeDt ofdJe redssQpdmixed-use prqject in OlU' Joly 11 phone convmatian.
n.is.letteris·tocoa:6ml.1batancft:Ntw1&ng;we,~·~i::ct1fe.~ ~-emem~lheuphillsideoitiiiiill8d-+¥~e}'Jllnot§@!or ,
8iii@i!i on ibiit easemma -
Once we haYe foiDml appwval oftbis plan iiom theCii;y of Arroyo Grande, our intent is to develap the
siteperplan(""ac:hed) Once.tbafinallmild-outis.COJllP)all:d,.:we..'Willllavc.TriNLHolmesEugineming
prepare an "'8S built' document to be recorded, clarifYing the new access easement(s) far the Casa Gnmde
Motel, and the non-e:xclnsive paddng spaces in tho defined easement area. -We est:imam these will be a
maxjm1un of J 8 spaces available in the parking easement uea. but the con6gandion wi1b phmting areas,
en:. have yet to be defined by the City •. 'Ihe area size and geneml location will remain the samc but of
course the City dictates the .final design and llUIDber of spaces allowed.
I wiD bq> you abreast oftbe plans as they dtMs1op, and of course you can call either myself or Rob
Strong at aoytime. For your records l have ilwbnfed the anacbed three page docamentl fimdyou and we
raviewed earlier this month. BS the basis for die agreement in principle to this reviaed design.
Once again. thank you fm-warldng together to mrive at a suitablct solution.
~4tl
925.984.4664
rsheppeJ@sbcglob81.net
I"' ...
~-,
{ \ \ ;
-----------------------------------·---· -·--
RECEIVED
SEP 3 0 r!J ~
cnv OF ARROVO eAANDE
COMMUNfTY DGVSl.OPMENT
Item 9.b. - Page 210
~ ( 'D. 'uJ '··-· l.tJ ~ \!) ~ H ,_ ~ 3 V) .._ \/) ........ , ~ \ (-.) -·
.
..
.
.
.
.
,
.
HU
A
O
O
N
C
A
.
e
l
l
t
c
CI
A
.
A
•
I
A
O
O
D
A
.
D
H
II·.
.
---
-
-
~-·-....
--
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
....
.
.
--
-
-
-
-
-
-
·
-
-
-
·
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
....
--
-
-
-
-
·
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
·
-·
·
·
-
-
-
-
-
·
--
-
.
.
.
.
-"
"
'
=
f
"
'
~
~
-
I
-
-
_:
:
=
___
...
.
,,
.
_
,
-·
~ !
:I
i
II
-
~
11
'
I
...
.
·1
1
I
I
I
11
'I
tU
I
C
l
-
P
C
L
I
'
-
-
-
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
---
1
-
-
.
L
-
L
.
-
'
-
1
-
-
l
.
.
.
<
-
L
.
.
.
J
'
-
'
!
-
1
-
L
.
-
'
-
'
-
-
'
-
-
-
.
c
:
-
-
:
:
-
:
:
-
-
:
-
:
"
-
:
"
r
-
~
1
"
'
'
OA
l
<
.
P
A
R
I
<
.
AR
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
I
J
R
A
L
SI
T
E
PL
A
N
···
·
~
{
\
I"
-
.
_
,
/
'"
~
Cl
"
'
Q
~
z~
l
U
<
:
:
)
~o
C
'
.
I
~
...
>
Q
IU
C
T
5
'
s:
;
.
l5
U
J
~
0
CL
~~
w
LU
<
z
a
t
V
)
..
.
::
:
>
0
:E
~
:l
e
u8
\t
P
•
H
N
f
f
l
l
.
.
1
1
--
"
:
.
"
:
d
l
f
.
~
9
.:
:
!
:
:
:
:
V
-
:
:
ro
•
k
l
p
O
f
D
W
I
•P
A
R
K
I
N
O
C.
O
t
.
I
H
T
t:
:
e
N
H
e
o
,
.
•
e
,
eP
A
i
:
e
e
6H
l
!
P
P
C
:
L
'
•
2
1
&P
A
.
G
e
o
GH
e
P
P
f
L
:I
•
SO
SP
A
C
.
1
:
6
SH
E
P
P
e
L
D
•
4
8
sp
~
e
&
&H
e
r
.
e
•
k
4
_,
..
•
•
~P.
t
.
c
;
e
~
T
O
T
A
L
•
2
1
&
6
P
A
.
G
8
6
.=-
:
:
;
r
.
:
:
;
:
:
:
i
:
~
.
,f
/
•
h
;
-
"
"
'
-
"
'
.
.
.
,
,
.
.
o
&
l
l
•
•
l
l
l
'
--
&
1
•
•
;
.
..
.
.
.
u.,
..
...
.
,
,
,
"
"
'
-.
l
t
l
.
a
t
"
"
"
"
"
"
-
"
..
.
, ..
.
,.
,
n
•
t
l
-
,
,
_
•
f
l
/
U.
1
t
1
1
8
I
A
.
&
'
I
.
.
