Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
CC 2014-12-09_09b Resolution_Courtland and Grand
TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: DATE: MEMORANDUM CITY COUNCIL " TERESA MCCLIS~OMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR MATTHEW DOWNING~SISTANT PLANNER CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009; SUBDIVISION OF TWO (2) COMMERCIAL PARCELS INTO FORTY-ONE (41) RESIDENTIAL LOTS, ONE (1) COMMON AREA LOT, AND TWO (2) COMMERCIAL LOTS; LOCATION -SOUTHWEST CORNER OF EAST GRAND AVENUE AND SOUTH COURTLAND STREET; APPLICANTS -MFI LIMITED AND NKT COMMERCIAL; REPRESENTATIVE -RRM DESIGN GROUP DECEMBER 9, 2014 RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends the City Council adopt a resolution adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approving General Plan Amendment 14-002, Specific Plan Amendment 14-001, Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14-001, and Conditional Use Permit 14-009. IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES: The proposed project would cause a relatively neutral shift in property taxes for the site, as _a majority of the site would be converted to single-family residential. Although commercial property taxes are typically higher than residential, the number of single- family residences is anticipated to help offset any reduction. Sales tax revenue for the proposed commercial development is anticipated to be approximately $25,000 annually, based upon information provided by the City's redevelopment consultant. However, this could be a slight underestimation due to the lack of identified commercial uses as part of the project. Item 9.b. - Page 1 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009 DECEMBER 9, 2014 PAGE2 BACKGROUND: The subject property is identified as Subarea 3 of the Berry Gardens Specific Plan (BGSP), is zoned Gateway Mixed-Use (GMU) with the BGSP overlay, is approximately 4.47 acres in size, and is the last remaining undeveloped piece of the BGSP . The BGSP has been amended several times, most recently in March 2011. That amendment and subsequent use permit approval allowed for construction of the thirty- six (36) unit Peoples' Self Help Housing (PSHH) project on adjacent Subarea 4. Although a development proposal for Subarea 3 was under consideration at that time, the application was eventually withdrawn. As a result, the Specific Plan Amendment designated Subarea 3 as an unplanned subarea with no use restrictions or development standards, but subject to a future amendment. A specific plan is a tool for the systematic implementation of the general plan . It effectively establishes a link between implementing policies of the general plan and the individual development proposals in a defined area . A specific plan may be as general as setting forth broad policy concepts, or as detailed as providing direction to every facet of development from the type , location and intensity of uses to the design and capacity of infrastructure; from the resources used to finance public improvements to the design guidelines of a subdivision (California Environmental Resources Evaluation System [CERES], 1998). Item 9.b. - Page 2 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN . AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009 DECEMBER 9, 2014 PAGE3 Project Description The proposed project (Attachment 1) would develop Subarea 3 in two separate components, Subareas 3a and 3b. Subarea 3a would include the creation of two (2) parcels adjacent to East Grand Avenue with two (2) mixed-tenant commercial buildings totaling approximately 11,000 square-feet of commercial floor area and four (4) two- bedroom, second-story condominium units of approximately 1,000 square-feet in size in a vertical mixed-use arrangement over the western commercial building. Subarea 3b would include the creation of forty-two ( 42) parcels for construction of forty-one ( 41) single-family detached homes and one (1 }_common area lot, to include driveways, parking areas, and a centrally located neighborhood green. A majority of the homes would be three bedrooms with four ( 4) different floor-plans with two (2) homes being four bedrooms. Previous Entitlement Applications The property has been the subject of numerous proposals and pre-application reviews. In 1999, the Council considered Specific Plan Amendment 99-001 and Conditional Use Permit 99-005 for the construction of an auto parts retailer (Autozone). At that time, based partly upon Council consensus that an auto parts store was not the desired vision , for the entryway to the City, the Council unanimously voted to deny the Specific Plan Amendment and Conditional Use Permit. In 2005, the Council considered Specific Plan Amendment 03-001 to allow for mixed- use development of Subareas 3 and 4. At that time, the two Subareas were separately owned and issues regarding reciprocal access and utilities caused owner conflicts, but the two areas were being addressed concurrently to create one cohesive plan. The Council approved the amendment establishing development standards for Subareas 3 and 4 for horizontal mixed use development, with the intent of encouraging commercial uses on approximately 2/3 of the site fronting E. Grand Avenue and high-density residential on the southern 1/3 of the site. The City further helped facilitate development of the residential portion through the acquisition and sale of the rear portion of the property. In 2010 and 2011, the Council considered Specific Plan Amendment 10-001, Tentative Parcel Map 10-001, Conditional Use Permit 10-001, and Conditional Use Permit 10-003 for the development of over 58,000 square-feet of commercial space (one (1) 3,750 square-foot commercial building, one (1) 4,200 square-foot restaurant, and one (1) 51,000·square-foot commercial grocer as the anchor tenant) and a thirty-six (36) unit, multi-family apartment complex (PSHH). Several alternative concepts for the commercial portion of the project were developed for Council input. However, the commercial development application was withdrawn and at the March 8, 2011 meeting, the City Council approved the Specific Plan Amendment, establishing the BGSP as it stands today, as well as approving the Conditional Use Permit for the PSHH project Item 9.b. - Page 3 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009 DECEMBER 9, 2014 PAGE4 Recent Pre-Application Review The City Council reviewed a Pre-Application for the project at meetings of July 8 and August 12, 2014 (Attachments 2 and 3). The conceptual project, including the construction of single-family detached housing, was generally supported by the Council. However, the Council stressed the importance of careful consideration of site-level design to ensure a high quality gateway project results. Architectural Review Committee The Architectural Review Committee (ARC) reviewed the proposed project at a regular meeting of November 3, 2014. The ARC discussed several aspects of the proposed project related to building architecture on both Subareas, access options for Subarea 3a, parking and the proposed 1 % reduction in required guest parking for Subarea 3b, the proposed modification to maximum fence heights, the lack of sidewalks on the interior of Subarea 3b, and water use. The ARC supported the architecture and mixed- use aspect of Subarea 3a, the walkability of the project, the plant palette and the architecture and accent colors of Subarea 3b as it is unique and adds interest to the Gateway corridor. The ARC had some concerns regarding pedestrian safety in the plaza area if the center driveway were to remain, the predominance of the residential component and the language of the proposed General Plan Amendment and ensuring it is restricted to the project site, the timing of construction of the commercial versus the residential components, and the security of the neighborhood green pavilion. The ARC ended by recommending approval of the project to the Planning Commission with conditions included in the prepared resolution:· Traffic Commission The Traffic Commission reviewed the Draft Traffic Study (Attachment 4) and project circulation at a regular meeting of November 17, 2014. The Traffic Commission had several concerns regarding the traffic study and circulation, including concerns regarding children playing in the private streets and sight distance for-motorists around corners of Subarea 3b, concerns regarding guest parking on Subarea 3b being concentrated in the southwestern corner of the development' and any impacts this would have on the newly created on-street parking on South Courtland Street, and merging issues created with the separated right-in and right-out driveways. The Traffic Commission did support the off-set of the residential driveway and the driveway across South Courtland Street to the commercial center, as left hand turns should not be in conflict entering those sites. Planning Commission The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed project at a regular meeting of November 18, 2014 (Attachment 5). Commissioners had several concerns regarding the driveway alignments on South Courtland Street, crosswalks on South Courtland Item 9.b. - Page 4 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009 DECEMBER 9, 2014 PAGES Street, interior development lighting and ensuring pedestrian walkways are lit, and ensuring adequate room exists on South Courtland Street for on-street parking. The Planning Commission moved to continue consideration of the project to December 2, 2014 to allow the applicants to address these concerns. On December 2, 2014 the Planning Commission reviewed modifications to the plans to address previous concerns. The Planning Commission was in support of the project and the applicant's proposed revisions. The Planning Commission adopted a Resolution recorpmending the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve the project, with the following conditions: 1. A crosswalk across South Courtland Street shall be included near the entrance to Subarea 3b; 2. The project shall include LED lighting in parking lot lights, bollard lights, and as feasible on building lights; 3. The Planning Commission supports Commercial Site Alternative #2; and 4. Commercial vehicles shall be restricted from entering Subarea 3a from East Grand Avenue. Items 1, 2, and 4 above have been included in the prepared Resolution as conditions of approval. ANALYSIS OF ISSUES: Legislative vs. Judicial Acts Every decision a local government makes can be placed into one of three categories - legislative, quasi-judicial or ministerial: • Legislative acts are those that create policy, such as general plan updates, zoning ordinances or specific plans. These acts establish local law -rules that apply to everybody within the jurisdiction. Under California law, legislative acts _ are subject to initiative and referendum. • Quasi-judicial acts are those that apply policy (created through legislative acts) to projects, such as consideration of tentative maps or use permits. These acts are discretionary, based· on the decision-makers interpretation and-application of policy to a particular project. Quasi-judicial acts are not subject to initiative or referendum. • Ministerial acts are those that require -no discretion on the part of the local government, such as the mandatory issuance of a permit if certain conditions are met. Item 9.b. - Page 5 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AM·ENDMENT 14-001, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009 DECEMBER 9, 2014 PAGE6 The proposed project is both legislative (General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Amendment) and quasi-judicial actions {Tract Map and Conditional Use Permit) - approval would concurrently identify standards for the development of the property, as well as· grant the property owner entitlements to develop the property in substantial conformance with the approved plans, and subject to any conditions of approval. General Plan Amendment The General Plan is the foundational development policy document for the City and defines the framework for how the physical, economic, and human resources are to be managed. The General Plan underwent a comprehensive update that was adopted by the City Council in 2001, with amendments and some individual Element updates since that time. The proposed project includes a General Plan Amendment due to an inconsistency with an implementation policy that relates specifically to the project site. The proposed project will amend implementation policy LU5-10.1, which states: LUS-10.1 Promote development of a high intensity, mixed-use, pedestrian activity node centered on the Courtland Street/East Grand Avenue intersection as a priority example of revitalization of this corridor segment,known as Gateway. The need for a General Plan Amendment results from the lack of single-family detached housing, regardless of density, being included in the definition of mixed-use. During the Pre-Application Review, the Council was concerned regarding how extensive a General Plan Amendment would be required to be in order to address this exclusion. The following amendment is intended to address the issue on the subject property while preventing carte blanche construction of single-family detached housing along East Grand Avenue as properties are redeveloped and continuing efforts to promote the high ·intensity development the City is seeking in this downtown mixed-use corridor (addition underlined): LUS-10.1 Promote development of a high intensity, mixed-use, pedestrian activity node centered on the Courtland Street/East Grand Avenue intersection as a priority example of revitalization of this corridor segment known as Gateway. Within the specific plan area, small lot single-family detached housing may be allowed at multi-family densities if integrated with and located behind a primary, distinctive, and attractive commercial/mixed-use gateway component. Staff believes that the proposed modification will meet the needs of the site, would not create any inconsistencies with existing development in the area or within the General Plan itself, and would limit the extent of replication, if any, of single-family detached housing along East Grand Avenue. Item 9.b. - Page 6 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001, ANDCONDITIONALUSEPERMIT14~~ DECEMBER 9, 2014 PAGE7 Specific Plan Amendment The proposed Specific Plan Amendment (see Exhibit "D' of the Resolution) sets development standards for Subarea 3. Due to Subarea 3 being designated as an unplanned Subarea of the BGSP, it is important to note that any project proposal would require an amendment. The amendment would define the boundaries of the two proposed phases of Subarea 3 for the commercial and residential developments (as 1 generally shown above on the location map). Aside from the detached single-family homes, the proposed development standards for each subarea are more or less equivalent to the development standards of the GMU zoning district, which is the underlying zoning district for the property and is included for comparative purposes (Attachment 6). The following table summarizes the differences between development standards for the GMU zoning district and the proposed Specific Plan Amendment (proposed standards that are more permissive are shown in bold text): Development Standard GMU Zoning District Proposed Subarea 3a Proposed Subarea 3b Maximum density 25 units/acre Consistent with GMU 20 units/acre Minimum lot size 20,000 square-feet 20,000 square-feet 2,000 square-feet Front yard setback 0-10' 0-5' minimum Boundary Lots: 1 O' Interior Lots: 8' Rear yard setback 0-15' 15' minimum Boundary Lots: 10' Interior Lots: 2' Interior side yard setback 0-5' 0-5' minimum Boundary Lots: 1 O' Interior Lots: 4' Street side yard setback 0-15' 0-5' minimum Boundary Lots: 1 O' Interior Lots: N/A Lot coverage 75% 50% 65% Floor Area Ratio 1.5 1.5 1.25 Building height 35' 35' 35' The proposed Specific Plan Amendment also identifies that property owners desiring to modify individual residences after construction would require a Minor Use Permit-Plot Plan Review from the Community Development Department to ensure compliance with the Berry Gardens Specific Plan. Standards that are not identified in the specific plan would be required to conform with the requirements of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code (AGMC). Vesting Tentative Tract Map The proposed tract map will subdivide Subarea 3 into forty-four (44) parcels, including two (2) commercial parcels of 23, 140.9 square-feet and 22,490. 7 square-feet, forty-one ( 41) residential parcels with a minimum size of 2,000 square-feet, and one ( 1) common residential lot, including driveways, parking spaces, and the neighborhood green, of 46, 776.3 square-feet. The proposed lot sizes are consistent with the proposed Specific Plan Amendment. Item 9.b. - Page 7 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009 DECEMBER 9, 2014 PAGES One important note regarding the Tract Map is the fact that it is a vested map. Vesting maps afford developers certain guarantees that would otherwise only be guaranteed once "substantial investment" has been made, which can vary widely depending upon the project. Approval of a vested map builds in the "substantial investment" upon approval of the map and protects the developer against future growth restrictions. Conditional Use Permit The proposed Conditional Use Permit will allow development of Subarea 3a with two (2) commercial buildings of approximately 5,000-5,600 square-feet. No tenants are currently identified as part of the Conditional Use Permit. Additionally, the Conditional Use Permit will develop four (4) second-floor condominiums of approximately 1,000 square-feet each above Building 1. This vertical mixed-use arrangement as well as the construction of new commercial. buildings require the approval of a conditional use permit in accordance with the AGMC. The proposed buildings are consistent with the proposed specific plan amendment, as illustrated in the following table: Development Standard Building 1 Building 2 Front yard setback 0'-5' 0'-5' Rear vard setback 22' 24' Interior side yard setback 70' 245' Street side yard setback 224' 30' Lot coverage -22% -24% Building height 31' 28' Design Guidelines and Enhancement Plan The Design Guidelines and Standards for Mixed-Use Districts (Design Guidelines) were adopted by the City Council in 2004, after the City's mixed-use zoning districts were created. The Design Guidelines incorporate by reference the East Grand Avenue Enhancement Plan (Enhancement Plan), which was drafted and circulated in 2002, prior to creation of the City's mixed-use zoning districts. The Enhancement Plan provides concepts and project considerations important to creating a successful project and revitalized corridor. The Design Guidelines provide site and building design requirements and architectural concepts. The following excerpts pertain to the development of Subarea 3: • Include specially treated pedestrian walkways to connect parking areas to buildings. • Buildings should enclose streets, plazas or paseos and contribute to well defined and walkable blocks. Building placement, streetscape elements and landscaping Item 9.b. - Page 8 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN_ AMENDMENT 1_4-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009 DECEMBER 9, 2014 PAGE9 each define the public realm. Consideration should be given to connectivity between adjacent developments. • Projects should integrate porches, balconies, decks and seating areas that are located to promote pedestrian use of the street edge by providing weather protection, comfort, security, and safety. Design shall incorporate handicap access, considerations for walkers (e.g. lockers), bicyclists (e.g. bike racks) and transit patrons. • Parking shall be located away from East Grand-Avenue and shared by multiple owners/users. • The desired configurations and locations for off-street parking lots, in order of preference, are: o Shared double-loaded aisle to side or rear of building partially on-site and partially off-site on neighboring parcel; o Shared off-site or public parking lot within 500 feet; o Double-loaded aisle to side, rear, above or below building on-site. • Buildings shall be two to three stories, with active fronts (e.g. articulated entries, detailed facades). A three-story component may be appropriate within a project located on a large lot and when it can be appropriately integrated considering adjacent buildings -and uses. The maximum height of a building should not exceed 35 feet, except if additional height is needed to accommodate a design feature that contributes-to both the character of the building and the surrounding area, and if upper-floors are recessed and/or massing is well articulated. For example, an additional story or tower element on a building at a key intersection may delineate a corner landmark building. • Ground floors should have clear articulation and a tall ceiling height (e.g. 10-15 feet.), and have a high percentage fenestration (arrangement of windows/doors - 40-60% of the facade). Awnings and overhangs are encouraged. • Emphasize-three-dimensional detailing on fagades such as cornices, window