/n
l
6H
E
P
P
E
L
3
6
4
14
J
X
E
D
-
U
S
E
ME
A
D
O
W
CR
E
E
K
MU
L
T
I
·
F
A
l
l
l
L
Y
L1
I
U
'
•
ll
l
O
O
H
P
.
t
n
k
an
n
:
I
O
J
4 ~~1
1
1
1
(
AU
G
S
l
!
l
l
Bl
l
e
P
P
e
l
•m
9
f
t
t
,
A
W
1
1
~I
H
~
I
C'
J
U
I
U
H
I
O
I
IA
-
.
1
i
:
W
i
i
.
:
i
t
r
"'
"
''
"
'
"
'
Ji
l
i
i
'
r
i
1
ih
i
l
(_
)
...
_
...
.
.
OW
I
R
A
L
t
.
Gl
l
l
P
U
l
l
OC
l
l
l
...
.
A
C
-
1
It
e
m
9.
b
.
-
Pa
g
e
21
1
I . TELECOPIER COVER SHEET
DATE:
TO:
RECEIVED
OCT 2 8 2013
( \
\
ITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
COMPANY: ~IT'/ C?F Ai?RDYo GR/tJJ])f__ ___ _
F A:f... :'.\lUMBER: . &'o5-'f-73 -03 ?fib
If OF PAGES
(including this cover sheet)
'
REGARDING: .SHEf'fE L P8oTEcr
FROM: f<AY 73rJAJAJEU--
3unnell Construction, Inc.
141 Sub:;rban Road. A-5 _,.,---,
( San Luis Obispo. C/l. 93401
805/544-4300 FAX 805/541-3985 CELi p·y /o : rn Eb . GU CJ<._) llTT ol\NE y \ __ _,
LL6SL176SG£ 11euung At?CJ . d ~o:so s l 8G PO Item 9.b. - Page 212
Subject Meadow Creek
From: ray.bci@att.net (ray.bci@att.net)
To: rsheppel@yahoo.com;
Date: Tuesday. October 22. 2013 4:28 PM
October 22, 2013
Russ Sheppel
rsheppel@yahoo.com
RE: Meadow Creek
Dear Russ:
RE CE MD
OCT 2 8 2013
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
J haven't heard from you since the Planning Commission meeting, so thought I should let you
know my position before you spend a lot of money redesigning your project
As stated jn my letter to the Commission, I am not willing to move or alter my easements on the
lower lot in any way. As you stated in one of your previous letters to me, the best thing for all of
us is to relocate the upper easement to the lower lot so that my traff)c goes straight out. This 1 am
more than willing to do. This would also save you having to restore tht: upper easement to 28
feet and revising the roadvlay to accommodate large trucks and buses. According to my engineer
(_.-· the current plan does not work for that traffic and would require considerable adjustments for safe
\_ transitions. Also keep in mind that I already have prescriptive rights over the lower lot afrer JO+
years of use.
c
If the City would allow you to stay with the 25 foot setback from the creek bank. it seems that
would solve most of your design problems. They certainly seem more receptive to the care
facility than the previous project.
M to my parking easement, you need to realize that I will not allow that easement to be disturbed
by garages and driveways. That is not an option! I also will not agree to any restricted time of
use. I believe that both my parking easement as well as the parking lot proposed at the end of
your building are going to be needed.
I really don't think that anyone is going to be interested in buying a condo in the middle of tb is
complex with all of its traffic and parking problems. A parking lot in this area would cost much
less and solve your parking problems. Maybe a small medical building, such as a dental office, in
conjunction with a par)cjng lot would work. I believe the condos are a big risk to you in that
location. Even if you were able to find buyers, you would end up with 8 additional property
owners raising hell with you over parking and traffic issues.
Please call me at 805-234-1200 (cell) if you have questions.
Sincerely,
Ray Bunnell
RB:gb
cc: Fred Glick, Artomey
LL65Lv6SZ:£ Item 9.b. - Page 213
EXISTING
HOl tl
I
I
, .---
'
I
I
I
I EXIST I tJ G
1.:Hl.'P.t..:H
I ---: Aloi
\ f,A)oCJG/-1
\r-LtJoT w~Lv :-1' J.-o cA TC: p
I
\ A/Of
.. \ (r((EM°A&E-,
I . I
I
I
I
I
I
I
l
I
/<{ kfAJfJE-b/
6PA-CE S 0»1 tTTE.b
RECE~ _o
OCT 2 8 2011
:EnterQrises
'12'2180l(lA 1l:;:i-lffit.[iW•.I 1 .:
IAC"J1;J.1 .. l!I VIEW. CA 94.l4l
I
L E G E N D
II r ... r.Y.ING fOR SI l[PP[L 1
11 catai .... 1rnrAt1.1·1() SPAC~
n NON-DESIGNATED SPACE!