moldings, and reveals to cast shadows and create visual interest on the fagade. The purpose of the Enhancement Plan is to "define a design framework for both future public improvements and further private developments that will enhance the functions Item 9.b. - Page 9 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION AD.OPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009 - DECEMBER 9, 2014 PAGE10 \ and aesthetics of this particular area properties adjacent to East Grand Avenue". The following objectives of the Enhancement Plan apply to the development of Subarea 3: • Provide for a diversity of retail and service commercial, offices, residential and other compatible uses, in size and scale to fit the "rural setting and small town character" of Arroyo Grande, without duplication of the function or character of other commercial areas. • Plan for a revitalized East Grand Avenue Mixed-Use corridor that has less of a strip commercial aspect and more consistent, coordinated mixed-use boulevard ambiance with district activity subareas: Highway, Midway and Gateway. • Include appropriate site planning and urban design amenities to encourage travel by walking, bicycling and transit as well as automotive access, along the entire corridor. • Promote development of buildings along a landscaped sidewalk frontage with rear yard and side street parking. Include substantial landscaping and streetscape improvements. • Propose functional design including specialized open space such as squares, courtyards and plazas whose frequent use is encouraged through placement and design such as proximity to public transit stops. Allow density bonuses and shared or public parking reduction to increase development intensity and enable more efficient utilization. • Propose designs for attractive streetscape including street trees and other landscaping, building fagade improvements, better signage and more consistent and coordinated development design, inclu~ing fewer driveways and enhancement of off-street parking areas. The proposed project addresses several of the goals and objectives of both the Design Guidelines and Enhancement Plan. Specifically, the proposed project includes: • One (1) outdoor patio area near the intersection of East Grand Avenue and South Courtland Street; • A paseo between the commercial buildings; • Enhanced pavement in areas along East Grand Avenue a1,1d onsite; • Landscape buffer along South Courtland Street, between the commercial and residential components, and adjacent to the PSHH project; Item 9.b. - Page 10 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION· OF A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING GENERAL PL~N AMENDMENT 14_-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001, ANDCONDITIONALUSEPERMIT14~~ -DECEMBER 9, 2014 PAGE11 • Enhanced pedestrian walkways for residents on the residential portion of the project, enhanced pedestrian link between the residential and commercial development, and adjacent to the commercial buildings on the site; and • Enhanced ADA access from East Grand Avenue. Residential Density AGMC Subsection 16.36.030.C identifies residential density equivalents for residential projects located in the mixed-use zoning districts as follows: .,8esiCleritial:DweUing~J:J.nit Typ~~~~::. ,-· '' 11wl!)~nsity .. EquiYalen(~1~1[/·~'.:c". -:., ' .;. ~-;, ~ .,, '· -~ . .d ."''' Live/Work Unit .5 Studio .5 1-bedroom .75 2-bedroom 1 3-bedroom 1.5 4-bedroom 2 Based on the proposed development, the total residential density of Subarea 3a and Subarea 3b are as follows: '.';f~umll~~~f:Wt~nit~ .. -~~ellin~.Unit TY~e -· ·--~~-~s_ify:. ~::·:~-':·Tota~,;~ensJfy_:.f~·uiv~ie·n(~ ::··: • 1 • ;,';~~:'.!:·:· .. · .. •'.:1t1l::,. . . · E.quivalent';~1::."''' ~ :,'l:~~".'~:· ·. <:~?L3i?:" ,· ~-:.;;:_. 4 2-bedroom 1 4 38 3-bedroom 1.5 57 3 4-bedroom 2 6 Subarea 3a: 4 Subarea 3b: 63 For the development as a whole, the resultir:ig residential density equivalent is 14.99 units per acre. Looking at the Subareas individually, the density equivalent for Subarea 3a equals 3.74 units per acre, while the density equivalent for Subarea 3b equals 18.53 units per acre. These are comparable to the multi-family residential densities identified in the General Plan and Municipal Code. Attainable Housing In the 2013 General Plan Housing Element update, the City identified the importance of providing housing to workers who are increasingly finding housing to be financially out of reach. This can cause issues for local businesses when they cannot recruit or retain qualified employees. The Housing Element considers this problem to be an issue of "Attainable Housing". Policy A.14 mandates that the City shall promote infill housing opportunities through an attainable housing program. While the AGMC has not yet Item 9.b. - Page 11 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009 DECEMBER 9, 2014 PAGE12 been amended to include a formal definition of "Attainable Housing", the Housing Element identifies qualities anticipated to be part of the definition, including: • Projects in mixed-use districts; • Infill projects; • Projects that include elements that exceed the mandatory California Green Building Code Standards in Title 24; • Projects that include universal design elements; • Projects including single-room occupancy units; and • Projects with a high percentage of rental units. Under this outline of "Attainable Housing", the proposed project meets several of these qualities and fills an important housing niche in the community. Additionally, the project will pay its proportional share of affordable housing in-lieu fees to help develop affordable housing projects elsewhere in the City, such as the PSHH project to the south of the site. Sign age Signage standards have been integrated into the proposed Specific Plan Amendment (as opposed to a separate planned sign program), and would apply to both Subareas. As proposed, each business in each building will be allowed one wall sign per building face of the business, with a size not to exceed 1.5 sq. ft. of sign area for each linear foot of building frontage utilized for the business. Pedestrian scale and orientation of signs is encouraged in the Specific Plan Amendment. The AGMC limits each business within a commercial complex to one (1) wall, canopy or projecting sign per street frontage. Individual signs are limited in size to seventy (70) square-feet. The proposed sign parameters of the Specific Plan Amendment would likely exceed the total number of signs allowed per business per the AGMC, as businesses in the corner of the building would be allowed to have a single sign on each of the three walls. Businesses in the interior of the buildings (i.e. not including the corner of the building) would be allowed two (2) signs; one sign facing East Grand Avenue and the second facing the parking lot. However, these deviations can be permitted under the Specific Plan Amendment if it is found to be desirable by the Council. Business specific sign proposals would still require appropriate discretionary approval through the Community Development Department to ensure compliance with standards identified in the Specific Plan and the AGMC for standards not identified in the specific plan. Architectural Character The commercial buildings are proposed as prime examples of the contemporary style and massing that lends itself to a vibrant, pedestrian-oriented development, which the Item 9.b. - Page 12 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009 DECEMBER 9, 2014 PAGE13 City is seeking at the western Gateway .. This includes smooth, flat surfaces with clean lines and a mixture of materials. Massing of the buildings is a uniform two-story height adjacent to the sidewalk, which is meant to enclose the street and create a more inviting, pedestrian friendly and distinguishable atmosphere. The massing and orientation of the buildings provides opportunities for several outdoor plaza spaces for pedestrian activity. A materials and colors board will be provided at the meeting. The proposed residential buildings are designed with a more contemporary, mid-century style. The residences will utilize differing colors between five (5) styles, each with bold accent colors, corrugated metal roofing over the porches, asphalt shingle roofing over the remainder, white vinyl windows, and a variety of roof forms. According to the applicant's proposal, the intent of the design is to provide lines of transition from the commercial development on East Grand Avenue to Berry Gardens, create a more urban atmosphere to complement the project density, be compatible with the PSHH project, and be visually distinct from Berry Gardens to preclude the development from appearing as an extension of the Berry Gardens neighborhood. The applicant prepared an additional alternative in the residential architectural styles (see Attachment 10, Sheets A12-A16). The Council may omit or include the alternative, refer it back to the ARC or recommend inclusion of the alternative with final review by the ARC prior to final map approval. Access The commercial component of the project proposes three (3) access points in total. This includes two (2) from East Grand Avenue and one ( 1) from South Courtland Street. The westernmost driveway would be designed to only allow vehicular egress in an eastbound manner. The center driveway (see Attachment 10, Sheet A2) would be 16' in width, include 66' between the commercial buildings (50' of plaza area), and only allow vehicles to turn right into the development. The single driveway on South Courtland Street would allow full ingress and egress to the site. During review of the Pre-Application, the Council provided strong direction to remove the center driveway between the commercial buildings based on guidance from the East Grand Avenue Enhancement Plan, which calls for reduction of driveways to East Grand Avenue to reduce pedestrian-vehicle conflicts, as well as for aesthetic purposes. The developer has reduced the center driveway to a one-way ingress and maintained it in the proposal for marketability purposes. An alternative access design (see Attachment 10, Sheet A9) has been studied for traffic and circulation purposes that would eliminate this driveway, make the westernmost driveway right-in, right-out, and create an approximately 55' plaza between the buildings. The traffic study indicates that from an intersection operations standpoint, either driveway configuration is acceptable. If the center driveway is allowed to remain, new parallel protected parking stalls would be Item 9.b. - Page 13 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001, · AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009 DECEMBER 9, 2014 PAGE14 available for visitors. The traffic study does note that the center driveway option has the potential to introduce confusion as visitors will not be able to exit through the same driveway they use to enter the site. The elimination of the center driveway would relocate the RTA bus stop from in front of the commercial development in Grover Beach to in front of the westernmost commercial building. The elimination of the center driveway additionally allows for the expansion and full use of the plaza area between the commercial buildings and could allow for the slight expansion of those buildings. The Regional Transit Authority, which operates the South County Area Transit, has indicated that they would prefer the bus stop to remain where it is rather than moving closer to the west side of the Courtland Street intersection, as this creates functional difficulties for buses to return to traffic as cars queue during red lights. The residential project component would contain one (1) primary vehicular access point from South Courtland Street. Interior driveways are proposed to be private, maintained by a Homeowner's Association, and contain fire lanes on both sides due to narrowness. Emergency access to and from the PSHH project would be maintained as part of the project. Pedestrian access between Subareas 3a and 3b is provided in approximately the center of the site and would allow increased interaction between residents of Subarea 3b and the commercial component and some limited interaction between residents of Subarea 3a and the neighborhood green. Although pedestrian access would not be obstructed, there is no legal pedestrian access proposed by the applicant between Subarea 4 and Subarea 3. This is inconsistent with Specific Plan Amendment 10-001 under which Subarea 4 was approved, which states that a pedestrian path connecting the two subareas shall be required ·to encourage interaction between the two subareas (Subarea 3 and Subarea 4). This is an amendment the applicant is proposing as part of the current application and has submitted correspondence from PSHH in support of the modification (Attachment 7). Residential Driveways on Courtland At the November 18, 2014 meeting, the Planning Commission expressed concern that the proposed residential drive on South Courtland Street did not align well with an existing driveway serving the commercial property to the east. The applicant submitted a revised residential ·driveway location to align with the existing commercial driveway. While some lot configurations will be required to be refined, .the proposed residential entrance detail better aligned with the existing commercial driveway, will lessen the probability of east/west left hand turn conflicts, and was supported by the Planning Commission. Item 9.b. - Page 14 CITY COUNCIL . CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009 DECEMBER 9, 2014 PAGE15 Commercial Driveway The applicant has provided two additional alternative access plans that provide for two- way access in the center drive area of the commercial property in response to Planning Commission requests. One of the details includes a western egress and one concept does not. The concept proposed to the Planning Commission on November 18, 2014 includes a westeiti egress driveway and an ingress only center driveway area. The original proposal provides a compromise between site access, site circulation, and minimizing driveway crossing lengths for pedestrians on East Grand Avenue. Alternative 2 (see Attachment 10, Sheet EX1) includes a western egress and two-way center driveway access, with two (2) 12' travel lanes and 44' of plaza area. This concept maximizes site access and circulation and increases pedestrian crossing distances on Grand Avenue. Alternative 3 (see Sheet EX1) reduces site circulation, provides a similar level of site access, and reduces the number of pedestrian driveway crossings on East Grand Avenue, but also reduces the amount of pedestrian plaza area provided between the· two commercial buildings. The width of travel lanes and amount of plaza area are the same between Alternatives 2 and 3. The Planning Commission supported Alternative 2 but in light of a reduced number of driveway entrances to the commercial development, reduced pedestrian/vehicle conflicts, reduction of vehicle speed entering Subarea 3a from East Grand Avenue, and consistency with the East Grand Avenue Enhancement Plan, the Commission desired Council to additionally cons1ider Alternative 1 (see Attachment 10, Sheet A9). It should be noted that this is anticipated to be a catalyst project with a significant pedestrian plaza if approved and would set a precedent for future developments along East Grand Avenue. Unprotected Crosswalks Although the Planning Commission recommended inclusion of a crosswalk on South Courtland Street, staff has some serious concerns regardi"ng the safety of these facilities and the installation of additional unprotected crosswalks in the City. Staff is currently updating the Circulation Element of the General Plan, which includes developing a study of uncontrolled crosswalks as a part of the update. The purpose is to establish policies on when crosswalks at uncontrolled intersections should be allowed and what types of features should be added to maximize pedestrian safety at those locations. The study is anticipated to be completed within the near future. While staff is not opposed to best management practices associated with painted crosswalks, such as bulb outs that reduce the distance pedestrians are in travel lanes, staff would recommend against a painted crosswalk until the Circulation Element of the General Plan is updated and approved by Council. However, given the Planning Commission recommendation and public input on the project, Council may wish to consider this installation. Portions of California Manual for Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD) and a study that was completed for the Item 9.b. - Page 15 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009 DECEMBER 9, 2014 · PAGE16 Federal Highways Administration (FHWA) concerning midblock crossings are included for Council consideration (Attachment 8). While the FHWA study provides thirty-five (35) pages of discussion on this topic, the general findings regarding painted versus unpainted crosswalk installation on two (2) lane roadways indicates no change in the in the number of pedestrian versus vehicle accidents. Parking . Parking requirements for the development are identified in AGMC Section 16.56.060. Parking requirements are dependent upon the use proposed, but for Subarea 3a requirements are generally one (1) space per 250 square-feet of gross floor area. The proposal of 11,000 square-feet of commercial floor area results in a requirement for forty-four (44) parking spaces. The four (4) two-bedroom condominiums in subarea 3a require two (2) spaces per unit, totaling eight (8) spaces. In total, fifty-two (52) parking spaces are required for Subarea 3a. The developer is providing sixty-one (61) parking spaces in Subarea 3a. This includes four (4) spaces reserved solely for the condominiums (1 space per unit) and fifty-seven (57) open, unassigned spaces to meet the total parking requirement. For Subarea 3b, parking is required per unit. Traditionally, this would include two (2) spaces per unit in an enclosed garage, as well as guest parking at a rate of 0.5 spaces per unit. For the proposed development, these requirements result in 21 guest parking spaces (20:5 spaces required would round to the next highest number). Each residence in Subarea 3b contains 2 spaces in their respective garages, meeting the requirement for the residences. The applicant has provided twenty (20) guest parking spaces spread throughout the site, with a grouping of these spaces in the southwest corner. The applicant has proposed that the additional guest parking space could be accommodated in some of the residential driveways on the corner lots. Driveway parking is not allowed to be counted toward guest parking per the AGMC. While the Specific Plan could modify the amount of parking required, it would still be calculated in the same ·manner as required in the Municipal Code. The AGMC allows a discretionary parking reduction for mixed-use projects up to 20% of · the total parking requirement. However, single-family residential units would normally not qualify for a mixed-use parking reduction because they are not included in the mixed-use definition. If the City Council decides that a mixed-use parking reduction is satisfactory in light of the proposed General Plan Amendment, a parking reduction of one percent (1 %) would be necessary, if looking simply at the parking requirements of Subarea 3b. When looking at both Subareas 3a and 3b, the applicant parked in excess of eight (8) spaces. Item 9.b. - Page 16 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009 -.DECEMBER 9, 2014 PAGE17 Concerns have been raised during project review that even though Subarea 3b is almost meets the parking requirements of the AGMC, there remains a lack of parking due to garages being used for storage instead of parking and families having more than two cars. Staff understands these concerns, however, there is nothing within the AGMC that would require additional parking beyond the base required by the AGMC. Additionally, the development is required to have a Homeowners' Association (HOA). Through active management of guest parking by the HOA, as is common in similar developments in other jurisdictions, these concerns can be reduced, although it is doubtful that they would be completely eliminated. Landscaping/Open Space The proposed conceptual landscape plan includes both perimeter and interior trees and screening/ground cover plant material that appear to meet the City's drought tolerant landscaping requirements. Specific plantings in private yard areas of Subarea 3b are not identified and it is anticipated that these would be up to the homeowners to plant. AGMC Subsection 16.48.065.C.1 outlines requirements, for open space for mixed-use projects at a minimum of 350 square-feet per unit. Forty-five (45) residential units for both Subarea 3a and Subarea 3b require a total of 15,750 square-feet of open space, which is met through a combination of private open space on each individual lot on Subarea 3b, as well as the approximately 14,000 square-foot neighborhood green. Residential Private Patios Homes surrounding the neighborhood green, as well as Lots 14, 16, 18 and 20 adjacent to South Courtland Street, have a unique side patio feature that is important to highlight. Property lines are evenly spaced between the residential structures with four feet (4') from the building to the property boundary. The developer proposes to include side yard patios for the sole enjoyment of one of the residences even though it would include part of the neighboring property. This would be accomplished through recordation of private easements for patio usage. This is a variation on the traditional zero lot line development concept where structures are placed directly on property lines and the buildings themselves help separate the properties. According to the applicant, the proposed variation allows for additional design con~iderations, such as windows, that would not normally be allowed in traditional zero lot line developments due to requirements of the Building Code. The remainder of the homes on the site would have four feet (4') between property lines but no side yard patio due to having rear yards. Neighborhood Green Subarea 3b includes a centrally located neighborhood green, providing open space to the development. The neighborhood green measures approximately 14,000 square- feet and includes a neighborhood pavilion and flex spaces, sitting areas, and a mailbox area in the green. The connection (by design but not legally formalized) between Item 9.b. - Page 17 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDM.ENT 14-001, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009 DECEMBER 9, 2014 PAGE18 Subareas 3a and 3b can additionally allow interaction between customers of the commercial development and this neighborhood amenity. In response to concerns from the Planning Commission, the applicant has included a playground feature in the neighborhood green area. Staff thinks the potential play structure would add a benefit to children within Subarea 3b while complementing the proposed residential architecture. Private Streets The applicant is proposing private interior streets in Subarea 3b. This allows for the design of streets outside of City ·Standards. Streets would be twenty-four feet (24') in width, including 2-ten foot (1 O') travel lanes and 2-two foot (2') rolled curbs. Interior sidewalks would not be provided, but accessible paths of travel from the public way to the neighborhood green have been included in the project. Fence Height The AGMC allows fences to be a maximum of six feet (6') outside of required front yards. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment would allow for six foot (6') fences to be placed on six foot (6') retaining walls, totaling twelve feet (12'). This is likely to occur in the rear yards of residences adjacent to Subarea 3a and potentially residences on the western side of the development. A deviation in fence height of this magnitude would typically require a variance but can be included in the Specific Plan Amendment. Timing of Project Construction Since the project is now predominantly residential, an issue that has been previously identified is the need to avoid a scenario where the residential portion of the project is built and the commercial portion is later determined to be infeasible and remains vacant or is requested to be modified. A condition was proposed by staff to require the commercial component to be built first or concurrent with the residential component. However, while the applicants intend to meet this condition, they indicated that including the requirement in the conditions of approval would make it infeasible to obtain financing for either portion of the project. At the suggestion of the applicant, the conditions of approval instead include alternate language that specifies the following: • The map may be phased in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act. If such map phasing is to occur, the following improvements shall be made in accordance with the timelines included in each: o Water -The public water main shall be extended from East Grand Avenue and South Courtland Street to the boundary of Phase II as shown on the Utility Plan, prior to recordation of either Phase. o Sewer -The public sewer main shall be extended to the boundary of Phase I and Phase II along South Courtland Street as shown on the Utility Plan, prior to recordation of either Phase. Item 9.b. - Page 18 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-_D01, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP-14-001, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1~-009 DECEMBER 9, 2014 PAGE19 o Storm Drains -The public storm drain main shall be extended and upsized as deemed necessary by the City Engineer to the boundary of Phase I and Phase II along South Courtland Street as shown on the Utility Plan, prior to recordation of either Phase. o Retaining Wall -The shared retaining wall between Phase I and Phase II shall be installed as shown on the Civil Site Plan, prior to recordation of either Phase. o Grading and Drainage -The drainage on Phase I shall be directed away from Phase II in a manner compliant with City standards, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, prior to recordation of either Phase. o Frontage Improvements, Phase I -Phase I shall install: 1. Its immediate street frontage improvements at East Grand Avenue and South Courtland Street (including, but not limited to, curb, gutter, and sidewalk); 2. A transition to the existing curb on South Courtland Street; and 3. A pedestrian path along the frontage of Phase II along South Courtland Street, as necessary and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, prior to recordation of Phase I. o Frontage Improvements, Phase II -Phase II shall install: 1. Its immediate street frontage improvements at South Courtland Street (including, but not limited to, curb, gutter, and sidewalk); 2. A transition to the existing curb on South Courtland Street; and 3. A pedestrian path along the frontage of Phase I along South Courtland, as necessary and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, prior to recordation of Phase II. • Prior to final inspection of any of the structures of Subarea 3b, the applicant shall first deposit an amount equal to % of all estimated development impact fees and permit fees associated with the development of Subarea 3a (the "Deposit"); if the development of Subarea 3a has not been commenced within six (6) months following the final inspection approval of the Subarea 3b improvements, then the Deposit shall be unconditionally forfeited to the City of Arroyo Grande, and shall not be applied to any permit fee or development impact fee associated with Subarea 3a. • Prior to final map recordation, the applicant shall deposit $250,000 with the City to be placed in an interest bearing account at an agreed upon local bank (the "Deposit"). If building permits to construct all of Subarea 3a have not been issued within 12 months of final map recordation, the City shall have the right to withdraw $25,000. In each successive year, if Certificates of Occupancy have Item 9.b. - Page 19 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009 DECEMBER 9, 2014 PAGE 20 not been issued for all of Subarea 3a, the City shall have the right to annually withdraw an additional $25,000, until the Deposit is exhausted. • If construction has not been completed and Certificates of Occupancy issued for all of Subarea 3a within 10 years, the applicant shall convey the Subarea 3a property to the City, in fee, free and clear of any monetary encumbrances. Although these conditions are incentives to the developer to immediately develop Subarea 3a, it is important to note that this construction phasing is not guaranteed. Although Subarea 3a is identified as Phase I on the Tentative Map, the Subdivision Map Act does allow for modification of phasing after approval. Therefore, the City could see itself in a position where the residential component is constructed and the commercial component remains undeveloped, thereby requiring collection of the fees as outlined. Water Use It is recognized that this project requires General Plan and Specific Plan Amendments in order to proceed, and therefore there is significant latitude as far as either approving or denying it. Staff, however, believes that concerns about drought should not be a basis for not approving the project for several reasons. First of all, it is important to note that staff'.s analysis of the issue of water in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration is that there are sufficient w~ter supplies available for the project and water related impacts are less than significant. This conclusion was based upon an analysis of the project's water demand, as well as the 2012 Water System Master Plan. More importantly, it must be borne in mind that all new development in the City is required to either implement a water neutralization program or pay a water neutralization fee to offset increased water demand generated by the project. Accordingly, the determination is that there are sufficient water supplies available to serve the project. In addition, Chapter 13.05 of the AGMC contains the City's Water Conservation provisions. Section 13.05.030 includes a wide range of permanent restrictions on water use that the residents and businesses located in this project will have to adhere to. Also, based upon direction from the City Council, staff is developing an ordinance to amend the AGMC to provide a mechanism to impose further retractions on water use, in the event it becomes necessary. However, those provisions are being developed on a contingency basis should the need arise and at this time staff believes water. supplies available to the City are adequate. Finally, if necessary, the City has the ability under Water Code Section 350, etc. to declare a Water Shortage Emergency, which can include limitations on new water connections. There is also the ability to declare a moratorium on new development, should it become necessary. To date however, a Water Shortage Emergency has not been deemed to exist in Arroyo Grande. Staff believes that water supplies are sufficient and stands by its analysis of the water impacts of this project as set forth in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. Item 9.b. - Page 20 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AM'ENDMENT 14-001, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009 DECEMBER 9, 2014 PAGE 21 Development Lighting The applicants have included an updated lighting exhibit (see Attachment 10, Sheet EX4) that iden_tifies where the different development lights will likely be located, in response to questions from the Planning Commission. Exact locations will be determined during development of construction drawings when photometric analysis is performed to ensure light intensity is not too dramatic to impact residences and neighboring properties. Based on the tentative locations of the fixtures, staff believes adequate lighting will be provided to ensure safety. The Planning Commission recommended a condition of approval that required the use of LED lights for parking lot lights, bollard lights, and as feasible on building lights as these are typically harder to find and more costly to the developer. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration: • Adopt the Resolution adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approving General Plan Amendment 14-002, Specific Plan Amendment 14-001, Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14-001, and Conditional Use Permit 14-009; • Modify and adopt the Resolution adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approving General Plan Amendment 14-002, Specific Plan Amendment 14-001, Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14-001, and Conditional Use Permit 14-009; • Do not adopt the Resolution and instead provide direction for staff to return with an appropriate resolution denying the project; or • Provide direction to staff. ADVANTAGES: The proposed project will complete development of the Berry Gardens Specific Plan area. The commercial development on East Grand Avenue contains several desirable design features that result in a project consistent with c the Design Guidelines and the Enhancement Plan~ Four (4) residential units will be included in a true vertical mixed- use arrangement and would be the first of its kind along this portion of East Grand Avenue. The project has the potential to spur investment to other properties along the East Grand Avenue corridor. The proposed architecture of the project will be unique and distinguish itself from neighboring developments. The project will address the need for "Attainable Housing" as identified in the General Plan Housing Element. The modifications to the residential entrance to align with the commercial entrance across . South Courtland Street will further help reduce left turning conflicts. Item 9.b. - Page 21 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009 DECEMBER 9, 2014 PAGE 22 DISADVANTAGES: The project will convert undeveloped land in the City's gateway commercial corridor to primarily a single-family detached residential use, limiting the revenue producing potential. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the Arroyo Grande Procedures for the Implementation of CEQA, staff has conducted an Initial Study and prepared a Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the proposed project (Attachment 9). PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS: A notice of public hearing was mailed to all property owners within 300' of the project site on Wednesday, November 26, 2014. The notice was published in The Tribune, and posted at City Hall and on the City's website on Friday, November 28, 2014. The agenda and staff report were also posted at City Hall and on the City's website on December 5, 2014. One member of the public had reviewed the plans and spoke in support of the project at the time of staff report preparation. Attachments: 1. Project narrative provided by applicant 2. Minutes from the July 8, 2014 Council meeting regarding Pre-Application 14-002 3. Minutes from the August 12, 2014 Council meeting regarding Pre-Application 14- 002 4. Draft Traffic Impact Study 5. Minutes from the November 18, 2014 Planning Commission meeting 6. Municipal Code Table 16.36.030(A) -Uses Permitted Within Mixed Use and Commercial Districts 7. Email from Peoples' Self Help Housing 8. Portions of California Manual for Uniform Traffic Control Devices and Federal Highways Administration study on midblock crossings 9. Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 10. Project plans (available for public revieV\( at City Hall) · Item 9.b. - Page 22 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002, SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14- 001, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009; LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF EAST GRAND AVENUE AND SOUTH COURTLAND STREET; APPLIED FOR BY MFI LIMITED AND NKT COMMERCIAL WHEREAS, the project site is located in the area of the Berry Gardens Specific Plan and is identified as Subarea, 3; and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied for Specific Plan Amendment 14-001 to amend the Berry Gardens Specific Plan as it relates to the development of Subarea 3; and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied for General Plan Amendment 14-002 to amend the General Plan Land Use Element as it relates to development in the area of the intersection of East Grand Avenue and Courtland Street to include single-family detached housing at multi-family densities as part of mixed-use projects; and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied for Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14-001 to subdivide Subarea 3 into forty-four (44) parcels, including two (2) commercial parcels, forty-one ( 41) single-family parcels, and one ( 1) common area parcel; and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied for Conditional Use Permit 14-009 to develop two (2) commercial buildings of 5,000-5,500 square-feet each, four (4) second-floor condominiums of approximately 1,000 square feet-each in a vertical mixed-use arrangement; and WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Committee of the City of Arroyo Grande has reviewed the project at a meeting on November 3, 2014 and December 2, 2014, recommending approval of the project; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Arroyo Grande has reviewed the project at a duly noticed public hearing on November 18, 2014 and December 2, 2014, recommending the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve the project; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande has reviewed the project at a duly noticed public hearing on December 9, 2014, and considered all written evidence and oral testimony; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed this project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the Arroyo Grande Item 9.b. - Page 23 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE2 Rules and Procedures for Implementation of CEQA and has reviewed the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds, after due study, deliberation and public hearing, the following circumstances exist: General Plan Amendment Findings: 1. The proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives, policies and programs of the General Plan and will not result in any internal inconsistencies within the plan. The proposed General Plan Amendment would modify LU5-10.1 as it relates to the subject property to allow the development of single-family detached housing as part of a mixed-use project at a density comparable to mu/ti-family densities. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not result in any internal inconsistencies within the remainder of the General Plan and requiring development of housing comparable to the density of multi-family development is consistent with the goals, objectives, policies and programs of the General Plan. 2. The proposed amendment will not adversely affect the public health, safety and welfare; There is nothing contained within the proposed, General Plan Amendment that will adversely affect the public health, safety or welfare, as the proposed General Plan Amendment involves the allowance of single-family residential development on the project site as part of a mixed-use development and at a density comparable to multi-family densities consistent with the Mixed-Use (MU) land use designation. 3. The potential environmental impacts of the proposed amendment are insignificant or can be mitigated to an insignificant level, or there are overriding considerations that outweigh the potential impacts; The proposed General Plan Amendment and resulting project have been reviewed 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 the impacts of the proposed project have been included in a draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration dated November 10, 2014 and have been reduced to an insignificant level. Specific Plan Amendment Findings: 1. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives, policies and programs of the General Plan. Item 9.b. - Page 24 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE3 The proposed Specific Plan Amendment would allow the development of 4.47 acres with commercial, mixed-use condominium residential, and single-family detached residential at a density comparable to multi-family density consistent with the goals, objectives, policies and programs of the General Plan. 2. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment will not adversely affect the public health, safety and welfare or result in an illogical land use pattern; There is nothing contained within the proposed Specific Plan Amendment that will adversely affect the public health, safety or welfare. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment contains mixed-use development standards which are consistent with the Mixed-Use (MU) land use designation, have single-family detached residential density comparable to multi-family density, and provide for an adequate buffer between dissimilar uses (commercial and residentialj; therefore, the proposed Specific Plan Amendment will not result in an illogical land use pattern. 3. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment is necessary and desirable in order to implement the provisions of the General Plan; The proposed Specific Plan Amendment is necessary to implement provisions of the General Plan regarding higher-intensity mixed-use development of 4.47 acres of vacant land along the City's main commercial corridor (East Grand Avenue). 4. The development standards contained in the proposed Specific Plan Amendment will result in a superior development to that which would occur using standard zoning and development regulations. The development standards contained within the proposed Specific Plan Amendment will result in a superior development to that which would occur using standard zoning and development regulations as they allow for development of a higher-intensity mix of uses, including commercial, mixed- . use condominium residential, and single-family detached residential at a density comparable to multi-family density. 