.U PAd1tl.!'lr,1Ch
j•l '1.IPICACU lACCWSl'I
LJ SHARED PAR~ING WITH HO!~ LJ JotOSt.rCtr.K;1r.uuc:.~1
STATISTICS
Jl!'l!!!NG !A!KIHG 10 H¥!jH
Sll~Prfll I
5HFPPR I ?
l:ENUD'tflft-.:ESS
HOU·PC51GUl\TCO
101.lllXllTIHG
H!WPUklHG
~lUL!l-f,t."'"lll
G•l!:•·:if loJrACU
t,1 "'~I I ~·•iii
ASSISI~:> llVb~C
~.'ON D~\Gl~Al!O
fOll.l tlfW r&UING
Ql!lf.!.Ul!IO
22 ~PACfl
n5PfiCB
SS !PACtl
2llPAC<I
127 llACll
2(1.SPACfS
30l•'•CU
19 SPACtl
49 sracu
lliJ[!kll
M e a d o w C r.eek
~[1,1nis. ~l1m ... 1~ C.11
l n d )I 1: I .!...L:._L_L!....!...1....
Arroyo GunJe, California
c
Q
I~ cc
v:
c
CJ
C:
"O
TI
w
Item 9.b. - Page 214
(
(.---..
\
·,"~~ .. :
' ' ' ·' ~,,.
DATE: /2-/J -13
--L.!.~_!._Jl_ ____________ -11--~ .. ece~veo I
__ C.:::::. ~-t._ -,:__, ~Y_c_:,F_--+-<A-ER.._..R~o~Yo=--_JG~/2-J_AJ...L.tJ=-b=-c~'----.. --ff---D'EC 1 1 ZOB ~
-~o~o~s_-_-_._!'+___;,7~-~---=o-'""""_....._~-----i!--.i .... ~!= ARP.OYO GRAf.!DE I IJ1t . 3 COMMUNITY D!:VELOPMEN'! .
':'O:
·coMPAN
ing this cover sheet)
REGARD NG:
FROM: RAY BUN/JELL--
LL6SL'l76SZ:S Item 9.b. - Page 215
N
0..
-coµDoJfi' usr F/f C.E c..vF-S-r -
DO NOT ENTER &vNE:.RJ=-po 7?fc_c;G...-
TRUCKS & BUSSES 5/GiJ5 60 <: _L:,-
-----11:=-uFDOrr=VE~R~2~2'~A~ND-:-=-:::-_1--1----E v TT_ t--1 EMERGENCY VEHICLES ~ 1 -~
ONLY!
MAX. HEIGHT = 13'-6"
ALL OTHERS
EXIT LEFT! ...
< <7 C\-S A-rDRii~
I 5 5-K c /-. U ~t:=>
();1 -.H ct-f/5: SI~
•\.J •• -,''--............. , .. ,_ .-,, ..... .
"KENNEDY CLUB
FITNESS,
SHEPPEL L
SHEPPEL 2
AND
TD\JNHDMES"
EXIT THROUGH HOTEL
FOR
ENTER HERE
HOTEL
GUESTS ONLY
ALL OTHERS EXIT TO
JAMES \JAY
·-··-r---.' ( ;-·--
_$/C,VS
,1\f 1:-; ___
·-·-------·-··----.. ·-·---/ \ ·,,----\ I / · .... __
ASSISTED
LIVING CENTER
ENTRANCE ONLY
-r f-f t=-u f>' fl E. r<._ F(o u T~
1,.,U/-ftCH (j) 7;>oE5 IJ a.I
:Sol-v E. T If E -n:_,J ~I'-, 1 rJ (0
F\ A t> I U S (::::::> /<.O f3 LE rv"\. f:) p_
THE-5AF E: rt /.SS o £_S ,/----...._
---·---~' -~-
Item 9.b. - Page 216
R~ JVED
DEC 11 ; :
1fft c; ul I$
ft!.. R. EA P ·y
IN 115
r-v i-c.-
U tJ/ JvtPRov-
OPEN SPACE
•.. ----·-----···--·-· ---·· --1
I; . ... ; ~l-1 ~;~~l;
~nternrises
-~--
,~ · 2Jl!C.!•''!t-CL.F.i~~r1'' ~C ::.:.: I 1.tOl:'ilAl•l 'rjfvl U V•04~
i, -----,. I
( --
L E G E. N D
I
I
I
I EXISTING
CHURCH
I
I
l
I
I
I
I
&vti4T A~ E-
1lH=-/11 llV o fe..
/tlTEM Tlol-J s
If/ bil=N>Jfb'/
"Re1v1ov c./s TTN-t-N .. /)
EXISTING PAR!IHG IQ~IJMIP_I
!HEFF £ll I 1.2 !PAC!.!
!HEPmt 2 2l !PACE.!
U•·.HJl-DY fll~l:SS SS SPACES
Jld T 1101IDESIC1IA!£D ~·~rACQ
/l/'tJ IOTAI lltsTIHG 116 !PACE.!
r~C 11r11P.u1111G /i1·~/ru.JU--MUlllfAM\lY . ioiPAC~ f1 \;. GAf"GE ! 1PACU
[,UJ[VIAT !L='.11(£j
Gl1[\I f5"ACEJ
,tJ51SrEo UVlNC
tlON·OESIGllAIED
IOIAI NIW rAlklHG
IOIAI PUKING
26 IPACES
roSPACEl
UIPACU
lt2SrACES
Meadow Creek
,\,,J,1cd Ll.1nc, ilcmor1 C,,.