5. The proposed Specific . Plan Amendment will not create internal inconsistencies within the Specific Plan and is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Specific Plan it is amending. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment will not create any internal inconsistencies within the Berry Gardens Specific Plan and is consistent with the Berry Gardens Specific Plan as it provides for both commercial and residential development. Item 9.b. - Page 25 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE4 Vesting Tentative Tract Map Findings: 1. The proposed tentative tract map is consistent with the 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 Vesting Tentative Tract Map would allow the subdivision of 4.47 acres into forty-four (44) lots consistent with the General Plan and Berry Gardens Specific Plan for the development of commercial, mixed-use condominium residential and single-family detached residential with densities comparable to multi-~amily densities. 2. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. The site is 4.47 acres of vacant land adjacent to one of the City's main commercial corridors-and is suitable for the development of higher-intensity mixed-use development including commercial, mixed-use condominium residential, and detached single-family residential with densities comparable to multi-family densities consistent with the Mixed-Use land use designation of the General Plan and the Berry Gardens Specific Plan. 3. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. The site is 4.47 acres of vacant land and is identified with the Mixed-Use land use designation of the General Plan, which allow high density residential development. The proposed infill residential development will not exceed the maximum allowable density of the district and is comparable to multi-family densities. 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. The design of the tract map is not anticipated to cause environmental damage due to the implementation of mitigation measures identified in the draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the Arroyo Grande Rules and Regulations for Implementation of CEQA. 5. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. With approval of the General Plan Amendment, the design of the subdivision will be in compliance with the Mixed-Use performance standards of the Municipal Code, which will allow adequate design and separation of incompatible uses to prevent serious public health problems. Item 9.b. - Page 26 RESOLUTION NO. PAGES 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 the 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. There are no easements for the public-at-large currently on the subject property. Emergency access easements to the multi-family housing project to the south will be modified and recorded to ensure adequate access is maintained for emergency response purposes. 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 proposed development will retain the g5th percentile of water discharge on site and excess discharge will be directed to an existing infiltration basin across South Courtlan'd Street. No discharge of waste will result in a violation identified in Division 7 of the California Water Code. 8. Adequate public services and facilities exist or will be provided as the result of the proposed tentative tract map to support project development. There are adequate provisions for public services to serve the project development and no deficiencies 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, and the development policies and standards of the Ci~y. The proposed development for commercial, mixed-use condominium residential, and single-family detached residential uses at a density comparable to multi-family densities is consistent with development standards for the Gateway Mixed-Use zoning district per Municipal Code Section 16.36.020, the Berry Gardens Specific Plan, and the Arroyo Grande General Plan. 2. The proposed use would not impair the integrity and character of the district in which it is to be established or located. There is nothing contained within the proposed Specific Plan Amendment that will adversely affect the public health, safety or welfare. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment contains mixed-use development standards Item 9.b. - Page 27 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE6 which are consistent with the Mixed-Use (MU) land use designation and provide for an adequate buffer between dissimilar uses (commercial and residential); therefore, the proposed Specific Plan Amendment will not result in an illogical land use pattern. 3. The site is suitable for the type and intensity of use or development that is proposed. The site is 4.47 acres of vacant land and is identified with the Mixed-Use land use designation of the General Plan, which allow commercial and high density residential development. The proposed commercial and residential development will not exceed the maximum allowable density of the district and is comparable to multi-family densities. 4. There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities and services to ensure public health and safety. The provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities were examined during development of the Initial Study and subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration and it was determined that adequate public services will be available for the proposed project and will not result in suqstantially adverse impacts. 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. The proposed use 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 it will comply with the Berry Gardens Specific Plan, all applicable codes and standards of the Municipal Code, and in accordance with conditions of approval specifically developed for the project. 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 General Plan Amendment 14-002, Specific Plan Amendment 14-001, Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14-001 and Conditional Use Permit 14-009. 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. 3. After holding a public hearing pursuant to State and City Codes, and considering the record as a whole, the City Council adopts the 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 Item 9.b. - Page 28 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE7 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 hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration and directs the City Clerk to file a Notice of Determination as set forth in Exhibit "B", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, approves General Plan Amendment 14-002 as set forth in Exhibit "C", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, approves Specific Plan Amendment 14-001 as set forth in Exhibit "D", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and approves Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14-001 and Conditional Use Permit 14-009 as presented to the City Council at the Public Hearing and shown on the plans labeled Exhibit "E", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, 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 gth day of December, 2014. Item 9.b. - Page 29 RESOLUTION NO. PAGES JIM HILL, MAYOR ATTEST: KELLY WETMORE, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: DEBBIE MALICOAT, ACTING CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY Item 9.b. - Page 30 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE9 EXHIBIT 'A' CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001; VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001; AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009 SOUTHWEST CORNER OFEAST GRAND AVENUE AND -SOUTH COURTLAND STREET COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION GENERAL CONDITIONS 1. This approval authorizes the subdivision of 4.47 acres at the southwest corner of the East Grand Avenue and Courtland Street intersection for the construction of forty-one (41) single-family residences and two (2) commercial buildings of approximately 11,000 square-feet of floor area with four (4) second-story residential dwellings, in accordance with the plans presented to the City Council at the Public Hearing on December 9, 2014. 2. The applicant shall ascertain and comply with all Federal, State, County and City requirements as are applicable to this project. 3. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of approval and mitigation measures for General Plan Amendment 14-002, Specific Plan Amendment 14-001, Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14-001, and Conditional Use Permit 14-009. 4. This application shall automatically expire on December 9, 2016 unless a building permit is issued. Thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the approval, the applicant may apply for an extension of one (1) year from the original date of expiration. 5. Development shall conform to the Gateway Mixed-Use zoning district requirements except as otherwise approved. 6. Development shall occur in substantial conformance with the plans presented to the City Council at the meeting of December 9, 2014 and marked Exhibit "B", on file in the Community Development Department. 7. The applicant shall agree to indemnify and defend at his/her sole expense any action brought against the City, its present or former agents, officers, or employees because of the issuance of said approval, or in any way relating to the implementation thereof, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers or employees may be Item 9.b. - Page 31 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE10 required by a court to pay as a result of such action. 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 under this condition. , 8. A copy of these conditions and mitigation measures shall be incorporated into all construction documents. 9. At the time of application for construction permits, plans submitted shall show all development consistent with the approved site plan, floor plan, architectural elevations and landscape plan. 10. Signage shall be subject to the requirements of Chapter 16.60 of the Development Code except as otherwise approved in the Berry Gardens Specific Plan. Prior to issuance of a building permit, all illegal signs shall be removed, if any. 11. Development shall comply with Development Code Sections 16.48.070, "Fences, Walls and Hedges"; 16.48.120, "Performance Standards"; and 16.48.130 "Screening Requirements", except as otherwise modified by this approval. 12. Setbacks, lot coverage, and floor area ratios shall be as shown on the development plans including those specifically modified by these conditions. 13. The developer shall comply with Development Code Chapter 16.56, "Parking and Loading Requirements", except as otherwise modified by this approval. All parking spaces adjacent/parallel to a wall, fence, or property line shall have a minimum width of 11 feet. 14. Where off-street parking areas are situated such that they are visible from the street, an earthen berm, wall, landscaping, and/or combination wall/berm/landscaping three feet (3') in height shall be erected within the required landscape area to screen the parking area. 15. All parking areas of five or more spaces shall have an average of one-half foot- candle illumination per square foot of parking area for visibility and security during hours of darkness. 16. Trash enclosures shall be screened from public view with landscaping or other appropriate screening materials, and shall be made of an exterior finish that complements the architectural features of the main building. The trash enclosure area shall accommodate recycling container(s). The location and function of the trash enclosures shall be reviewed and approved by South County Sanitation prior to approval of the improvement plans. 17. Final design and location of the trash enclosure(s) shall be reviewed by the Item 9.b. - Page 32 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE11 Architectural Review Committee and approved by the Community Development Director. 18. Noise resulting from construction and operational activities shall conform to the standards set forth in Chapter 9.16 of the Municipal Code. Construction activities shall be restricted to the hours of 7 AM and 5 PM Monday through Friday where adjacent to existing residential. No construction shall occur on Saturday or Sunday where adjacent to existing residential. 19. At the time of application for construction permits, the applicant shall provide details on any proposed exterior lighting. The lighting plan shall include the height, location, and intensity of all exterior lighting consistent with Section 16.48.090 of the Development Code. All lighting fixtures shall be shielded so that neither the lamp nor the related reflector interior surface is visible from adjacent properties. All lighting for the site shall be downward directed and shall not create spill or glare to adjacent properties. All lighting shall be energy efficient (e.g. LED). 20. All new construction shall utilize fixtures and designs that minimize water and energy usage. Such fixtures shall include, but are not limited to, low flow showerheads, water saving toilets, instant water heaters and hot water recirculating systems. Water conserving designs and fixtures shall be installed prior to final occupancy. 21. Landscaping in accordance with the approved landscaping plan shall be installed or bonded for before final building inspection/establishment of use. The landscape and irrigation plan shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect subject to review and approval by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. The landscape plan shall be in conformance with Development Code Chapter 16.84 (Water Efficient Landscape Requirements) and shall include the following: a. Tree staking, soil preparation and planting detail; b. The use of landscaping to screen ground-mounted utility and mechanical equipment; c. 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 practices including the use of low flow heads, drip irrigation, mulch, gravel, drought tolerant plants. iii. An automated irrigation system using smart controller (weather based) technology. iv. The selection of groundcover plant species shall include drought Item 9.b. - Page 33 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE12 tolerant and/or native plants. v. Linear planters shall be provided in parking areas. vi. Turf areas shall be limited in accordance with Section 16.84.040 of the Development Code. 22. All planted areas shall be continuously maintained in a healthy, growing condition, shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing and trimming, and shall be kept free of weeds and debris by the owner or person in possession of such areas. Any damaged, dead or decaying plant material shall be replaced within thirty (30) days from the date of damage. . 23. Trees shall be provided at a ratio of one tree for every five parking spaces. 24. For projects approved with specific exterior building colors, the developer shall paint a test patch on the building including all colors. The remainder of the building may not be painted until inspected by the Community Development Department to verify that colors are consistent with the approved color board. A 48-hour notice is required for this inspection. 25. All new commercial electrical panel boxes shall be installed inside the building(s). 26. All Fire Department Connections (FDC) shall be located near a fire hydrant, adjacent to a fire access roadway, away from the public right-of-way, incorporated into the design of the site, and screened to the maximum extent feasible. 27. Double detector check valve assemblies shall be located directly adjacent to or within the respective building to which they serve. 28. All ducts, meters, air conditioning equipment and all other mechanical equipment, whether on the ground, on the structure or elsewhere, shall be screened from public view with materials architecturally compatible with the main structure. It is especially important that gas and electric meters, electric transformers, and large water piping systems be completely screened from public view. All roof-mounted equipment which generates noise, solid particles, odors, etc., shall cause the objectionable material to be directed away from residential properties. 29. All conditions of this approval run with the land and shall be strictly adhered to, within the time frames specified, and in an on-going manner for the life of the project. Failure to comply with these conditions of approval-may result in an immediate enforcement action. If it is determined that violation(s) of these conditions of approval have occurred, or are occurring, this approval may be revoked pursuant to Development Code Section 16.08.100. Item 9.b. - Page 34 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE13 SUBDIVISION CONDITIONS 30. The developer shall comply with Development Code Chapter 16.20 "Land Divisions". 31. The developer shall comply with Development Code Chapter 16.64 "Dedications, Fees and Reservations." 32. The developer shall comply with Development Code Chapter 16.68 "Improvements". 33. The applicant shall submit Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) that are administered by a subdivision homeowners' association, formed by the applicant for the area within the subdivision. The CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney and recorded prior to or concurrently with the final map. At a minimum, the CC&R's shall: a. Provide for maintenance of the driveways, common areas, sewer lines and other facilities; b. Prohibit additions to the units; c. Require garages to be kept clear for parking cars at all times; and d. Inform residents of the water conservation requirements placed on this project. 34. The applicant shall remove all structures in conflict with new lot lines. INCLUSIONARY HOUSING . 35. The developer shall comply with Development Code Chapter 16.80 "lnclusionary Affordable Housing Requirements", which includes the appropriate in-lieu fee be paid prior to issuance of the first ministerial permit, including but not limited to grading, demolition, or building permit for all or any part of the project. SPECIAL CONDITIONS 36. Crosswalks across South Courtland Street and East Grand Avenue from the project site shall be upgraded or fair share in-lieu fees provided to include flagstone patterned, color stained concrete, subject to the approval of the Community Development Director and Public Works Director. 37. All aisles, approach lanes, and maneuvering areas in the parking lot of Subarea 3a shall be clearly marked with directional arrows to simplify vehicular movement. 38. A minimum of one (1) motorcycle parking space shall be provided in Subarea 3a. Item 9.b. - Page 35 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE14 39. The map may be phased in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act. If such map phasing is to occur, the following improvements shall be made in accordance with the timelines included in each: a. Water -The public water main shall be extended from East Grand Avenue and South Courtland Street to the boundary of Phase II as shown on the Utility Plan, prior to recordation of either Phase. b. Sewer -The public sewer main shall be extended to the boundary of Phase I and Phase II along South Courtland Street as shown on the Utility Plan, prior to recordation of either Phase. c. Storm Drains -The public storm drain main shall be extended and upsized as deemed necessary by the City Engineer to the boundary of Phase I and Phase II along South Courtland Street as shown on the Utility Plan, prior to recordation of either Phase. d. Retaining Wall -The shared retaining wall between Phase I and Phase II shall be installed as shown on the Civil Site Plan, prior to recordation of either Phase. e. Grading and Drainage -The drainage on Phase I shall be directed away from Phase II in a manner compliant with City standards, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, prior to recordation of either Phase. f. Frontage Improvements, Phase I -Phase I shall install: i. Its immediate street frontage improvements at East Grand Avenue and South Courtland Street (including, but not limited to, curb, gutter, and sidewalk); ii. A transition to the existing curb on South Courtland Street; and iii. A pedestrian path along the frontage of Phase II along South Courtland Street, as necessary and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, prior to recordation of Phase I. g. Frontage Improvements, Phase II -Phase II shall install: i. Its immediate street frontage improvements at South Courtland Street (including, but not limited to, curb, gutter, and sidewalk); ii. A transition to the existing curb on South Courtland Street; and iii. A pedestrian path along the frontage of Phase I along South Courtland, as necessary and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, prior to recordation of Phase 11.. 40. Prior to final inspection of any of the structures of Subarea 3b, the applicant shall first deposit an amount equal to % of all estimated development impact fees and permit fees associated with the development of Subarea 3a (the "Deposit"); if the development of Subarea 3a has not been commenced within six (6) months following the final inspection approval of the Subarea 3b improvements, then the Deposit shall be unconditionally forfeited to the City of Arroyo Grande, and shall not be applied to any permit fee or development impact fee associated with Subarea 3a. Item 9.b. - Page 36 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE15 41. Prior to final map recordation, the applicant shall deposit $250,000 with the City to be placed in an interest bearing account at an agreed upon local bank (the "Deposit"). If building permits to construct all of Subarea 3a have not been issued within 12 months of final map recordation, the City shall have the right to withdraw · $25,000. In each successive year, if Certificates of Occupancy have not been issued for all of Subarea 3a, the City shall have the right to annually withdraw an additional $25,000, until the Deposit is exhausted. 42. If construction has not been completed and Certificates of Occupancy issued for all of Subarea 3a within 10 years, the applicant shall convey the property of Subarea 3a to the City, in fee, free and clear of any monetary encumbrances. BUILDING AND LIFE SAFETY DIVISION AND FIRE DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS CBC/CFC 43. The project shall comply with the most recent editions of the California State Fire and Building Codes and the International Building and Fire Codes as adopted by the City of Arroyo Grande. FIRE LANES 44. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall post designated fire lanes, per Section 22500.1 of the California Vehicle Code. 45. All fire lanes must be posted and enforced, per Police Department and Fire Department guidelines. FIRE FLOW/FIRE HYDRANTS 46. Project shall have a fire flow in accordance with the California Fire Code. 47. Fire hydrants shall be installed, per Fire Department and Public Works Department standards and per the California Fire Code. 48. The developer shall relocate the existing fire hydrant at the west end of the project site on East Grand Avenue to be adjacent to the west end of the western commercial building. 49. The applicant shall install a new fire hydrant per City Standards approximately halfway between East Grand Avenue and the residential project entrance, adjacent to South Courtland Street (at approximately Lot 9). 50. The developer shall install a new fire hydrant per City standards immediately south of the residential project entrance (at approximately Lot 18). Item 9.b. - Page 37 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE16 SECURITY KEY BOX 51. The applicant must provide an approved "security key vault," per Building and Fire Department guidelines and per the California Fire Code. FIRE SPRINKLER 52. All buildings must be fully sprinklered per Building and Fire Department guidelines and per the California Fire Code. 53. Provide Fire Department approved access or sprinkler-system per National Fire Protection Association Standards. ABANDONMENT I NON-CONFORMING 54. The applicant shall show proof of properly abandoning all non-conforming items such as septic tanks, wells, underground piping and other undesirable conditions. DEMOLITION PERMIT I RETAINING WALLS 55. A demolition permit must be applied for, approved and issued. All asbestos and lead shall be verified if present and abated prior to permit issuance. SPECIAL CONDITIONS 56. The Applicant shall provide fully improved secondary means of emergency access from the southwest corner of the project site leading to/from the People's Self Help Housing to South Courtland Street. Access shall be provided in accordance with California Fire Code Appendix Section D107 and the previously recorded access easement. Minimum clearances and turning movements shall accommodate the Fire Department's ladder truck. 57. The development shall provide safe accessible paths of travel to the satisfaction of the Building Official, in accordance with Americans with Disabilities Act requirements. ENGINEERING DIVISION CONDITIONS All Engineering conditions of approval as listed below are to be complied with prior to recording the map or finalizing the permit, unless specifically noted otherwise. Item 9.b. - Page 38 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE17 GENERAL CONDITIONS 58. The developer shall be responsible during construction for cleaning City streets, curbs, gutters and sidewalks of dirt tracked from the project site. The flushing of dirt or debris to storm drain or sanitary sewer facilities shall not be permitted. The cleaning shall be done after each day's work or as directed by the Director of Public Works, the Community Development Director or his/her representative. 59. For work requiring engineering inspections, 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 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. 60. Trash enclosure area(s) shall have a roof structure (grease trap) to reduce stormwater pollution runoff. 61. Trash enclosure area(s) shall be screened from public view with landscaping or other appropriate screening materials, and shall be reserved exclusively for dumpster and recycling container storage. Interior vehicle travel ways shall be designed to be capable of withstanding loads imposed by trash trucks. 62. All residential units shall be designed to mitigate impacts from non-residential project noise, in compliance with the City's noise regulations. 63. All project improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the City of Arroyo Grande Standard Drawings and Specifications. 64. 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. As-built plans shall be required prior to release of the Faithful Performance Bond. 65. Submit three (3) full-size paper copies and one (1) full-size mylar copy of approved improvement plans for inspection purposes during construction. 66. If adequate public right-of-way does not exist beyond the back of sidewalk and/or curb ramp, a public pedestrian access easement may be required. The easement(s) shall be recorded prior to building permit issuance. The applicant shall provide any required exhibits necessary to define the area of the easement along with current ownership information and a legal description. Item 9.b. - Page 39 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE18 67. In accordance with Municipal Code Section 13.24.110 for Stormwater Management, the Registered Civil engineer shall provide certification of the best management practices (BMP's) used and shall demonstrate compliance with all applicable standards in the ordinance, prior to approval of the final map/improvement plans. 68. Show all required short-term and long-term bicycle parking per Municipal Code Chapter 16.56 and any project specific conditions to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department. The building plans shall provide a detailed site plan of any racks and all dimensions and clearances to obstructions per city standard. IMPROVEMENT PLANS 69. Improvement plans (including the following) shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer or qualified specialist licensed in the State of California and approved by the Public Works or 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. Other improvements as required by the Community Development Director. (NOTE: All plan sheets must include City standard title blocks) 70. The site plan shall inclu_de 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, size and orientation of all trash enclosures. c. All existing and proposed parcel lines and easements crossing the property. d. The location and dimension of all existing and proposed paved areas. e. The location of all existing and proposed public or private utilities. 71. Landscape and irrigation plans are required within the public right-of-way, and shall be approved by the Public Works Director. 72. Improvement plans shall include plan and profile of existing and proposed utilities. 73. Submit all retaining wall calculations for review and approval by the Community Development Director for walls not constructed per City standards. 7 4. 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 40 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE19 75. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining an encroachment permit for all work within a public right-of-way (City or Caltrans). STREET IMPROVEMENTS 76. Obtain approval from the Public Works Director prior to excavating in any street recently over-laid or slurry sealed. The Director shall approve the method of repair of any such trenches, but shall not be limited to an overlay, slurry seal, or fog seal. 77. All street repairs shall be constructed to City standards. 78. Street structural sections shall be determined by an R-Value soil test or recommendation by a soils report, but shall not be less than 3" of asphalt and 6" of Class II AB. 79. The developer shall show that emergency vehicles can negotiate streets through the several right angle turns. 80. All plans shall show the City's complete right-of-way on South Courtland Street and East Grand Avenue. 81. Guest parking shall be spread throughout the development due to street parking not being available on the project site. 82. The developer shall provide a striping plan to include a five foot (5') bike lane, turn lane and travel way on South Courtland Street. 83. The developer shall provide full road with resurfacing on South Courtland Street for the entire length of project frontage. CURB, GUTTER. AND SIDEWALK 84. Install new concrete curb, gutter, and sidewalk as directed by the Community Development Director and Public Works Director. 85. In special designated zones, including where driveways cross pedestrian sidewalks, new facilities shall be color and/or installation of exposed aggregate concrete finish shall be as directed by the Commonity Development Director. 86. Install ADA compliant facilities where necessary or verify that existing facilities are compliant with State and City Standards. The project shall include sidewalk and ADA compliant paths consistent with State Standards. 87. The applicant shall dedicate a pedestrian access easement(s) when the ADA Item 9.b. - Page 41 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 20 sidewalk extension does not fall within the City's right-of-way. 88. Install tree wells with root barriers for all trees planted adjacent to curb, gutter and sidewalk to prevent damage due to root growth. 89. 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. DEDICATIONS AND EASEMENTS 90. A private/public (fire, water main, sewer, open space, drainage) easement shall be reserved on the map. 91. A Public Utility Easement (PUE) shall be dedicated a m1mmum 10 feet wide adjacent to all public streets. The PUE shall be wider where necessary for the installation or maintenance of the public utility vaults, pads, or similar facilities. 92. A blanket Public Utility Easement (PUE) shall be dedicated over the project site. (CONDOMINIUM PROJECTS) 93. 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 and PUE, except that street tree easements shall exclude the area covered by public utility easements. 94. Access shall be denied to East Grand Avenue and South Courtland Street except at designated entries. The access denial shall be _offered by the property owner and recorded on the map or other document as is acceptable to the City. 95. A ten foot (1 O') sewer main and/or water main easement(s) shall be dedicated to the City via an agreement or the Tract map. 96. 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 Developer shall be responsible for all required fees, including any additional required City processing. 97. The developer shall obtain agreement from Peoples' Self Help Housing for the disposition of Item No. 6 in the Title Report. 98. The subdivider shall enter into a subdivision agreement for the completion and guarantee of improvements required. The subdivision agreement shall be on a form acceptable to the City. - Item 9.b. - Page 42 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 21 GRADING AND DRAINAGE 99. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A GRADING PERMIT, the developer shall submit two (2) copies of the final project-specific Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) or a Water Quality Control Plan (WQCP) consistent with the San Luis Obispo Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWCB) requirements. 100. All grading shall be performed in accordance with the City Grading Ordinance. 101. All drainage facilities shall be designed to accommodate a 100-year storm flow. Provide a complete drainage report. 102. The developer shall provide appropriate documentation stating the projects compliance with the post-construction requirements set by the State Water Resources Control Board and Municipal Code Title 16, Chapter 68. The statement shall clearly identify the level of compliance with each of the applicable Performance Requirements the project is subject to. The statement shall be signed and stamped by the Engineer of Record and shall include any identified deficiencies, per Performance Requirements. 103. Submit a soils report for the project shall be 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. 104. The Developer shall provide specific design for drainage systems in compliance with the Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements and Municipal Code Title 16, Chapter 68. 105. The applicant shall: A) 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 noJ 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 Item 9.b. - Page 43 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 22 WATER for any building permit within the project. f. The basin shall be maintained by the property owner. g. The basin shall be maintained by a homeowner's association. The City shall approve the related language in the association CC&R's prior to recordation. h. The basin shall be maintained by a landscape maintenance district. The maintenance district shall be recorded concurrently with the map. i. The basin design shall include landscaping and irrigation. j. The basin shall be fenced around the perimeter. Fencing shall be six feet (6') tall. OR B) Connect proposed drainage facilities to the existing Poplar Basin designed and installed in accordance with City Standards and State Water Resources Control Board Post-Construction requirements, including retention of the 95th percentile on site. 106. Whenever possible, all water mains shall be looped to prevent dead ends. The Public Works Director must grant permission to dead end water mains. 107. The applicant shall extend the public water main to adequately serve the project across the property frontage. 108. A Reduced Pressure Principle (RPP) backflow device is required on all water lines to the (structure and/or landscape irrigation). (Commercial development only). 109. A Double Detector Check (DOC) backflow device is required on the water service line. Fire Department Connections (FDC) must be remote and locations to be approved by the Building Official and Fire Chief. 110. The DOC shall be placed inside the building or adjacent to the building. Other locations for the DOC shall be approved by the Director or Community Development. 111 . Each parcel shall have separate water meters. 112. Lots using fire sprinklers shall have individual service connections. If the units are to be fire sprinkled, a fire sprinkler engineer shall determine the size of the water meters. Item 9.b. - Page 44 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 23 113. Existing water services to be abandoned shall be properly abandoned and capped at the main per the requirements of the Public Works Director. 114. Unpermitted fill was placed at the northwest of the property. This fill will have to be removed or provide certifications from a Civil Engineer. SEWER 115. The applicant shall extend the sewer main to adequately serve the project across the property frontage. All new sewer mains shall be a minimum diameter of 8". 116. All sewer laterals within the public right-of-way must have a minimum slope of 2%. 117. Existing sewer laterals to be abandoned shall be properly abandoned and capped at the main per the requirements of the Public Works Director. 118. Each parcel shall be provided a separate sewer lateral. Laterals shall be sized for the appropriate use, minimum 4". 119. All sewer mains or laterals crossing or parallel to public water facilities shall be constructed in accordance with City standards. 120. Obtain approval from the South County Sanitation District for the development's impact to District facilities prior to permit issuance. 121. Obtain approval from the South County Sanitation District prior to relocation of any District facilities. 122. The developer shall evaluate the capacity of sewer lift station #7 to take the additional flow of the development. The developer shall amend the Berry Gardens HOA agreement for maintenance of sewer lift station #7. PUBLIC UTILITIES 123. The developer shall comply with Development Code Section 16.68.050: All projects that involve the addition of over 100 square feet of habitable space shall be required to place service connections underground -existing and proposed utilities. 124. Prior to approving any building permit within the project for occupancy, all public utilities shall be operational. 125. Public Improvement plans/Final Map/Parcel Map shall be submitted to the public utility companies for review and approval. Utility comments shall be forwarded to the Director of Public Works for approval. Item 9.b. - Page 45 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 24 126. Street lights shall be placed 200' -250' apart on streets 40' or less in width. On streets greater than 40' in width, a street lighting plan shall be designed and submitted to the Community Development Director for approval. FEES AND BONDS FOR ALL CITY DEPARTMENTS The applicant shall pay all applicable City fees, including the following: 127. FEES TO BE PAID PRIOR TO PLAN SUBMITTAL a. Map check fee for Tract Map. b. Map check fee for Parcel Map. c. Plan check for grading plans. (Based on an approved earthwork estimate) d. Plan check for improvement plans. (Based on an approved construction cost estimate) e. Permit Fee for grading plans. (Based on an approved earthwork estimate) f. Inspection Fee of subdivision or public works construction plans. (Based on an approved construction cost estimate) g. Plan Review Fee (Based on the current Building Division fee schedule) 128. FEES TO BE PAID PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT a. Water Neutralization fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, involving water connection or enlargement of an existing connection. b. Water Distribution fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, in accordance with Municipal Code Section 13.04.030. c. Water Meter charge to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, in accordance with Municipal Code 6-7.22. d. Water Availability charge, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, in accordance with -(not correct). e. Traffic Impact fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, in accordance with Ord. 461 C.S., Res.3021. - f. Traffic Signalization fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, in accordance with Ord. 346 C.S., Res. 1955. g. Sewer Connection fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, in accordance with Municipal Item 9.b. - Page 46 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 25 Code Section 13.12.190. h. South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District Connection fee in accordance with Municipal Code Section 13.12.180. i. Drainage fee, as required by the area drainage plan for the area being developed. j. Park Development fee, the developer shall pay the current parks development fee for each unit approved for construction (credit shall be provided for existing houses), to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance in accordance with Ord. 313 C.S. k. Construction Tax,'the applicant shall pay a construction tax pursuant to Section 3-3.501 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code. I. Alarm Fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of development in accordance with Ord. 435 C.S. m. Strong Motion Instrumentation Program (SMIP) Fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of development in accordance with State mandate. n. Building Permit Fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of development in accordance with Title 8 of the Municipal Code. 129. FEES TO BE PAID OR LAND DEDICATED PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP/PARCEL MAP a. Park Development fee, the developer shall pay the current park development fee, and/or donate land in-lieu of, for each lot approved, in accordance with City Ordinance 313 C.S. b. Park Dedication, the developer shall dedicate, in accordance with City Ordinance 313 C.S., land for park purposes. c. Park Improvement fee, the developer shall pay the current park improvement fee, for each lot approved, in accordance with City Ordinance 313 C.S. 130. Preliminary Title Report, a current preliminary title report shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works prior to checking the map. A current subdivision guarantee shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works prior to recording the Map. BONDING SURETY 131. Erosion Control, prior to issuance of the grading or building permit, all new residential construction requires posting of a $1,200.00 performance bond for erosion control and damage to the public right-of-way. This bond is refundable upon successful completion of the work, less expenses incurred by the City in maintaining and/or restoring the site. Item 9.b. - Page 47 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 26 132. The applicant shall provide bonds or other financial security for the following. All bonds or security shall be in a form acceptable to the City, and shall be provided prior to recording of the map, unless noted otherwise. The minimum term for Improvement securities shall be equal to the term of the subdivision agreement. 