I • J I.I o1 I ' • · f 1 a i I •
-·~~'-"Y_" _Gun.Jc, C:dlfornii
2 5 -5 0 c 4~ s . '3 LJ5. '7 _s 5pp,.c_E:. s ~A~K~N~ AN~ v~c'!"'~ r~g::
----------_,,fi=-'A-}~-.1<-o AJ Tl"/.15 VALl'l!C...--l 7..-----~11""""ff.H,A-k,ilT-IJ--;E;rR-M-G&?=-PlA id--1!:-..~.\f~:\!\'3:1;1::~;1· r~:ii~l~ 1 ~~1 -~D~-
f._.o T /JCJ iU t!> ~UHE~E.. WI Ll-
-rt-1 E "( p 1J Ri( f1 FT£ tc_ TJ-11 S
Bi,DG IS !}u;L I (?
i"
(f}
()
-c_.:
c cc
c_.:
c_.:
"O
Item 9.b. - Page 217
• .... -1-
January 3, 2014
Planning Commission
City of Arroyo Grande
Mathew Downing
200 East Branch
Arroyo Grande, CA 93420
•,·.-...; "·-°'
RE: CUP 12-002, Variance U-004, Tract Map U-001,
Russ Sheppel, Meadow Creek Development
Dear Mr. Downing:
" '
. :·:
~eCE~VED
JAN 0 3 2014
CITY OF AReovo GRANDE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Please provide the Planning Commissioners with my letter of September 30, 2013, and its five
attachments, in addition to this letter and its attachments.
I will not be ableto·attend the hearing on this short notice as I am out of the state. However, I will be
represented-by my attorney, Fred Glick, of San Luis Obispo.
As you know, we have not come·to any agreement on the easement issues as Mr. Sheppel continues to
attempt to design ·over my existing easements, and to dictate our unrestricted use. I again submit to
you his letter of July 26m, 2005, in which he promises not to impede or encroach on my easement. Even
though he.has no right and promised not to, he is now once again designing over my easements and
asking you to approve. I do not under.stand how the City.can process a plan that clearly infringes on
someone else's property rights. This is not acceptable to me, and I will do whatever I have to do to
protect·my interest. I have already been forced to spend thousands unnecessarily to defend my long
standing-easements.
In addition, it is clear that Mr. Sheppel currently has severe .parking problems that are not solved by this
proposed plan. His attempt to move my parking easement and restrict our use·to night time only
indicates that he is attempting to count all of those spaces for his use to qualify his current design. This
is not acceptable as Casa Grande has unrestricted non exclusive use at any time. It is obvious that this
parking isneeded in addition to my parking easements, which cannot be relocated.
Twenty five·-fifty:± cars park in the lower creek side lots almost daily. The upper unimproved parking
lot is also full almost daily. Where will these cars park if this project were built as designed? Where will
the Kennedy nineteen spaces go?
The proposed signage is inadequate, confusing, and complicates traffic flow. Will anyone really stop to
read the signs? If trucks and buses are allowed to exit on a one way .driveway in the opposite direction
of the one way·traffic, is this really a good idea and is it safe? Are the radiuses designed to allow this
traffic? If they are allowed to leave this way, they will assume they can also come in this way. If they
are not allowed to come in this way as currently suggested, then they must enter through the upper
Ba.annelD C11»nstna:::tion, fin:::.
141 Suburban Road, A-5
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
805/544-4300 FAX 805.'541-3985
Item 9.b. - Page 218
route creating the same turning radius and safety issues that now exist. Mr. Sheppel has encroached on
my upper easement by building parking spaces that extend four to five feet into my twenty eight foot
wide easement and creating unsafe turning radiuses. This condition must be corrected ifthis route is to
be used in either direction.
I still believe the condos do not fit in this current plan, but if they are to be approved, then they must
face west as my parking easement does not allow them to face east.
As mentioned atthe last hearing, this is really a new project, not a simple modification ofthe currently
approved plan. It should be treated as such. Again, the condos do not fit this plan and should not be
allowed.