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. 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. Monumentation, 100% of the estimated cost of setting survey monuments. e. Tax Certificate, In accordance with Section 9-15.130 of the Development Code, 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 f. Accessory Structures, the applicant shall remove or bond for removal of all accessory structures not sharing a parcel with a residence. g. Garages, the applicant shall construct, or bond for construction of a two-car garage and driveway for the existing house on lot __ _ h. Curb cuts, the applicant shall construct or bond for construction of individual curb cuts and paved driveways for parcels. POLICE DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS 133. Prior to issuance of building permit, applicant to submit exterior lighting plan for Police Department approval. 134. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall post handicapped parking, per Police Department requirements. 135. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall install a burglary [or robbery] alarm system on commercial buildings per Police Department guidelines, and pay the Police Department alarm permit application fee of ($94.00). Annual renewal fee is $31.00. 136. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, for any parking lots available to the public located on private lots, the developer shall post private property "No Parking" signs in accordance with the handout available from the Police Department. Item 9.b. - Page 48 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 27 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE CONDITIONS 137. If the central drive proceeds, the applicant shall utilize open fencing· or other barriers adjacent to the drive aisle to control pedestrian access, include additional elements to slow traffic and designate areas for pedestrians to cross. 138. Consider protecting condominium parking with special designations, through structural means or signage. 139. Include additional bike racks on the commercial development to accommodate additional bicyclists. 140. Consider pursuing a green roof pilot project on the trash enclosures. PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITIONS 141. A crosswalk across South Courtland Street shall be included near the entrance to Subarea 3b. 142. The project shall include LED lighting in parking lot lights, bollard lights, and as feasible on building lights. 143. Commercial vehicles shall be restricted from entering Subarea 3a from East Grand Avenue. 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 111-1: On-road diesel vehicles shall comply with Section 2485 of Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations. This regulation limits idling from diesel- fueled commerdal motor vehicles with gross vehicular weight ratings of more than 10,000 pounds and licensed for operation on highways. It applies to California and non-California based vehicles. In general the regulation specifies that drivers of said vehicles: • Shall not idle the vehicle's primary diesel engine for greater than 5 minutes at any location. Item 9.b. - Page 49 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 28 • Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system (APS) to power a heater, air conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on that vehicle during sleeping or resting in a sleeper berth for greater that 5 minutes at any location when within 1,000 feet of a restricted area. MM 111-2: Off-road diesel equipment shall comply with the 5 minute idling restriction identified in Section 2449(d)(2) of the California Air Resources Board's In-Use Off-Road Diesel regulation. MM 111-3: Signs must be posted in the designated queuing areas and job sites to remind drivers and operators of the State's 5 minute idling limit. MM 111-4: The project applicant shall comply with these more restrictive requirements to minimize impacts to nearby sensitive receptors (adjacent residential development): • Staging a queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors; · • Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors shall not be permitted; • Use of alternative fueled equipment is recommended; and • Signs that specify no idling areas must be posted and. enforced at the site. MM 111-5: The project shall implement the following mitigation measures to manage fugitive dust emissions such that they do not exceed the APCD's 20% opacity limit (APCD Rule 401) or prompt nuisance violations (APCD Rule 402): • Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible; • Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site and from exceeding the APCD's limit of 20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in any 60 minute period. Increased watering frequency would be required when wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed (non-potable) water should be used whenever possible; • All dirt stock pile areas should be sprayed daily and covered with tarps or other dust barriers as needed; • 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; • Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading should be shown with a fast germinating, non-invasive, grass seed and watered until vegetation is established; • All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation should be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD; Item 9.b. - Page 50 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 29 • All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed as soon as possible. In addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used; • Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site; • All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials 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 Section 23'114; • Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site; • Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers shall be used with reclaimed water should be used where feasible. Roads shall be pre-wetted prior to sweeping when feasible; • A listing of all required mitigation measures should be included on grading and building plans; and, • The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below the APCD's limit of 20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in any 60 minute period. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork or demolition. MM 111-6: Prior to the start of the project, the applicant shall obtain all necessary permits for equipment 'to be used during construction by contacting the APCD Engineering Division at (805) 781-5912. MM 111-7: Prior to any grading activities, the project sponsor 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 Air Resource Board (ARB) Air Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) for Construction, Grading, Quarrying and Surface Mining Operations. MM 111-8: Burning of vegetative material on the development site shall be prohibited. MM 111-9: Should hydrocarbon-contaminated soil be encountered during construction activities, the APCD shall be notified within forty-eight (48) hours of such contaminated soil being discovered to determine if an APCD permit is Item 9.b. - Page 51 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 30 required. In additioh, the following measures shall be implemented immediately after contaminated soil is discovered: • Covers on storage piles shall be maintained in place at all times in areas not actively involved in soil addition or removal. • Contaminated soil shall be covered with at least six (6) inches of packed, uncontaminated soil or other TPH -non-permeable barrier such as plastic tarp. No headspace shall be allowed where vapors could accumulate. • Covered piles shall be designed in such a way as to eliminate erosion due to wind or water. No openings in the covers are permitted. • During soil excavation, odors shall not be evident to such a degree as to cause a public nuisance. • Clean soil must be segregated from contaminated soil. MM 111-10: Operation of any commercial building with a loading area shall include the establishment of a 'no idle' zone for diesel-powered delivery vehicles. Vehicle idling shall be minimized to the maximum extent feasible using the following techniques: • Each delivery vehicle's engine shall be shut off immediately after arrival in the loading dock or loading area, unless the vehicle is actively maneuvering. • The scheduling of deliveries shall be staggered to the maximum extent feasible. • Vehicle operators shall be made aware of the 'no idle' zone, including notification by letter to all delivery companies. • Prominently lettered signs shall be posted in the receiving dock area to remind drivers to shut off their engines. • Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors is not permitted. • Use of alternative-fueled vehicles is recommended whenever possible. • Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors. Responsible Party: Monitoring Agenc~: Timing: Developer City of Arroyo Grande __: Public Works Dept., Building Division, Engineering Division Prior to issuance of Grading Permit and during construction MM V-1: Any areas where native (non-stockpiled) soil will be disturbed by construction activities (grading, footings, utilities, etc) shall first be inspected by a qualified archeologist to determine if any cultural resources are pres_ent. Prior to construction activities and if cultural resources are present, a phase two archeological study shall be conducted by a qualified archeologist and further mitigation measures identified and implemented. Item 9.b. - Page 52 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 31 Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Developer City of Arroyo Grande -Engineering Division; Public Works Department Prior to issuance of a grading permit MM V-2: 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 res0urces 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-3: 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. Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Developer City of Arroyo Grande -Engineering Division; Public Works Department Prior to issuance of a grading permit and during grading activities MM Vl-1: Prior to grading permit issuance, the project proponent shall submit a revised geotechnical study or addendum to the original study that either states that all conclusions and recommendations in the original report are valid or, if the original conclusions and recommendations are not valid, includes updated conclusions and recommendations where necessary. MM Vl-2: All construction plans shall incorporate the recommendations of and Item 9.b. - Page 53 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 32 updated geotechnical study based on the study prepared for the project by GSI Soils Inc. dated April 2006. Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Developer City of Arroyo Grande -Engineering Division; Public Works Department Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit MM Vll-1: All construction plans shall reflect the following GHG-reducing measures where applicable. Prior to issuance of building permits, the project sponsor 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. • 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. • ~tilize low energy street lights (i.e. sodiu'm). • 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. Item 9.b. - Page 54 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 33 • Eliminate high water consumption landscape (e.g., plants and lawns) in residential design. Use native plants that d-o 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. Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Developer City of Arroyo Grande -CDD; Building Division; APCD Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit or Building Permit MM IX-1: The following BMPs shall be incorporated into the project: • Roof Downspout System. Direct roof drains to pervious areas to allow infiltration prior to discharging to water bodies or the municipal storm drain system. • 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 storm drain inlets with "No Dumping -Drains to Ocean" to alert the public to the destination of stormwater arid to prevent direct discharge of pollutants into the storm drain. - • Vehicle/Eauioment Cleaning. Commercial/industrial facilities or multi- family residential developments of 50 units or greater should either provide a covered, bermed area for washing activities or discourage vehicle/equipment washing by removing hose bibs and installing signs prohibiting such uses. Vehicle/equipment washing areas shall be paved designed to prevent run-on or run off from the area, and plumbed to drain to the sanitary sewer. • Car Washing. Commercial car wash facilities shall be designed and operated such that no runoff from the facility is discharged to the storm drain system. Wastewater from the facility shall discharge to the sanitary sewer or wastewater reclamation system. Item 9.b. - Page 55 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 34 • Common Area Litter Control. Implement trash management and litter control for commercial and industrial projects or large-scale residential developments to prevent litter and debris from being carried to water bodies or the storm drain system. • Food Service Facilities. Design food service facilities (including restaurants and grocery stores) 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 should be large enough to clean the largest mat or piece of equipment to be cleaned. • Refuse Areas. Trash compactors, enclosures and dumpster areas should 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. • Loading Dock Controls. Design loading docks to be covered, surrounded by berms or curbs, or constructed to prevent drainage onto or from the area. Position roof downspouts to direct stormwater away from the loading area. Water from loading dock areas shall be drained to the sanitary sewer, or diverted and collected for ultimate discharge to the sanitary sewer. Door skirts between the trailers and the building should be installed to prevent exposure of loading activities to rain. • 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 Item 9.b. - Page 56 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 35 and collected to prevent entry into the storm drain system. Wash water containing any cleaning agent or degreaser should be collected and discharged to the sanitary sewer. Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Developer City of Arroyo Grande -COD; Engineering Division; Building Division Prior to issuance of a Building Permit MM Xll-1: All store deliveries shall be restricted to between the hours of 7:00 AM to 10:00 PM, and the current parking limitations on either side of South Courtland Street shall be maintained. MM Xll-2: Any residential structures that would have a direct line of sight to store delivery areas shall include acoustical treatment to reduce exterior noise levels by thirty (30) decibels, the cost of which shall be borne by the developers. MM Xll-3: Delivery truck drivers shall be instructed to turn off diesel engines when trucks are parked or being unloaded. Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Developer City of Arroyo Grande -COD; Engineering Division; Building Division Prior to issuance of a Building Permit MM XIV-1: The applicant shall pay the mandated Lucia Mar Unified School District impact fee. Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Developer City of Arroyo Grande -Building Division Prior to issuance of a Building Permit MM XVl-1: For the intersection of Brisco Road and East Grand Avenue, the applicant shall restripe the westbound approach to include a dedicated westbound right turn lane, which will require two 11' travel lanes and a 1 O' turn lane. MM XVl-2: For the intersection of Oak Park Boulevard and El Camino Real, the applicant shall: • Restripe the westbound left turn lane as a shared left/through lane; • Restripe the westbound shared through-right lane to a dedicated right turn lane; • Provide overlap phasing for the westbound right turn movement; and • Provide overlap phasing for the eastbound right turn movement. Item 9.b. - Page 57 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 36 Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Developer City of Arroyo Grande -COD; Engineering Division; Public Works Department Prior to issuance of a Building Permit Item 9.b. - Page 58 EXHIBIT B NOTICE OF DETERMINATION To: D Office of Planning and Research 1400 Tenth Street From: City Of Arroyo Grande Sacramento, CA 95814 IZI County Clerk of the Board ·of Supervisors County of San Luis Obispo . 1144 Monterey Street, Suite C San Luis Obispo, CA 93408 PROJECT TITLE AND NUMBER: 300 East Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 General Plan Amendment 14-002, Specific Plan Amendment 14-001, Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14-001 and Conditional Use Permit 14-009 PROJECT APPLICANT: TELEPHONE NUMBER: MFI Limited (805) 595-5400 735. Tank Farm Road, Ste. 240, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 and NKT Commercial {805) 541-9004 684 HiQuera Street, Ste. B, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 PROJECT LOCATION: Southwest corner of East Grand Avenue and South Courtland Street; Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Amendment to the Arroyo Grande General Plan Land Use Element, the Berry Gardens Specific Plan and construction of 41 single-family residences, 2 commercial structures, and 4 condominium units. LEAD AGENCY CONTACT PERSON: TELEPHONE NUMBER: Matthew Downing, Assistant Planner (805) 473-5420 STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER (if applicable): N/A This is to advise that the City of Arroyo Grande City Council approved the above-described project on December 9, 2014 and made the following determinations: D D A NeRative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions for CEQ. , . An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions for CEQA. A Categorical Exemption per CEQA Guidelines Mitigation measures XX were _were not made a condition of project approval. The project, in its approved form, __ will XX will not have a significant effect on the environment. A statement of overriding considerations_ was XX was not adopted for this project. A copy of the project approval may be examined at the City of Arroyo Grande, 300 East Branch Street, Arroyo Grande, CA 93420. SIGNATURE: DATE RECEIVED FOR FILING: December 10, 2014 TITLE: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DATE: December 10, 2014 Item 9.b. - Page 59 EXHIBIT "C" LUS-10.1 Promote development of a high intensity, mixed-use, pedestrian activity node centered on the Courtland Street/East Grand Avenue intersection as a priority example of revitalization of this corridor segment known as Gateway. Within the specific plan area, small lot single-family detached housing may be allowed at multi-family densities if integrated with and located behind a primary, distinctive, and attractive commercial/mixed use gateway component. Item 9.b. - Page 60 EXHIBIT "D" Berry Gardens Specific Plan Amendment -Subareas 3a and 3b Purpose and Objectives The purpose and objectives for Subareas 3a and 3b of the Berry Gardens Specific Plan include the following: a. Implement the goals, objectives, and policies of the City of Arroyo Grande's General Plan; b. Promote high-quality mixed-use commercial/retail development within the City of Arroyo Grande's Gateway Mixed-Use District; c. Increase the City of Arroyo Grande's supply of entry-level/workforce housing stock; and d. Produce a functional, aesthetically pleasing project that will serve as a landmark in the City of Arroyo Grande's western gateway and complete build-out of the Berry Gardens Specific Plan. Subareas Defined Subarea 3a and 3b consists of APN 077-131-052 and APN 077-131-054 (reference Exhibit 3-4.A). Land Use Designations and Property Development Standards Subarea 3a -Mixed-Use Commercial Subarea 3a provides for mixed-use commercial/retail development of approximately 1.04 acres. Unless otherwise specified in this Specific Plan, allowed uses shall be consistent with those allowed within the Gateway Mixed-Use (GMU) zoning district, subject to the same level of review as required by Municipal Code Section 16.36.030. All development within Subarea 3a shall conform to the following standards: 1. Minimum Front Yard Setback (East Grand Ave): shall be a minimum of 0-5', consistent with the Design Guidelines and Standards for Mixed-Use Districts. The front yard is that side which is closest to East Grand Avenue (reference Exhibit 3-4.B). 