Mr. Sheppel is overreaching by attempting to build more than his property will reasonably support. Any
development must honor the existing easements, should solve existing parking problems, and should be
designed to fit the property that he owns.
s~j/
Ray Bunnell, Owner
Casa Grande Inn
RB:gb
cc: Fred Glick, Attorney
Attachments: Sheppel Letter of July 26, 2005
Bunnell Letter to Sheppel, November 10, 2007
Signage Comments Dated 12-11-13
Current Plan with Comments Dated 12-11-13
Plan Showing Upper Easement Encroachment
Item 9.b. - Page 219
.Jul 2.7 05 ll:Slp Russell ~neppe1
./
DaarMr. "Bmmell. "'Juiy'26, 2005
ThankJDU far_}'OUf midmBementaf1he ~ Diixed-use jm!jectin CJUr~oly U pbouecouve-natjuu
1bisletterkmcxw•fi1mtllataailezm""lrltii:C"::""~*ilDiHICC1:asiu= a~on1beppbill -:of -~sbale. ewilhaot:~ yr
en -cm.1bii easement -
0m:e wemvem'.appiUWil ciftiDS planiiamtheCil;7-ofArroyo'Gmnde. 'our irdenfiS:tculeveJop·1he
:site perplan.(.fdtadeed.j ·0m:e-t1mfinit1mili1-0m'.iiu:cnnp1arei!, we.:Will1m.e. llilHYfOlnms'F-ng1•ieeiq
-~ -~-built'-dm:amBllHD he.racmdd,.-Clari:ijriDgthe DBW1lCCB!IS miieiilent{C).fm'1heO!sa:Gmnil&
.. Motel, and tbenon-mmlmive pa;Nng spaces'm1bo CJgfjnea cmsmmnt anm. ·we:esllmate theze·will"lJe a
1llBI' j11111m ·of J8.spaces .lmiilable.ib ibeJJll!ltiqg easeznent~bnt fbe ennfi,gwaticm with pmmng-areas,
~lmreyetJ:Obe aafinea Jar lhecqy. 'Ue:areuiim mnl!,enmal.1o:ammcwillmmmn tnesam= butof
-· cmme 1heaty dicr.ates the-final ilesi11und llDllibei' of pees allowed.
lwill ~~ 1ilneast-oftbc plans as thD,)r-d=wlop. mid afc:Dmseymuan c:B1l e1tlu:rmy5elf or Rab
-Stnmg&auytime..Far.JDDrmcmdsl'baveWmdeddleanadmilthmepageaomment1fiamll_llClltamiwe
-nMewea e8rlier tbiummthr-asibe'bDSS ibr:theaeaeCmumtmprim:iplc to:thiHavised d::sign.
Oncc.apio.,fimnk}'DlLfarwmldngmgetlmr to.arrive ata&aimbl&snhztinn.
..
I"" ...
Item 9.b. - Page 220
. November 10,_2007
~ECEMlD
TO: Russ Sheppel
FAX: 925-SSl.-9715
FR.OM: Ray"Bunnell
SEP 0 4 20i3 I
CtIY OF AnP.O'lO Gf'.AtIDE _
COMMUl'ITT':' DE'/EtO!JM~N"i
RE: J'ollow Up to Trucks E-Mail
Russ:
As-a~ow:up1Dmy e-~ :to you ofNmrrmber 9, 2007~.;~~~.offi!ie·.~:cQpy~~fc!nditions Of
:~1riec!~~mif~~~?~~~~ih~~~~~ ~ •• ~.+·~'t-··-'\•• •••• -.... -·-.-........ -.....__. !g .. _ ·-.· -i,.-.--.,., ., •• ~-:--.-•••• :
easemantdoes'nah'estl'U:t our 'ilSe :to a specified type ofwliicle.:
~ .&mirdies5.1JfaibaNnunrn;-h~eaist-'tbe.truck~~tilms·cnslmners~:an,mmortant ·Dart of ~business,
~ . Wffiqj'_.we.-ao-.nofinieid-b>" eJiiirilurl:e:aue !n 'WDtaml(jjiiiii:nhi?ti.Vffia'.:We will take sreps to insure they
use:ttie eaSfimeut properly ana do not encroach ·mm your space. Ni a c~ to-you. and in the interest of
safi:ty, we'Will also ask them notto.backinand topa?kfhe 18 wheelci:s elsewhere.
Siru:e1his:is the ilrat camplsiint we..bave bad in five years· we believe ihe cummt incidentwas :areli:f driver
not :iiuniliar wit:b:thc-area. .Afb:r miking fmther with Matthow :and Micbael, J:beiieve 1bey:me da.iog
everything they can 'tD notify:1he drivers, but there are some that we do not.have good eontactinformation
for. Therefore, there may be some additiomil hqe tracks come in ·before 1hey receive the :infmmatiou.
*
r:tae·10·-1:h~ Oiii:umStaiJces;!want.to m!1w itclcar.thatf:will not agree !D.anv·encroachment,:reali!1!!!!!AA ·. ::::.,J._
·.ortiesignithmihes~~Oiimi~·andicliies riotm.em·-tb~;sefforth'irrConditioils ·· f'
lnffii'2Q" · · · · · · ·
faWi.~:tha_tY~~ei~~-~-ememfu BIJYpoi:entia'J •beym.; inclndio.gthe !'y.Pe-.of:traffic'.to he --~( (
-~::aDi:lthe·faat that there in1o·access~-tJ:!e·Casa·0ranQe-~ This'should-also,-be'Spel.led
. GUtin·iliSclOsun:s ti> finaUwme ~ · ·
:~(I
RayBwme]
RB:gb
c::: Matthew Martin, Best Westi:m Casa Granae Inn
Michael Kidd. Wesrem llms
Fred Glick, Attorney
Bunnell ConstntctiaT"' ~re..
141-Suburtran Road,A~5
San l.1Ji& Obispo, CA 93401
BCS.'544-4300 FAXB05l541-39B5
Item 9.b. - Page 221
DD NdT ENTER
TRUCKS & BLISSES
OVER 22; AND
EMERGENCY VEHICLES
DNLYI
MAXj HEIGHT = 13'-6 11
ALL OTHERS
EXiT LEFT!
~ ,,
°KENNEDY CLUB
FITNESS,
SHEPPEL L
SHEPPEL 2
AND
.TO'w'NHDMES"
ENTER HERE
EX.IT
..
EXIT THROUGH HOTEL
FDR
HOTEL
GUESTS ONLY
ALL OTHERS EXIT TO
JAMES VIAY
EXIT _.
ASSISTED
LIVING CENTER·
ENTRANCE ONLY
'.
c~.
Item 9.b. - Page 222
OAk PARK ROAD
8.JNNE.tL CorYltrJENTS
LtPI IS
12-11-13
H
I
I
.-,
I EXISTING
CHtil!tH
!
I
I
I
j
I
I
I
I
Wtli+T 1}/16-..
71fl~ /1111\lo R.
/}l:[EE/} 710/..J s
5 L.15 .. 9 5 5f'fKE:. S
TH-A-N ~R t.J Gf?-P t,R J\::J
USP.I.ca
22lPACES
!S!PACES iiintffi~p::t..--~2cspAca mmcu
20SPACU
2d SPACES
2DIPACEi
~IJ,~ ~i?i:Y. !IC?m!,~ $..~ 11
• M ! 'I• L_I n1 I I <~rroro Grande, Caffia111I;
PA~KINO AND VICINlrY .. ,.!U."I.'!'' sire .PLAN"~·
!.-f.d .. ,. .... ; I A 1 o lhht·1111c1u:1•·u-o-•
Item 9.b. - Page 223
~-·---------------
i
l.
1J EA1l1H SWALE DETAIL
:N1S
2'
J
(HAYBALE'DPTIDN NDT 70 BE
l/S!/) fN S7fJatPll.E .AREAS
USE· RJ. '1ER FENCF OPTlDN,)
HA Y8Al£ DETAIL
-.........
'JN ACTIVITES AND REMAIN IN PLACE UN7ll V£CGTA110N IS £STABLJSH£D ON DJSTRUB£D AREAS.
EROSION CONTROL DETAILS
NO SCALE
l triad/holmes
~ associates
""'41 on9lneerl11R
~ a.l:l'':1:~t
!l!l!i"Clllm> IL --al
SIR ws CIJ!SR). Qll IJ(D5 214 .... Delo a\. mra:o 0 IUDI mcGftO 91 .... ~
pbanO (Bn5) 644-89tl8 OZSKOf>. 00 n5.Y . MAR.A.. DO 'iMll!59
tmo (805)-544-11932 :-:;::~ ~ r:m R8n i:~::~l: e-c:soi! .:ilOOl~ .-..:i . .......ti weDIMISt ""'I
--·" A. P'-1 1?.C'\/ • d 1-10.,.
II I f -::::. "do
SEAL: OESIGNEDBY: ORAWNB\':
CF//)£ CB/RB
··-....._"" ......... _
CHECKED
CF/D.
Item 9.b. - Page 224
---···---------·----· .. ----... --···-··------·-
TELECOPIER COVER SHEET
DATE: /-3-1+
TO: /flA-TT DOWN/!1/G
COMP AN Crr'( OF AMoYo 01?;wDL
f!o5-lf7 3-0386
3
this .cover sheet)
' ZJ?vCI<:, cl-Bv s s JU~ jJ I A) G I Alf 0
FROM:
COMMENTS
Nor£ TH~T--TffE V!ir-11 C-LE.S /f Rf.-
-PRotE . LlfNE.. As . COMP/t~E..b To
BunneU onstruction, Inc. By Slf£00E.. L
141 Subur n Road. A-5 [ r I
San Luis O 1spo, CA 93401
805/544-4 0 FAX 805(541-3985
I ·rj
A-L wti-.Ys 1tJ Tiie
T1-I t=-5rut>y ffloVlbFl':>
Item 9.b. - Page 225
I
\
\
---.\r~ -
I t ... --··-· -··--·--·-----·-
W CREEK
FAMILY
' ,, . .· . . . " . , ·. . , . . " ... ·. . ··....,~...,;;..::........,~--:-r• :--. . . .. . . ;. ....... , "·: . -, , ·'· .• .· . .. ==-r.~:Lc~·~·='===··~·d··~·=·=··~===~..-r
· .· .
·. •' . :· .. ·
. ': : . : .. : .... ; ... . . . . . ~. . . ·· .
. . · .. · .
MEADOW .C:~E·~.K.CAR~ FACILl··r·y.