2. Minimum Street Side Yard Setback {Courtland Street): shall be a minimum of 0-5'. The street yard is that side which is closest to Courtland Street (reference Exhibit 3-4.B). 3. Minimum Interior Side Yard Setback {City Limit Line): shall be a minimum of 0-5'. The interior side yard is that side which is closest to the City Limit Line (reference Exhibit 3-4.B). 4. Minimum Rear Yard Setback (along subarea 3b): the primary commercial buildings shall be a minimum of 15'. The rear yard is that side which is closest to Subarea 3b (reference Exhibit 3-4.B). 5. Maximum Lot Coverage: shall be 50%, inclusive of all enclosed structures. 6. Maximum Floor Area Ratio {FAR): shall be 1.5, inclusive of total floor area. 7. Maximum Building Height: shall be 35'. Total height including any architectural features shall not exceed 40'. 8. Parking: shall be provided at the ratio of one (1) space for every 250 square-feet of commercial building area, one (1) designated parking space for each residential unit, and (1) shared parking Item 9.b. - Page 61 space for each residential unit. The shared spaces will be shared with the adjacent commercial uses. 9. Prohibited Uses: the following uses shall be prohibited in Subarea 3, due to the proximity to residential uses: • Standalone Coffee Roasters; • Nail Salons; • Dry-cleaners; • Gasoline stations; • Furniture refurbishing I refinishing; • Any use involving the application of spray paint. 10. Lighting: lighting in subarea 3a shall be shielded to minimize overflow of light into the adjacent residential neighborhood of subarea 3b. 11. Signage. Up to one wall sign per building face. Total area for each tenant's building sign on each building face shall not exceed 1 Yz sf of sign area for each linear foot of building frontage for the business. Consistent with the Design Guidelines and Standards for Mixed Use Districts, additional awning and hanging signs are encouraged to reflect City Character and pedestrian scale with a maximum of one awning or hanging sign per building face. Signs are subject to discretionary review and approval. Subarea 3b -Residential Subarea 3b provides for residential development of approximately 3.33 acres as part of a horizontal mixed-use development. Except as otherwise specified below, allowed residential uses shall be consistent with those allowed within the Gateway Mixed-Use (GMU) zoning district, subject to the same level of review as required by Municipal Code Section 16.36.030. All development within Subarea 3b shall conform to the following standards: 1. Permitted Uses: in addition to the residential uses identified for the GMU district in Municipal Code Section 16.36.030, single-family detached housing shall be allowed in a horizontal mixed- use arrangement with the single-family detached development located behind a primary, distinctive, and attractive commercial/mixed-use development and at a minimum density of 15 units per acre. 2. Maximum Density: shall be a maximum of 20 units per acre. 3. Minimum Lot Size: shall be 2,000 square-feet. No subdivision resulting in lots less than this minimum size shall be allowed. 4. Project Boundary Setbacks: a. Minimum Project Front Yard Setback (Courtland Street): shall be a minimum of 10'. The front yard is that side which is closest to Courtland Street (reference Exhibit 3-4.B). b. Minimum Project Interior Side Yard Setback (between Subarea 3a commercial and 3b residential; between Subareas 3b and 4): shall be a minimum of 10' (reference Exhibit 3- 4.B). 2 Item 9.b. - Page 62 c. Minimum Project Rear Yard Setback (City Limit Line): shall be a minimum of 10'. The rear yard of the property is that side which is closest to the City Limit Line (reference Exhibit 3-4.B). 5. Interior Yard Setbacks: a. Interior street setback: shall be a minimum of 2' b. Courtyard/common open space area setback: shall be a minimum of 8' c. Side yard setbacks: shall be a minimum of 4' 6. Maximum Lot Coverage: shall be 65%, inclusive of all enclosed structures. 7. Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR): shall be 1.25, inclusive of total floor area. 8. Maximum Building Height: shall be 35' or two (2) stories, whichever is less. Total height including any appurtenances shall not exceed 40'. 9. Parking: 2 spaces shall be provided per unit within an enclosed garage and guest spaces shall be provided at a ratio of 0.5 per unit. A maximum of two of the guest parking spaces may be provided in driveways. 10. Minimum Open Space for Subarea 3b: shall be 35%. 11. Signage. Shall comply with Municipal Code Section 16.60.040-A, Subsections A.l (Single-family neighborhood identification) and be subject to discretionary review and approval. 12. Future Modifications: Property owners desiring modifications to individual residences shall be required to obtain a Minor Use Permit-Plot Plan Review through the Community Development Department. The applicant shall provide proof of design approval by the development's Homeowners' Association prior before consideration by the Community Development Department. East Grand Avenue Frontage Development of Subarea 3 shall implement objectives of the General Plan, Design Guidelines and Standards for Mixed-Use Districts, and the project's fair share of the recommendations in the Grand Avenue Enhancement Plan relating to streetscape character along the East Grand Avenue frontage. Green Building and Energy Efficiency All new development shall be accompanied by a summary outlining energy use calculations, design features and/or operational measures that exceed minimum standards in order to make the development more 'green' and energy efficient. Access and Circulation 1. Vehicular Access. Vehicular access will be from East Grand Avenue to Courtland Street. 2. Emergency Access. An emergency access driveway will connect Subareas 3b and 4. The design of which shall be subject to Fire Department approval. Vehicular access to the driveway may be optionally restricted to emergency vehicles only through the use of bollards, a gate, or other mechanism approved by the Fire Chief. 3 Item 9.b. - Page 63 3. Fire Access. Shall be provided per the strict application of the California Fire Code and its appendices, as approved by the Fire Chief. 4. Pedestrian Connections. Sidewalks shall be provided along East Grand Avenue and Courtland Street with connections to interior of the site. A pedestrian path connecting subareas 3a and 3b shall be required to encourage interaction between the two subareas. A pedestrian path shall also be provided in Subarea 3b through the neighborhood green. Sidewalks are not required adjacent to the private drive. 5. Courtland Street. Development of each Subarea shall include widening of Courtland Street to its ultimate width along that Subarea's frontage. The southwestern curb return at East Grand Avenue and Courtland Street shall be rebuilt as a part of the Courtland Street widening. 6. Bicycle Lanes. Shall be provided on Courtland Street along the project frontage. Street Trees and Landscaping Trees shall be provided along Courtland Street and East Grand Avenue within 10' of curb edge where feasible. Internal landscaping for each Subarea shall be subject to discretionary review and approval and should include drought-resistant plants and low impact development techniques. Fences and Walls Interior fences and walls shall be limited to 6' in height. To accommodate compact higher density development, 6' fence may be combined with an 18 inches retaining wall (exposed wall height) on interior lots. Retaining walls (exposed wall height) shall be limited to 6' in height with discretionary approval. Fencing above retaining walls is allowed up to 6' in height (maximum of 12' combined fence and wall height) when located adjacent to commercial (lots 3-9 and 43) and/or along western edge of property (lots 34- 43) to buffer from large wall expanses of existing buildings. Perimeter fencing or walls along the East Grand Avenue and Courtland Street frontages shall be limited to 3' in height unless the portion over 3', up to 6', is 90% light emitting, or combined with a raised planter . All fences and walls shall be subject to discretionary review. Storm Drainage and Water Quality Facilities Each drainage subarea shall incorporate post-construction storm water management measures consistent with Regional Water Quality Control Board standards. Project water quality measures shall be provided on-site and include low-impact design features such as disconnected downspouts, rain gardens and/or other measures promoting storm water infiltration through surface and/or sub-surface infiltration basins. Mitigation of post-development peak storm water run-off shall be directed to the east, across Courtland Street to the Poplar Basin, which was designed and built to accommodate development of the Subareas. 4 Item 9.b. - Page 64 Architectural Design Guidelines Subarea 3a 1. Buildings. No specific architectural theme is required; however all buildings within the Subarea 3a shall reflect a mixed-use commercial character consistent with the Gateway Mixed-Use District objectives. 2. Site Design. Site design shall include plazas or paseos and contribute to well defined and walkable street frontage. Buildings should line East Grand Avenue with parking located on the side and/or rear of building. 3. Parking. Parking within Subarea 3a shall be located away from East Grand Avenue and shared by multiple owners/uses. Subarea 3b 1. Buildings. No specific architectural theme is required; however all buildings within the Subarea 3b shall reflect a residential character and be compatible with the Berry Gardens Neighborhood. Phasing of Development The two Subareas and/or properties within the Subareas may be developed concurrently or separately, provided that all applicable requirements are met (emergency access, etc.). Developers will enter into a development agreement or similar binding agreement, financing or other leverage mechanism with the City to ensure the commercial parcel will be developed prior to the residential or within a reasonably sufficient timeframe. 5 Item 9.b. - Page 65 PR O JECT DIRECT ORY: MPUCANI: AtCHITECT: l'IOJECT AOOIUS: HICK IOMrnNS Nt..fC..::1,.111.1EPCIAl 684HIGUEPASTREET,<;UITEP. SAlilUr.Cl!GP<'.CA 934'JI AHOIEW MANGANO MFILIHllEO 735 lANI.. f.t.flM ~(.·AD, ~1 llf :•O SANlUt':·'l"f:PC> Clo '>)401 HM DfStGH QIOUI' 17to5UICUERASrPEFl'.SVlrE 1c:; ~AN wt: ce-t:ro c" 13401 CC!lTA.CT D"RN CA8PAL PHCNE !1!051·5.0·lr-;-1 El'....,.ll: 0 fCA&R . .t.t~lllCr.'l>ESION.COM Al'N NUMIEl3: COLJ~llA.N D SI ANO C:.l<.\NO AVE Al!~f VO m:.\NDE. CA 9?-l~'ll 017.131 ... );52 0;7.131 ... 15.i 11-!f C(.\IPTU.110 ANO G~A"['> pl>r_•JH:l ~r1e IS WCAIED Wlll-'U HI[ '.';E.~rEliN (j,t.lf,';"' ~EG~ .. .flll ltl IHE(.111 Of Alili'V10 Cl!4.t<DE ALC:NG CASI c~.i.rm 4\IEN ·E. II'( rli..: tECI TVM Pf10r', ~~f:; ". OEVhOP ,. MIOUEn l"ESl:Oll!'O SllE lCC,t.rro ACP~ rwo PAPCELS Wf'~••I lttE E~rr•io MPRt GMCEll ~rECtlC Pl.AN MEA. 11M: verm.-:::1oL 1.WEM~E 6!.'U.:11 :'S fr.JNT CNTC EAST Gf(A,..C• A\IENIJE wrH RESIOEIHl>l UtllT~ LOCATED MO\'E. Ami:ACTr.fE SPEfTSCAH TPEAltA.ENIS MID r_\lnD(l\°:11 H.AlA ~PACES l:'>EFlllE HIE :;!l~EEI LEVEL f.1Jll)l11G USE~ MIO Ellltr::E PEOE'iT~IArl AClMIY. AN ... rm"lllL Pt:OESllllAli PA!tl'WAY CON"-IF.CTS IHE ML>CED· USE C.C'M\\E.~CIAL r-c·•WOtl or THE l'RC.·JECT SOLl!H TC THE PE:;DENTIAL P<.~lillO!I OPENINC:-UP orno A CENIR>-L NEiUHf.Ol!l-+000 C:.l!EEN 1H4.l ~ ,t.T THE HE/IPT OF THE <.flf. lfiPEE AND FO•JI( BEOROC M DET>-CHED TC•WNHC•ME UtJll~ ARE l'ICLUDED THAI Wll ~fRVE A 'llDEllANOE (•F BmH-1.EVEl AND W~""::RIJ'<WCF HOU$1NG llEEOS WITHIN !Hf 4.RRC'•·':: C.PAf'IDE !:''0t.IMIJNllY MIXED·UU COMMEICIAl: ll•E t.'0'[['-11$ECC•f.V,'£RClALSHt: WILL i:o·t~rl OF1..:1~E !11 (•"-IE...:foRY CC'f",\,'.t:RCll·l M't;.Dl"4C, -"1<0 OllE {I) h'1>;,; .. ~KR' Ml•ED·lr.E 8l'li.[ofNC, TC•lll.UNG .t.rrROXIU.AlElY 15,0C() SF THE f<.'UR /CJ J.,•JXE('-ll E ~f:i[)Nll.t..L CC,..[>''.WJ#'llll#-.\ uun:' PAr-GE IN SIZE FPOM900-I '.XX'ISO/Fl. IESIOfHTIAl: IHE l'E.:[)EtlT\.t.t llfltTS Will C.OWISl ('F H\."E (5) uNn nr·E:; PAl~GU;'.; IN SllE FPCM l.70C'-21!i0 Sf-. /,ll li'ESIOENllAL LINllS Will M l\'/(~1CP.f WllH ATTACHED!\':(). CA~ CAl!AC·ES THE APCHITECfURAL :TILE F0~ All PE l('ENTIAl (IN fT~ Wilt M' CCNTF.MPOl1AR't, · ,'.-1[)..CEt/IUP.I" t.IC'DERN'" Courtland & PROJECT STATISTICS : .w~EO·V.'.".E CGMl-1£/?CIAL MAX ALLOWED llflGHT: l5 FT [AN( APCH. FEAJllRESSH~LL flOI E:":CEEO 40 J l'tOl'OUO HBGHT: JS FT IANY ARCH. FEAltlPE~ :i"iALL NOT i:xcer:o •O I MAX ALl OWt:O lOl COVEkAGE: ~ "Ol'OSfO COV: 2.-.. M.A Xf.A.I.· l.5 l'tol'OSED f.A ... : V.lJ LOT sue 1.o.t ... Cl!E'ij4~.Jtl2SFJ l'IO,OSfO DENSITY: r•1 2 eE-crlOOM UNIT~ • J Du f:ESIOCIJTIAL MAX AlLOWEO HEIGH T: lS FT. (01! TWO [ZJ SIC•l!ESJ l'IOl'OSEO HBGH T: 35FT.(01!1W•1 {2] $10PIESI MAX AllOWEO LOl C0\1£RA.Gt: &5,_ 'IOl'OSEO C::OV: VMIE~ (<MAX MLC#EO LOT COVEll ... GEJ M.AXf.A.L: l'tol'OUO f.A..~ MA X. ALIOWED Df:NSITY: lOlSIU: MA X DW!lllNG. UNITS: l'I Ol'OUD Df:HllTY· 1.~S VAPES I~ MAI( Allt""::WEO f .t. P.j 200U/AC 3.33ACF.B 11•5.05..tSf) 3.33'15. 500') j.41J 3,.NO" ~EDF'CC•MUlnrs. •1 Q!J PARKING CAlC UlATIO NS: MU COM!.lfBCIAL DEVEL opMENT AREA· MU COMMERCIAL PARKI~ REQUIRED' I SPACE PER 250 SO/FTOf GROSS FLOOR AREA (1 1 000 ~QlfT) 4-4 SF¥.CES 2 SPACES PER UNIT !<4 IAlll TSJ • 8 SP ... CES Q S SPACES PfB 5 Ltlli..11 \..M!St • Q SpACES TOTAL PARKJNQ REQUIRED: 52 SPACES MU COMMERCIAL AARKINQ PROVIDED 1 SPACE PER 250 SQIFT OF GROSS FLOORAREA\11 OOOsO/Fn 53 SPACES 2 SPACES PER LNT (A UNI TS)• 8 SPACES 05 SP"'CfS PfB :i LffTS 14 I.HTS\• Q SPACES TOTAL FYJ&.ING PAO\ltOED 111 Sf¥.CES RESIOENTlAL PA.Pio.ING REOlARED· 2 SPACES PER UNIT (ENCLOSED GARJ,GE) • 82 S~CES Q 5 GUEST Sf'ACES PER l.!U • 2Q SPACES TOTAL RESIDENTIAL PARt<ING REQUIRED• 102 SPACES RESIDENTIAL PARKll-Kl PROVIDED· 2 SPACES PER UNIT (ENCLOSED GARAGE)• ll2 SPACES P5G\lfSTSPACf<',PfBltU• ?OSPACES TOTALRESJDErrnAL PARY.ltlG PROVIDED• 102 SPACES REQUIRED MOTORCYCLE SPACES-1111.NCIPAL CODE 16.56.o&O I OEStGNATED MOlOACYCLE PARKING ,t.REA FOR USES REOl..IRINO MORE lHAN ~AVTO SPACES. MOTORCYCU: Pl'.RKll-Kl AREAS REQUIRED SHALL COUl'JT TOY'.IAROS Fl.1..FILUNO AUTO PMYING $PACES AT A RATE OF ONE PAPt<JNG SPACE PER MOTORCYCLE PARKING AREA. REQUIRED FOR MIKED-USE COMME.PCIAL I MOlOPCYClE PARKING AREA PROPOSED FOR MIXED-USE COMMERCIAL I MOTORCYCLE PARIOt"° AREA REQUIRED BIC'l'CLE S~CES -MU,...CIPAL COO€ 16,56, IS0.2 5% OF REOUIRED AUTO SPACES. REQUIRED FOR MI XED-USE COMMERCIAL 3 TOTAL BICYCLE SPACE& PROPOSED FOR l.f)!.ED-IJ$E COWAERClAl 3 TOTAL BICYCLE SPACES Grand COVER SHEET DATE: December9, 2014 #1014030 CITY COUNC I L SUBM ITTAL EXHIBIT E SHEET INDEX Tl COVER SHEET A I EX ISTING SITE SURVEY A2 ARCH ITECTURAL SITE PLAI~ A3 SITE SECTIONS CI GRADING AND DRA INAGE PLAN C2 SITE PLAN C3 VES TI NG TENTATIVE MAP C4 UTILITY PLA I~ L l COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN L2 COMMUNITY COMMON L3 COtlCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN L4 PLANT MATER IAL L5 PLANT MATERIAL A4 COMMERCIAL PLANS A5 COMMERCIAL PERSPECTIVES A6 COMMERCIAL PERSPECITVES A7 COMMERCIAL ELEVATIONS AS PLAZA PERSPEC TI VE A 9 ALTERNA T/VE PLAZA A 10 COMM. COLOR+ MATERIAL A 11 TYP ICAL SITE PLANS + PERSPECT IVE A 12 RES IDENT/AL PLAl<I A 13 RESIDENT/AL PLAN 2 A 14 RES IDENT/AL PLAN 3 A 15 RES IDENT/AL PLAN 4 A 16 RES IDENT/AL PLAN 5 A 17 RES. COLORS AND MATERIALS A 18 RES . COLORS AND MATERIALS A 19 RES. COLORS AND MATERIALS EX I COMMERCIAL SITE EXH IBITS EX2 RES IDENT/AL SITE EXHIBITS EX3 RES IDENT IAL SITE EXHIB IT S EX4 SITE LI GHTING EXH IBIT EX5 PLAY STRUCTURE EXH IBIT VICINIT Y MAP f.S rrm group &ii Tl creating env ironmenh people enjoy., Item 9.b. - Page 66 I I I I :~~~-~~~ I I I I I I ------=:,. .C~o/ ----= ---" :' \:" "" I I I I I I I I --}_[ \ I I ~------··) DOC ~EO~~E~E~E€~~~~~C~t'6~SING IJOT + PART <O <D CI GRAPHIC SCALE ~u t IN FEET } i SCALE~ 1 '•Yi IZ~~)O )hf'l'll) SCALE: 1 ·,, .,o· 11z..1~shu!! SYMBOL LEGEND; -•-rt:l'oCCll!'<C c:::I::I::I:I:ll!Cl~lU;.I. == :::_= ~ PC;H~ =!:!==~: C-=='Olli.~··~ l.'ll0 : !>"TOl!lo'OIUo?l""-.....U: am 'It <l> • ,,., .. "' .__. SURJEYOR 0 S STATEMENT: 11"'5-~•nn.cl~f'JT 51.#"¥.(J~!l#ICSAICQLW.nOlolS ... WQl'W<llOO......:>laM•< SURVEYOR'S NOTES: ~~~~~~~~~~ 2 OO.l~IH£~11Ut~nf'~:IV'l'l.IT'C'I~ flll'"IWC~•l>f:rntll'<Ol1141'>\l.Hl'lll'rll~W.T[ ~~ISOllf.SIOOll'>O • ....ic..U-IU~IO T>Ca..-n..ol.LCr..Al'°"Ml'COllllCl'fMf'JT-~ ~~it~~~~~' J ,, m:t..r0110«1t~r'l1><~rrtovt.....,.s.cta<iCW ANO ~t•>f' !O(STJl!CT•0:..5 ..rrt< t>« UX:,._ ~ ~ • 'll[S>Q0(0.&l«()$f)IU[)OllQH(~IJ"Tl~i;N' (.~fll'C;T><f:""'"llll'(Wo;-xio.IC"I' ~~~S•U. loCfl 91:1.1'81.~ FCJ'l (Lf~,_~~S<.Y l>llS -l"t(Ml){O II) -~ SITE DATA: IOJl'C.'l•C~51J,~~CAA>IOIWl:"""".!f!OW""IJE AS'".,£S!i011:'5~.\iPC'O,.tt0. -072-IJl~ll.05"4 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP Courtland & Grand EXISTING SITE SURVEY rrm group iii Al DATE: December9, 201 4 '1014030 C IT Y COUNC I L SU B M ITT AL crealing envir onments people enjoy"' Item 9.b. - Page 67 Courtland & Grand GRAND AVENUE EXIST ING AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPEMENT ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN DATE: December 9, 201 4 #1014030 CITY COUNC I L SU BMITTAL rrm 1 EXISTING DRAINAGE BASIN Graphic Legend PORCH SIDEWALK COMMON YARD PRIVATE YARD n-~ w 1L $ SCALE: 1" = 30' 12 4x36 sheel) SCALE: I"= 60' {I 2x l 8 sheefJ group &ii creating environments people enjoy • A2 Item 9.b. - Page 68 E•ISTING CC»M'C.llCIAl 11JllD1t•(; JO" J /~PB!f1 r ftl E Sec t ion 1-Comme r c i a l Wes t EXr.llNO CClM/'."fP.CIA.l Pl!l.['lf'IG SO" ~ iuw•u f ltOPO:;ED "D i1LlhHIV.V6~ :'I Sec ti o n 2-Res id e nti a l Wes t r ;i~,f>()SfD ~ESDEllflAL IOI :T·• 'f'A'l!P Sec t i on 3-Co m me r c i a l/Res id en tial COMMERC IAL LOT Sec t i o n 5-Ramp and Stair c a se Sectio n EXISTING PEOPLE'S SEL F HELP HOUSING SIT E EXISlllID GRADf AJ'l[lrAO l O MATC H Sec ti o n 4 -Res id en ti a l South RES IDENTIAL LOT Courtland & Grand SITE SECTIONS rrm group &ii A3 DATE : December 9, 2014 #1014030 CITY COUNC I L SUBMITTAL cre ati ng enviro nments people en joy .. Item 9.b. - Page 69 EAST GRANO AVENUE Courtland & Grand .... ~ en EXISTING r PDPLAR / BASIN SECl\OH NOTE: ffiAL SECT\ON TO 8£ OCTERMINED 8Y PROJECT '!RMFlC IN[)[)(. UCCHSEO SOILS ENQt<fiR, AND .\CCOMPANVING SOILS ~f. SECTION NOTE: STREET SECTION A-A GR ANO A\/fNU E . ,... FlNAl SECTION TO SE OETERW!NEO BY PRO.ECT ffiAf'flC INDEX. UCEHSED SOILS ENQNEER, AHO ACOClt.IPNIYINC SOILS REJ"l:RT . smEET SECTION B-8 ~ -MTS- 10' ··~1~12·1 ~ ... ~~~=t \.~~~~;~rv SECTION NOTE: ft<IAl seen~ TO 8E DETER"llNED BY PRO.ECT lRN'flC INOCX. LICENSED SOILS E:HGl-IEER, Af'IO ACCOMPANYING SOLS R(Pa:IT SECTION troTE! SJREET SEC TI ON C-C -NTS- FIMAL SECTION TO BE OETERIAINEO BY PRO.A::CT TRAFFIC INDEX. Ut:ENSEO SQILS ENCINEDI:, AHO ACCOMPAN~G sat..S ~T. SJREET SECTION 0 -0 -•TS- EAJUHWQR K· COUWERCIAL LOTS 1 & 2: RAW CUT (CU '1)): 1,200 RAW Fl.L (CIJ 'l"O): 2,800 RESIO£NTIAI.. LOTS J TO 44: RAW CUT (OJ '1>): 9,GOO IU,W FU (CU 'l'D}: lUOO TOTAL; RAW CUT (CU YO): 10,800 RAW Fl.L {CU 'ltl}. 1!1.900 TOTAL AAEA OF DISTURBANCE (SF): -1111 ,000 THE RAW EAAlHWORI< QUANTITE:S 910°M'I HEREON REPRESENT TI-IE tsllM.ATro VOUJl.lfTRIC OF'fER£NCE BCl"llEEH niE PnOPOSf.O nN19-IEO OAAOE ANO Tl-IE LIMITED TOPOGRAPHIC EXISTING GRADES. THES£ ESllMJITtS DO NOT MAKE CONSIDERATIONS FOR L~SES OR 8UUCING OUE TO: stiRINK'-ClE, SOIL AM ENOM£J'ITS, STABIUZATIOll. CONS'fRVCTIOH TtQfNIQUE, FOOTING & TROIQflNG SPOILS. ETC. lHESE. IN AOOITION TO ACnJAL FlO.D COOOITlONS. COHS'IRIJCTIOH lECHNIOVE .t.N0 THE FINAL RECOM~NOA.TIOHS OF THE SOILS ENOINEER WAY ~lflCANTlY Efl'ECT 1l£ FY-IAL !WPORT/()(PORT QUANllnES . 0:1SllNC SLOf'CS ¥1Hlttl lHC PRO..ECT SIT£ 00 NOT EXCCED 1,1 OAT£: SEPIEM&.A 17, lt>1 4 QR AINAGE SU MMAR Y· STORM'll"ATER RCTENTIOH (SrA re or CAt/f"QRff/A RW'Xfl) COMMERCIAL LOT I AREA; UTM f>ER(:ENT1l.E: ''"""""' 2.!12(oc) X 1.05(1n) x ... 1.SMJO(eu-rt) CQMM(RON.. t.OT 2 AREA; 95TH PERCDHILE: RVMOfF COEF: RETEMTlON 2.!!2(oc) )( 1.&5{.-.) X 0.42 • 1.1!100 ( .... -11) R(SIO(NT1Al LOTS J TO 44 AREA-. 95TH PERCENTILE: RVNOfF COEF: RETENTIOH 2.!!2(oc} )( Ul5(1n) )( 0.42 -8.300 (o:.u-tt) TOTAL R£0UIRCD sroRAGC .. 11,IKIO (o.i-n) E)(ISTIMC WATER LINE DaSTING SEWER LINE EXISTING CAS UN[ EXISTIMC ARE HYORANT OJSTING STREET LICHT Pa>OSEO STREE T UQ-lT PftOf'OSEO BUii.DiNG ~ W/ILXWAY c:=::=J PROPOSED STORM DRAIN PROPOSED SO t-11.ET PffOPOSEO nRE H'rtlRANT PROf>OSED IJ'IOERCAOUNO DETEMTIOM STRUCTURE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN rrm rou Iii c 1 DATE:December9.20 14 g p # 101 4030 C IT Y C 0 U NC I L SU BM I TT A L creating environments people enjoy•· Item 9.b. - Page 70 ->:... ! "'~ I 0 -< "' CD ~ •! 0 ~ "'-0 '1 ~ 0 ll .... II ~·-q II ~·,. -~\ 4 - Courtland & EAST GRAND AVENUE PEOPLE'S SELF HELP HOUSING (NOT A PART) Grand ----___J SITE PLAN DATE: D ecember9, 20 14 #1014030 ·-·~· ABBBE:l!AD~S· in<;HT Cir W1>,Y ntl9iED SURf"AC( t»Sll<C ,. flMSHro CRAOC Pffl'(Jll[ " """""-... l«il-IPOINT "' TOP OF GffAl"( SANITARY SEwot "' GRADE 8RtAK STORM ORNM < "'"""'" EXISllNO Cl'!AOE: STREU LICHT GRANQ AVENUE ENIBY AL JERNADVE SCALE!"