ASSISTED .L ·V-ING & ME.MO.RY CAR·E
SAFE TRANSITION
-------
-------·--9 .
. --.. -----.... -----·. -........ -.. ___ ... --· ·------· .......................... -..... ·-.............. -.... -·--·--· --. ··--.... ----....... " .. ·-·-·---....................... -............................ -.................. ---............. ---.... ---..
. --.................................................. ----···· ........ .: ............ -----· ................. -·--····--·· -· ........................ -......... .; ........ --.... --..... ·-............. -· ............. ---...... ······---......... -............ --...
OPEN SPACF
-
g
Ill
Item 9.b. - Page 226
.. -
I 4 t r . 7 . ' . .. .
4 I '
, " ..
I • • p ., ... ·,
I .• '\ •.
I "' 4 t
. " • .. 1 ' . .. . ' .. " .. ·'
• • .. , I
. .. . " ... f . ~
I •
I ' t 1 I I
t I t . . .
<f .. .,
'1 I . . . . . . " ' ' . . .
•••:.c.=<G -
.· . . :
--------
PATIO ..
-·----·--
--
...
'( • ·' •• , •• I' ~... ··):'
• ti • •• ~ ••• ,·-' •••• , • ,·' • .•
.. · . >·( ~-,_ .,
~r'L.:.:}::2_:.::. .· '· .··. ,
oPTJON
J '"== 30 I
(_
!l)
:::>
0 w
...__,._,_ ,...... --....
.' '
" .. __ "'" •"' •---................ •,.,. • ,..,., ... ,..,. "'"'"'"'"'• • • •••• •'" •• .,.,_..,,. "'"'" ...... • • "'"" ,. ... .,,.., "'"' • ••••r,. •• •• • • • •• •• .., ....... ..,,. • • "'• ........... .,,. •• t ••• •• "'"' •• •••• • • •• •• •• "''" •• •"" • •• ""'" •• •• •• • • •••''"I•"''"'" .... •••••• -"'""' •• •• ...... • • .............. • ..
............. ....... ....... ·--...................................................................................................................................................... -· ·-·--····· .......................................................................................... --...................................................... ··--..... ---· --..... .
0 PE I~ SPA\.F Item 9.b. - Page 227
,, -.-sunnEIL ·
January 14, 2014
City Council
City of Arroyo Grande
Mathew Downing
200 East Branch
Arroyo Grande, CA
Email: mdowning@arroyogrande.org
RE: CUP 12-002, Variance 12-004, Tract Map 12-001,
Russ Sheppel, Meadow Creek Development
Mathew:
RECEIVED
JAN 1 4 2014
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Attached is a parking lot comparison to be included in documents for the City Council.
Also, we would like for Staff to consider adding the word "SAFELY'' to the turning radius condition of
approval. We all know that somehow a truck or bus can get through the current driveway design, but
can they do it safely? This should be everyone's primary concern. We don't believe the current design
provides the safety that it should. The architect's explanation at the Planning Commission hearing was
certainly not adequate and left a lot of concerns.
Thanks, L!iJ;zj/
Ray Bunnell
Owner, Casa Grande Inn
Bunnell Construction, Inc.
141 Suburban Road. A-5
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
805/544-4300 FAX 805/541-3985
Item 9.b. - Page 228
STING
)TEL
TRASH
--• ---------t -_,. •• ,"-••
' .,
ALZHEIMER
GARDEN
... !
, : -
:• .·I
.1
4t
PATIO
\
t
I
'. I,
' .. I
.·I.
_ .....
.. ,.. ~ ............... ... -~---·-·-··-·····-····~····--··-··---·-·---~·----·--··--·····-~·-----~---·~---·-------·--·-·-·-·····-··--~-·-·-···················------·~-~-·--~·-·-······~·-·····--······~---·-··---------
Item 9.b. - Page 229
Bunnell Construction 8055450878
t:~ISllN G
PRoPosE../J
. ~xrs 77 Iv' G
PRoPosE.D
FRow5£.b
. Exr ST!N r:;
. PBJfrJSED
3C:.9o SQ. Fr;
Z JQ~ II 1'
I
22.5 DF-6.:.P Wt TH tJo l>Rtvc=-ISLE_
R~~u< Rt=::..b -ur1 uz..c s cx1s r-1/116
DR1 vr=.. r.s~ fE.ltSt5m i=:vr ~fe._
A-cq= s..s
f
18 C>t=.Ef' r5 PR CfE-.S fl.PRUt RE.
I
2-lf DAnJE t..s LE FOR. A-cct=.5.S
Co/\J s r s I/ A/6 OF /5glf s~. Fr,
PARf<1NG IS .St/VI f'LL /}IJD £As y
To fiCCE..5 s AtJ lJ /J-CCOIYllY21J-t:'/J-Tf=:_S..
/Jf R. G G-!Z VE 11-1 CL~-5
PAR.l<tN G / s Dr FFI cuL r Fa R
/}UYlo5i IJNY C01YJJ110,A.} J..,/fR.GE._
VE.I-I: I CL£. SUCH /l5 1f Dool<...
Plc.KUP...S AND LAR6£ suv_s
ALLOW.5 !OR Tll£ OPr!o!J TD fJJR.f<..
T'Rv~ {3'1) SES 1 CitR.5 Wf rt-/. TRl+tCGR,s
PAR.tt-LLE...L TO /ICCE.55 f?RrVE._
Nol PoSStBL£__
CoNGt.v s 10" J : 7fft5-FRofbs Eb -PflRK1 N G
/..OT 15 NOT £(],L}JT(__. (tJ JllNY WA-Y
/l--5 T7f!E-/1-f Pl! CA-IJ I ffltS 5U66ts.srct:>.
C45A GR~AJDE. WCLG NtJY-/It.LON 11...s
.PARk/N 6 EAS£./YliSt0 I TO Bl5-Rt=-LOC/ITEP
fl.S PRCJPos~.
QuR. ?1J-RK11-JG t3156Mt=tJr rs /llor
A fUNc T70N op 5Qo11-R.i:=.. poor/f6E-.
ti rs (N ,., sPt=.CJFJC t-Oc/tT70;J
W t -rff S~CI Fl L . M FE.:r5 /fND B OU/l.Jb S .
II ALLOWS UP TO J8-9' .5P/KE S
com PA.RE b TO l 3 .
p.2
Rt=-'STRl c rE.6 (O
/Jf/E r?ME US£.
6 #.J Cy r' o R
CA:3A Gf,1,1J2iS
----·----------------------------------------Item 9.b. - Page 230
· RESOLUTION NO.
VTTM 04-006; PUD 04-005; MEX 05-015
PAGE 7 of 28
19. The applicant shall prepare a plan for a right pocket tum lane within the public right of
way for review and approval by the Public Works Director, if a right pocket tum lane is
determined to be a substantial public safety enhancement within a five (5) year
timeframe based on traffic projections. SAFE.Ly
2ll. The applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfa~of the Pubtic Works Director that
the tu.ming radiuses within the project site can accommodate a range of vehicles from
large trucks and buses, to cars, or the project-shall retDm to the city Cocrncil for
additional review.and modification.
21. Speed bumps shall be installed between the hotel gate and the third town house.
ARCHITECTURAl REVIEW COMMITTEE (ARC) CONDITIONS
22. Soften the two purple building colors of the town homes.
23. Provide more landscaping in the three islands where the cantilevered building projects
out (pending no loss of parking spaces).
24. Plant two Liquidambars in the diamonds on the north side of the condos.
25. Change the Flax plants to Pittosporum undulatum and change the planter area to
project as far as possible into the parking space on the west side of the condos on
either side _of garage doors.
26. Submit a final landscape to the Architectural Review Committee for review and
approval prior to issuance of building permit.
27. Provide decorative paving in the driveways between garages of the town homes.
~ NOISE
28. All residential units shall be designed to mitigate impacts from non-residential project
noise, in compliance with the City's noise regulations.
29. Construction shall be limited to between the hours of Barn and 6pm Monday through
Friday. No construction shall occur on Saturday or Sunday.
DEVELOPMENT CODE
30. Development shall conform to the Office Mixed Use (OMU) zoning requirements except
as otherwise approved.
31. All fences and/or walls shall not exceed six feet (6') in height unless otherwise approved
with a Minor Exception or Variance application.
J Item 9.b. - Page 231
It
e
m
9.
b
.
-
Pa
g
e
23
2
It
e
m
9.
b
.
-
Pa
g
e
23
3
It
e
m
9.
b
.
-
Pa
g
e
23
4
It
e
m
9.
b
.
-
Pa
g
e
23
5
It
e
m
9.
b
.
-
Pa
g
e
23
6
It
e
m
9.
b
.
-
Pa
g
e
23
7
It
e
m
9.
b
.
-
Pa
g
e
23
8
It
e
m
9.
b
.
-
Pa
g
e
23
9
It
e
m
9.
b
.
-
Pa
g
e
24
0
It
e
m
9.
b
.
-
Pa
g
e
24
1
It
e
m
9.
b
.
-
Pa
g
e
24
2
It
e
m
9.
b
.
-
Pa
g
e
24
3
It
e
m
9.
b
.
-
Pa
g
e
24
4
It
e
m
9.
b
.
-
Pa
g
e
24
5
It
e
m
9.
b
.
-
Pa
g
e
24
6
It
e
m
9.
b
.
-
Pa
g
e
24
7
It
e
m
9.
b
.
-
Pa
g
e
24
8
It
e
m
9.
b
.
-
Pa
g
e
24
9
It
e
m
9.
b
.
-
Pa
g
e
25
0
It
e
m
9.
b
.
-
Pa
g
e
25
1
It
e
m
9.
b
.
-
Pa
g
e
25
2
It
e
m
9.
b
.
-
Pa
g
e
25
3
Item 9.b. - Page 254
Item 9.b. - Page 255
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Item 9.b. - Page 256