• W CQMMEBC!AL INFRASTRUCilJBE "" BESJQfNDAl JNFRASTRUCilJRf "" ' ~::SITE LOCATION POPLAR BASIN ··j . ! Vl CINITY MAP "' pRO.JfCT INFO · '""' 022-131-052 .t:; 54 FlOOO ZONE: EXISTIMC EASEMENT'S: PftOPQSEOEASOIEl'<fTS: GROSS AA£.A (MET): ZONE "I( -MAP No. 0807iel601C 100'~120' TCMPORARY AOXSS EASOAENT 10' *>E PUllUC Yl'AIERltlC EASENOH 4.Je oc (1811.819 9q -ft) EX. ZCNN<: .t:; LANO VSE: PROP ZQilHC .t:; l..NIO USE: JtU.OWABlE DENSITY: PROPOSED ODISITY: =~:~ 25 o•iliNcs PER M:.i:tE 112.25 O"°-J.l'tCS POI J.Q!£ TOTAL IJHITS PAOPOSCO: .. MIXEO-U5E: (4) lW0-8E:OROOM UNITS RCSIJCfllAl! RE'SDCNTIM...: ~~)r~~~OOt.IUNt~rs FlOOR AREA RATIO: CCMMERCIAL FAA • O. JJ RESIDENTIAL LOJ<i: COMMEROAL LOTS: l,9i8 •q-lt TO 4,207 9Q-lt Ea. (41 lOT1'1..} 22,481 1q-f\ ,\HCl ll,1'41 1q-f\ (2 TOTAL) APPLICANT INFO· CONTACT; AND Y WA.NGANO 1» TANK F"ARW ROAi>, !lilt 2'0 SAH WIS 08ISPO, CA. 9.J.401 PHCNE: 90S-'9$--~'° LEC,Al QESCR IPDON· PREPARER'$ STATEMENY. lltS Pl.AH SET WAS PREPARED BY: -~"'°"" J795S.._Q.IERAST.,STE.102 SAN WIS 08ISPO, C:,... 93401 Pt4(~)$43--1794 UNOOt M OIRECT'ION Of: JOSHUA R08CJUS. PL 81,799 A Pl'.l'ITION or Bl.OCK IHI Of' THE TOl'IN Of' GRO'JER AS 9-t~ ON tr.IAP nt..rD IN 600I< A AT PACE 8, IN 1H£ CITY Of A.RftO'l'O CAA.ta, COUNTY Of" SAN LUIS 081SPO, CAU'OflHIA QWNER 'S CERDE!CAIF• \llE HER£8Y CONSOIT '!O THE ~T Of' F!t'.Al PROPERTY ~ ON T14S MAP AHO CCRTifY THAT WE ARE TllE LEGAL O'llNERS ANO THAT THE »lf"Cfni!ATlON HERON IS TRUE At«l CORRECT TO THE B[ST Of' OUR l<NQ'M..!DC( ANO llEl..JCf. MKT COMUCROAL IMC. ee• HIGUERA SlREtT, SUITE e SAN LUIS 08ISPO, CA 11340• BENCHMARK · Tt1E 9EH~ MARK f"OA THIS PROJECT !S A FOOMO BRA.SS CAP IH MONUMENT llltl..l AT TtC CEHTE~I: EC CE COURTVJ«> STREETA.5SHO'llN. ELEVATION •82.97' PER TtC EHQN~C (DATUM Lt*{N{)Wj) unurt SER\1CES· WA TDI: CHY Of" ARROYO CAANOC 50€R; CHY Of ARROYO CA.ANO£ PtiOHE:\ERIZON D..EC: PACflC CAS .t EUCTRIC CAS: SOUTHERH CAL GAS COMPANY C.0.SU:: (>(ARTER CQl.IMUMICATlONS LOI COVERAGE· LOCATIOM ARCA (94ft) PERCCNT BUil.DiNG: 8 1,024 32.11': ROAO: ~1,.453 21.0'1 WALJ(WAY: ~.584 ,.1!1, LANDSCAPE: 88,10Q 3,.8:il: oPEH SPACE.: TOTAL SITE: 190,275 PRQ.l:CT BOUfWARY PRoPERTY LIHE DOSnt.IG WA TtR UMC ElO STIMC S£'llER UNE ElOSnMC CAS Uff( EXISTING f'R H'Tt>RANT EXISTING STR£ET UOHT POf"05CD SlREET LICHT PffOPOSED BUI.DING PffOPOSEO WAU(WAY Pfl:OPOS(l)WAU. ~WATER PffOPOSEO STORM Off~ PftOl"OStO SI) INl.£T PROPOSED nRC H'l'DAANT PROPOS'EO IJNOCRGROUNO 0£TEN TION STRIJCTURE CIT Y C O U NC IL SU BM ITTAL r rm group &ii C 2 creating environmenls people enjoy .. Item 9.b. - Page 71 EAST GRAND A VENUE Courtland & Grand ------' '-------------- /~I -~ I I 1 1 I I' EXISTING 'L----P~~AR ---- ' NICT COMMERCIAL WC. 6M~Cl'!.A5lft£ET,s.lllEB SAN LUIS <8SPO. CA 9l401 PHONE: (~) 5'4 1-9004 Appl JCAN! INFO; COMPANY: Mn UlrlllED CONTACT: ANCY MANGANO PREPARER 'S STAJIMENl lltS Pl.AH SET WAS Pl'!U'ARO> B'F: RRM Dr.SIGN CROuP J7&5 S. HICIJERA ST., ST£. 102 SAN WS OBISPO, CA 9.l'OI Ptl (805) 543-1794 Ur«R THE OIRECTION OF: JOSHUA AOUERTS, P,[, 151,799 7J~ T.'Jll( FARM RO.\O, sum: 240 SAM LUIS OBISPO, CA 9l401 PttOUE: (805) 595'-5HO MICHAEL B. STANTON, PlS 5702 JS$J SUCl.DO ST., UNIT Q SAN LutS OUISPO, Cl\ 9 3401 ~E:(ll05)~4-1ia() OAlE Of" ~'YEY: MARQ1 2S. 2C1 4 Il.11.E;_ fl)[l.JT'I' NAlDtAl TITU: COMP""" 2222. SOUTH BRO-'OWAY, Sl.ITE 0 SA.NTA i.IA.RIA. CA tJ~" PRQ,lfCT INFO· "'"' t«A&R OF PARCC.S: QtOS'S AREA (NO): '1.000 ZCNE: EXISntC EAStMOHS: PROP05ED CASEMENTS: EX. ZONJNC •I.AHO USIE: PROP ZONING • LANO USC: Al..l.o.A8l.ECCNSIT'r. f'ROl"OO(OOCHSITY: TOTAL UNITS PRCPOSCO: WllC£0-U$(: RESIOEHTl.IJ..: RESIDEN TI AL: flOOA AREA AA TIO; RESECNTIAI... LOTS: COM l.IEROAl LOTS: LEGAL DESCRIPTION · 022-1l1~2•022-IJl-05' 2 4.J6 oc (1119,91 9 sq-ft) ZONE ''1( -M/lJ' No. 06079C1&ClG 1oo'•120' lOIPOtNn ACCXSS EASElilENT UY WIX PIJ9UC 'lfllATOUt< EASCMEtH CUU (SP) ~uo~.LHCs PUt ACRC :t12 .. ~ O'flELLIHGS PER ACRE " (4) ft'IO-BEOffOOM UNITS ~~)r=-~~~rs COMlilER:CIN.. f"AR • O.JJ I .He 8Q-ft ro 4,207 1q-lt Eel (41 TOTM.) 22.~1 1Q-fl .A.ND ll,141 ~-ft (l TOTAL) A.PORTION <:1'8l.OQ( !le OlfM l'Qllltf Of~ AS Stto'/lf'I OH t.IAP F'1.£l) IH 900K A AT PAGE 8, IN M OTY (:I' ARROTO ORN«, COUNTY (:I' SAN LUIS 081SPO. CMTCA'flA BENCHMARK· JM: BENCH WARK rCF THIS PRO.(Cf IS A rruMO BRASS CAP IN MOHUMENT 1'£U AT THE COl'ftffl>IE EC ~ COURll.AHD Sl'REtT AS SHOWN . DLVATIOH-32.97' PER TEC [N()M[ERftofG (OATVW UHKNO'lllN) UDUJY SER'VlCES · WA '!ER: OTY <:s: ARROYO GR.ANOE: SEWER: QTY ~ A.RROVO GA.ANO£ ~E:VERIZOH E1.£C: PACIFIC GAS • ElEClRIC OAS: SOUlHERN CM.FOftNIA OAS c::oMPAHY CA9LE: CHARTER COt.lt.fl.lllllC ATIONS PHASE I PHASE II PHASING DIAGRAM A 10' 'MOC PUBllC SOCR UT'UTY 'o/ [Aso.t£Hf. A B' 1illlE PU8UC UllUTY X/£~T. VESTING TENTATIVE MAP DATE: December9, 2014 #1014030 CIT Y COUNCIL SUBMITTAL rrm group Iii C 3 creating environments people enjoy" Item 9.b. - Page 72 ---------------------------------------------------' 10' MX .(~ "":1~1 - -4 oos~i!r:J Courtland EAST GRANO AVENUE & Grand UTILITY PLAN DATE: December 9, 2014 #1 0 14030 ------ / ( EXISTING L r POPLAR j-~A~ ' CITY C OUN CI L SU B M ITT A L UTIL!JX SE R\1CES· WATER: OTY Of ARROYO QAAHOE SEWER: CITY Of ARROYO GA.ANOE PHalE:'IERIZotl O.CC: PActnC OAS & El.ECm!C CAS: SOUTiiERN CAL GAS COMPNIY C"91..£: CHARTER COMMUNICAllONS PRO.ECT BOUNDARY ,,_,,,.,LINE EXISTING WATER LINE [XISnNG SEM:R UN[ [)(]STING GAS L.INE [)(!SONG FlRE H'YDAAIH EXISTING STREET LIGHT f'OPOSED STRE[T UCiHT Pfl:Of>Osa> SUlDIMO PROf'OSEl) WA1J',WAY PMPOSED WALL PROPOSED WAT£R l'ffOPOSED SEWER f>ROf'OS(l)STQRtdOAAJN PROPOSED SO INl.ET PROP<lSED F'IR£ H'rORAHT PROPQSEt> VNOUtc;ROUNO OETENTION STRUCTURE __ ., __ m PROPOSED St:'11ER LAl'EIVJ. ---- PROPOS[D WA'll:R LAltRl'IL -- ABBREVIATIONS· ROW " "' '- FlNISHEO SURf"AC( ntl!SHEO GRADE FlNISHEO FUXlR HICtlPOINT TOP Of GRATE GRAOC BREAK """"""' STREtT LICHT rrm group Iii C 4 crealing environmenls people enjoy" Item 9.b. - Page 73 Site Furnishing Examples Decorative Concrete Pavers Planter Boxes Cafe Seat ing Courtland & Grand GRAND AVENU E -------1- PLAN3 Trash Bike Racks Overhead Shade IJ;rfl!"ii---\-+_.::__:::::__:__::__-l---Structure .b-"'-r------------=---.;;...~.µ __ :___,:_:_ __ l---Benchs & Planter Boxes, typ -llr--"-+4+-+-++:=C-\,.-l,-,;'-'---l-4-A+--....:.:..-~:.....~-1---Fle x ible Outdoor Seating /Dinning ~:.+r~~\--'1:----G~.,--f'~,,_,,.--~~-WL------.:!.....li-f=:_:_ __ Staircase "'-#.,,t-----0--H----''---Retaining Wall With Fence Tree Grates Light Fi xture Trash Enclosure Concept 6' Backy ard Fence COMMERICAL SITE PLAN group Iii Ll DATE: December9, 20 14 ~1014030 CIT Y COUNCIL SU BMITTAL rrm crealing environmenls people enjoy•· Item 9.b. - Page 74 Site Furnishing Examples Li ght Fixture Pinic Table Conceptual Mail Kio sk Neig hborhood Pavilion Cafe Tables and Chairs Info rma l Gathering ;w,;~~~++:-+-----l--,..._-11-__ -lJ:_..______ Spaces ~~.\-f--lH,..C:=1,..___,,,.-!t---+-:.:;J.------Cir cu lar Pathway ------Conc rete Paving with Decorative In set Ba nd s Mail Kiosk Scale 1 "=30' Neighborhood Pavilion with Flexible Spaces Courtland & Grand COMMUNITY COMMON rrm group iii L2 DATE : December9, 2014 11014030 C ITY C O U NC IL SU B M ITTAL crealing environments people enjoy • Item 9.b. - Page 75 Irrigation Notes : All o f the proposed landscape a reas f o 1 the project wi ll be irrigated by means of an automatic Irri gation system co nsistin g of low fl ow drip, sp r ay, or rotary spray devices. The irrigation sys t em wi ll be controll e d by means o f a weather b ased cont roll er wit h the abi lity to automaticall y adjust watering ru ntlmes based on his torical a nd curren t temperat ure data. The proposed p lan t material is selected fo r th is region as we ll as it's ability to survive with mo d erate to low water levels. Scale 1 "=30' CONCEPT PLAN T SC H EDU LE r\1''1. 0 TREES -GRANO AVENUE APPROVED TREES GINKGO BILOOA f M/\IOENHAIR TREE LIOUIOAMBAR S TYRAC1FLUA I AMERICAN SV'IEE f GUM MAGNOllA GRANDlflORA I SOUlHERN MAGNOLIA PISTACIA Cl·HNENSIS f CHINESE P\STACHE TREES· PRIVATE YARD TREES AND SETBACKS LAGERS TROE.MIA INOICA I CRAPE MYRTLE LAGERSTROEMIA INOICA DALLAS RED' I RED CRAPE MYRTI.E LIOUIDAMBAR STYRACIFLUA I AMERICAN SWEET GUM OLEA EUROPAEI\ .MAJESTIC BEAUTY' TM f MAJESTIC BEAUTY FRUITLESS OLIVE PYRUS CALLERYANI\ I ORNAMENTAL PEAR QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA I COAST LIVE OAK TRISTANIA CONFERTA I BRISBANE BOX TREES • DECIDUOUS CERCIS CANAOENSIS I EASTERN REDBUD MUL Tl-TRUNK GINKGO e1LOBA I MAIDENHAIR TREE F'tSTACIA CHINENSIS /CHINESE PISTACHE PLAT ANUS X ACERIFOLIA "BLOOOGOOO I LONDON PLANE TREE OUERCUS PALUSTR:IS I PIN OAK MEDIUM TO LARGE-SHRUBS AGAVE ATTENUATA / AGAVE AGONIS FLEXUOSA "AFTEROARK I BLACK PEPPERMINT TREE CALAMAGROS"T IS FOLIOSA I REED GRASS CALAMAGROSTIS NUlK/\ENSIS/ REED GRASS CALAMAGROSTIS X ACUTIFLORA 'KARL FOERSTER I FEATHER REED GRASS CALLISTEMON CITRINUS ·ume JOHN' I DWARF BOITLE BRUSH CARPENTERIA CALlfORNtCA I BUSH ANEMONE CHONOROPETALUM TECTORUM I CAPE RUSH CMONOROPETALUM TECTORUM I CAPE RUSH COLEONEMA PULCHRUM "SUNSET GOLD" I GOLDEN BREA TH OF HEAVEN COTINUS COGGYGRIA I SMOKE l REE CRIOGO"IUM OIGANl"EUM I ST. CAT HERINE S LACE I IEUCllERA MAXl'M / ISi.ANO ALUM ROOT HEUCHERA SANGUINE A I CORAL BELLS LEUCAOENORON X JESTER I JES I ER COHEBUSH LEUCAOENORON X 'RED GEM I RED CONEBUSH LEUCAOENOROfll X SAFARI SUNSET I CONEBUSH MYRICA CAllFORNICA I PACIFIC WAX MYRTLE ptTTOSF'ORUM TENUIFOLIUM "GOLF BALL" /TA'.VHfWHl PITTOSPORUM TENUIFOLIUM KOHVHU I TAWHrM-11 POOOCARPUS ELONGAT\JS "tCEE BLUE' TM / ICEE BlUE YELLOW WOOD ROSMARINUS OFFICINALIS "GOLDEN RAIN' /ROSEMARY Sl\LVIA AFRICANA-LU I EA I GOLDEN SAGE SALVIA LEUCOPHYLLA I PURPLE LEAF SAGE WESTRINOIA FRUTICOSA I COAST ROSEMARY GROUNOCOVER TO SMALL-SHRUBS ARCTOSTl\PHYlOS X EMERALD CARPEr /EMERALD CARPET MANZANITA ARCTOSTAPHVLOS X "PACIFIC MIST I PACIFIC MIST MANZA.NITA CAREX OIVULSA I BERKELEY SEDGE CAREX GLAUCA I BLUE SEDGE CEANOTHUS GRISEUS HORIZONTALIS 'DIAMOND HEIGHTS' 1 CALIFORNIA ULAC OANIELLIA REVOLUTA I BABY BLISS OYMONOIA MARGMETAE I OYMONOIA EUPHOR81A RIGIOA I YELLOW SPURGE EUPHORBIA X MARTINI! / EUPt-IORBIA MUHLENBERGIA CAPllLARIS I PINK MUHL Y ORJGANUM WAJORANA I SWEET MARJORAM ORlGANUM ROTUNOIFOLJUM 'KENT BEAUTY I OREGANO PENS"IEMON PARRYl/PARRY'S BEAROlONGUE PEt,STEMON P1NIFOL/US I THREAOLEAF BEARD TONGUE PENSTEMON SPECTABIUS I SHOWY PENSTEMON ROSA X FLOWER CARPET WHITE' I ROSE ROSMARIN US OFFICtNALIS HUNTINGTON CARPET I HUNTINGTON CARPET ROSEMARY SAL VIA CHAMAEDRYOtDES I MEXICAN BLUE SAGE SAL VIA OFFICINALIS PURPUREA I COMMON SAGE SAMBUCUS NtGRA BLACK LACE" I BLACK LACE ELDERBERRY PRIVATE FRONT YARDS ACHILLEA MILLEFOLIUM "TERRA CO rl A /TERRA COTTA YARROW OYMONOIA MARGARETAE I OYMONDIA HEUCHERA MAXl\4A I ISi.ANO ALUM ROOT IRIS OOUCLASIANA I DOUGLAS IRIS THYMUS LANUGINOSIJS I WOOU Y l"HYME Courtland & Grand CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN group ill DATE: December9, 2014 #1014030 CIT Y COUNCIL SUBMITTAL rrm creating environmenls people enjoy• L3 Item 9.b. - Page 76 E1iogonum giganteum/ St. Catherines Lace Equisetum Species/ Hors etai l Agave a ttenuata/ Agave Courtland & CONCEPTUAL PLANT PALETTE MEDIUM TO LAR GE SHRUBS Myrie a californica/ Pacific Wax My1 ti e Agonls nexuosa 'Afterda rk ' I Black Peppermint Tree Coleonema Pulchell um I Breath of Heaven Rosa x Flower Ca i pet White I Rose Podocarpus e longatus · 1cee Blue'/ lcee Blue Ye ll ow Wood Leucadendron species/ Conebush Grand PLANT MATERIAL DATE: December 9, 201 4 #1014030 CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTAL Pens temon species/ Beardtongue PiUosporum tenuifolium ·Golf Ba n · I Tawhiwhi Cotin us coggygri a/ Smoke Tree rrm group Iii L4 crea li ng environm ents peo pl e enjoy" Item 9.b. - Page 77 He.uche ra s angulnea / Co 1al Be ll s Sa lvia speciP.s/ Sage Ca la magros ti s Karl Foerster ·/ Feathe r Reed Grass Euphorbta s pec ies/ Spu rge CONCEPTUAL PLANT PALE T TE SMALL SHRUBS, GRASSES & GROUNDCOVERS Arc tostaphyl os x ·Pacific Mist · I Pacific Mi st Manzanita Rosmarinus officinalis ·Huntington Ca rpet · I Rosemary Carex species/ Sedge Penstemon species/ Penstemon Courtland & Grand PLANT MATERIAL DATE: Dec ember 9, 201 4 #1014030 CITY CO U NC I L SUBMITTAL Dan iellia revo luta/ Baby Bliss Penstemon s pec ta bili s/ Sho>NV Penstemon Carex divu lsa/ Berkeley Sedg e rrm group Iii LS creating envi ronments people enjoy" Item 9.b. - Page 78 SECOND FLOOR BUILD I NG l BUILDING 1 Courtland & Grand EAST GRANDE AVENUE HE~l&tEOIJlOO O RSU.tlllO A.NDOllJl>.IG BUILDING 2 COMMERCIAL PLANS DATE : December9, 201 4 #1014030 CIT Y COUNCIL SUBMITTAL rrm 1-w w Cl:'. I--en 0 z ~ __, ty :::J 0 u Si t e/F l oor Pl ans l ~B ,....__ o a " SCA LE : 1/8"=1 '--0 " (24x36 sheel) SCALE: 1/1 6"=1'--0" (12xl8 shee l) group Iii c realing environmenh people enjoy" A4 Item 9.b. - Page 79 Perspective View of Bu il d i n g 2 Grand Avenue Eleva ti o n Courtland & G r a n d C O M M E R C I A L PE R S E P E C T I V E S DA T E : Dec e m b e r 9, 20 14 #1 0 14 03 0 CI T Y C O U N C I L SU B M I T T A L rr m gr o u p Ii i A5 crea l i n g en v i ron m e nl s pe o p l e en j o y " ~ • It e m 9 . b . - P a g e 8 0 v-- - /~~ -. I . P e r s p e c t i v e V i e w o f Bu i l d i n g Re a r El e v a t i o n C o u r t l a n d & G r a n d C O M M E R C I A L PE R S E P E C T I V E S DA T E : De c e m b e r 9 , 20 1 4 ~1 0 1 4 0 3 0 CI T Y C O U N C I L SU B M I T T A L group Iii rr m cr e a t i n g en v i r o n m e n t s people enjoy" A6 Item 9.b. - Page 81 Bui l ding l East Elevation Building l West El evation Courtland & Grand Bui l ding 2 East El evation 31'-0 "T.O.S .$ 26 '-0" CLG.$ 0'-0" G.F. Bui l ding 2 West El evation COMMERCIAL ELEVATIONS rrm 2s ·-o · ROOF $ 22·-s-PARA PE T.CD 19 '-0 "" ROOF.$ 17'-0"C LG .$ I 5'-0" HD R.$ O'-O"G.F.$ SCALE: I /8"= I '--0 " {24 x36 sheet ) SCALE: 1/16"=1'--0 " {12xl8 sheet) group Iii DATE : December 9, 2014 #1 01 4030 CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTAL creating environmenb people enjoy ., Al Item 9.b. - Page 82 8\1 l'v'l!IWSns 1 1::)NnO::> Al l '.) 0£0~l0ljj r10~ '6 Jaqwa:>aa :31va 3/\11:>3dS~3d 'v'Z'v'ld Item 9.b. - Page 83 Alternative Pl aza Plan r:-r. SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0'' (24x36 sheel) SCALE: 1/16"=1'-0" (1 2x18sheelj Courtland & Grand BUILDING 1 5,000 SF Alternative A l ternative Plaza Persoecti v e A lt ernative Pl aza Overa ll Plan ALTERNATIVE PLAZA DATE: December 9, 20 14 #1014030 C ITY COUN CI L SUBMITTAL rrm SCALE: 3/16 "= I '-0 " (24x 36 sheel) SCALE: 3/32"= 1 '-0 " (I 2x 18 sheel) group Iii crea ting environmenls people enjoy " A9 Item 9.b. - Page 84 BRIGr ELDORADO STONE TUNDRA BRICK RIVERBED Courtland STUCCO SHERWIN WILLI AMS FIREWEED SW6328 & Grand STU CCO SHERWIN WILLIAMS BELIEVABLE BUFF SW6 l 20 STUCCO SHERW ll< WILLIAMS ANALYT ICAL GRAY SW7051 AWN INGS SERMAN WIL LI AMS SMOKE GRAY SIOREFRO NT KAWNEER ANODIZED FINISH DARK BRONZE Item 9.b. - Page 85 COURTIAlm STR(ET -·-'-"'"---~ .. --z:. NEIGHRORHOOD .... .....,. CREEN AREA ~ 11 ~-· 1·-.1:_ MIN --!'--'-'-----. I . _ _...........,. .;....., ___ ----1--11 ~--- J ··--· I = Porth INTERIOR STk.CCT INTER IOR STREET Typica l Co u rt l a nd Lo t Typ i c al In t er i o r Lo t lNTLJl.100 STR£ET ., Ruid'!nct ·= ··-·-· ·-11 ~11 j __ ,, -....... ~~,·1 --·-.. Ty pi c a l Per i miter Lot Resident i a l Perspective Courtland & Grand TYPICAL SITE PLANS + PERSPECTIVE DATE : December 9, 201 4 #101 4030 CITY COUNCIL SU BMITTAL " SCALE: 1/8"=1 '-0"' {24x36 sheet) SCALE : 1/16"=1"-0" (12x18 sheel/ Item 9.b. - Page 86 L._ ___________ __J Secon d Fl oor Plan ~ ~ •. 1' ~ • L :~ I Ii ,_J >M l.J1 ~-----------:..:.1~- Ground Floor Pl an AR EA GROUND FLOOR 'ECONP FLOOR GARAGE PORCH TOTAL 786 SF 1126 SF 1912 SF 430 SF 88 SF -----.. ---___ r ------ --:-~-~--------I ,El--"f""ll 11 --! Clt .0 I; D ,-_1 I I ----··--··· ---·-·=-17t ~""1----=:--·-- 11 [IJ Right El evat i on Perspective Fron t Ele vation -Sty l e A Rear Elevation r -----~:JJ- ·~··-~i i I Left Ele vat i on Perspective Front El eva ti on -Sty le B Courtland & Grand RESIDENTIAL PLAN 1 DATE; December9, 2014 #1014030 CIT Y COUNCIL SU B MITTAL " SCA LE; 118··=1 ·-0" (24x36 sheet ) SCALE; 1/16"=1'-0" (12xl8 sl1eel) Item 9.b. - Page 87 ,---------------, il I I I I I L__ ___________ __J Second Floor Pl an ,------------- ~[.] 1 •·-e--•·<t'k I t TYP l'!'P I ~ L__ ___________ __J___'."_ Ground Fl oor Plan 6J:.e.Q GROUND FLOOR SECOND FLOOR GARAGE PORCH TOTAL 719 SF 1185 Sf 1904 Sf 431 Sf 97 SF i.:::-_:_-_ -----:;:::::;-::_-=-----·-- "t--.----·--------¥ !D:l1 Ri g ht Ele vat i on Persoective Front Elevation -St y l e A Rear Ele va ti on Le ft Elevation Perspecti ve Front Ele va ti o n -St y l e B Courtland & Grand RESIDENTIAL PLAN 2 DATE: Decem ber9, 201 4 #1014030 CITY C O U N CIL SUBMITTAL SCALE: I /8·= 1 ·-0· {24x36 sheel} SCALE: l/16"=1'-0 .. {12xl8sl1 eel} Item 9.b. - Page 88 t__ ___________ _J Second Fl oor Pl an """ I '"""" IL:l :Q ,. _t= ___________ _J ,, Gro und Floor Plan AREA GROU ND FL OOR SECOND fl OOR GARAGE PORCH TOTAL 75 1 Sf JOBS SF 1836 SF 441 Sf 65 SF Ri ght El evation Perspective Front El eva t ion -Sty l e A Rear El evation ,------ '[}] I __ : Lef t Elevation Persoe c ti ve Front El evation -Sty l e B Courtland & Grand RESIDENTIAL PLAN 3 DATE : December 9, 201 4 f l01 4030 C IT Y COUNCIL SUBMITTA L " SCALE: l /8"= I '--0" (24x36 sheet) SCALE: I /16"= I '--0" (I 2x 18 sheel) Item 9.b. - Page 89 r--------------, ~-i r--------------, ~.:.:·1: l'llTt:llOI ...L L i ~1 ·-- l.::J :t::1 -___________ _J Ground Floor Plan AN.Q GROUND FLOOR SECOND FL OOR GARAGE PORCH TOTAL 753 SF 992 SF 1745 SF 44 l SF 115 SF Right Elevation Perspective Front Ele v ation -Style A Rear Elevation Left Ele va tion Perspecti ve Front El evation -Style B Courtland & Grand RESIDENTIAL PLAN 4 DATE: December9, 201 4 #10 14030 CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTAL " SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" (24x36 sheet) SCALE: t/1 6"=1'-0" (12x18st1eet) Item 9.b. - Page 90 i---~--~--~--~--~--~--~--~---i I I .~.~ I I L_--~--~--~--~--~--~--~--~--~ Second Fl oor Plan ',._r' ;[. [---:.:.;----------------------1· ., VNID --, ~ ~ -,_ I _J ' -~ ~L L ________________ ~· _________ J Ground Fl oor Plan ~ GROUND FLOOR 863 SF SECOND FIOOR 1263 Sf GARAGE PORCH TOTAL 2127 Sf 456 SF 62 Sf Courtland & Grand Right El evation Rear El evation Left Elevation RESIDENTIAL PLAN 5 DATE : December9, 2014 #1014030 CIT Y C O U NC IL SUB M ITTAL Persoective Fr ont El evat i on -St y l e A Persp e c ti v e Front El e v ation -St y l e B " SCALE: 115··= 1 '-0" (24x36 sheet) SCALE: 1/16"=1'-0" (12xl8 sheel) Item 9.b. - Page 91 STUCCO SHERW IN WILLIAMS SLEEPY BLUE SW6225 FIBER CEMENT SID ING SHERWlr< WILLIAMS DANUBE SW 6803 Courtland ENTRY DOOR SH ERWIN WILLIAMS CENTER STAG E SW6920 WOOD STAIN SHERWIN WILLIAMS SEMHRANSPARENT SP ICE CHEST SW3513 METAL ROOF CORRUGATED METAL GALVANIZED & Grand RES . COLOR DATE: December9, 2014 #1014030 STUCCO SHERW IN WILLIAMS BAS IL SW6194 FIBER CEMENT SIDING SHERW IN WILLIAMS OYSTER BAY SW6206 +MATERIAL CIT Y COUNCIL SU BMITTAL ENTRY DOOR SHERW IN WILLIAMS FORCEFUL ORANG E SW 6894 ACCENT TRIM SHERW IN WILLIAMS PURE WH IT E SW7005 WOOD STA IN SHERW IN WILLIAMS SEM~TRANSPARENT SP ICE CH EST SW35 I 3 ASPHALT SH INGLE ROOF GAF ROYAL SOVER IGN-SLATE METAL ROOF CORRUGATED METAL GALVAN IZED Item 9.b. - Page 92 STUCCO SHERW IN WILLIAMS TEMPE STAR SW6229 FIBER CEMET SIDING SHERW IN WILLIAMS QU IETUDE SW6212 Courtland ENTRY DOOR SHERW IN WILLIAMS CITRUS SW6906 ACCENT TRIM SHERW IN WILLIAMS PURE WHITE SW7005 WOOD STA IN SHERW IN WILLI AMS SEMHRANSPARENT SP ICE CHEST SW35 I 3 ASPHALT SH INGLE ROOF GAF ROYAL SOVER IGN-SLA TE METAL ROOF CORRUGATED MET AL GALVANIZED & Grand RES. COLOR DATE: December9,201 4 tl014030 STUCCO SHERW IN WILLIAMS USEFUL GRAY SW7050 FIBER CEMENT SIDING SHERW IN WILLIAMS C IT YSCAPE SW7067 +MATERIAL CIT Y C O U N CIL SUB M ITTAL ENTRY DOOR SHERW IN WILLI AMS INTE NSE TEAL SW6943 WOOD STA IN SHERW IN WILLIAMS SEM~TRANSPARENT SP ICE CHEST SW3513 META L ROOF CORRUGATED MET AL GALVANIZED Item 9.b. - Page 93 STUCCO SHERWIN WILLIAMS SNOWBOUND SW7004 FIBER CEMENT SIDING SHERWIN WILLI AMS WEB GRAY SW7075 ENTRY DOOR SHERW IN WILLI AMS FI REWORKS SW6867 ACCENT TR IM SHERWIN WILLI AMS PURE WH IT E SW7005 Courtland & Grand RES. COLOR DATE: December9, 201 4 #1014030 WOOD STA IN SHERW IN WILLIAMS SEMHRANSPARENT SP ICE CHEST SW3513 +MATERIAL CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTAL ASPHALT SH INGLE ROOF GAF ROYAL SOVER IGN-SL ATE METAL ROOF CORRUGATED META L GALVANIZED Item 9.b. - Page 94 BUILDING SHIFTS WEST TO ACCOMODATE 2-WAY ACCESS AT CENTER RIGHT -OUT ONLY TWO -WAY ACCESS POTENTIAL CROSSWALK REDUCED PLAZA WIDTH TO ACCOMMODATE TWO-WAY ACCESS BUILDING 1 1 WOhJ I , ,., : r' 1'1 COMM ER C I A L SITE A LTERN A TI VE #2 BUILDING SHIFTS WEST TO ACCOMODATE 2-WAY ACCESS AT CENTER ELIMINATE RIGHT-OUT TWO-WAY ACCESS POTENTIAL CROSSWALK REDUCED PLAZA WIDTH TO ACCOMMODATE TWO-WAY ACCESS BUILDING 1 11111 11,1 l .~.hl,h,,I COMM ER C I A L SITE A LTERN AT I V E #3 SCALE: 1" = 30' (24x36 sheet) SCALE: t" = 60 ' (I 2x 18 sheet) Courtland & Grand COMMERCIAL SITE EXHIBITS DATE: December 9, 2014 . #1014030 CIT Y C O UNCI L SUB M ITT A L Item 9.b. - Page 95 -.p~ / I I I 7 PREV IOU S RESI D EN TI A L EN TRA N C E 1-w w a::: I--en 0 z ::s ~ ::::> 0 0 Courtland & Grand \N 3 ..,__.... __________ NEW SITEWALK ---;-..... t-----WIDEN STREET 9.5 '-1 1.5 ' ~-~_:__------~~ ' -. PLAN 1 15 ________ ):.__ __ r"'-...----'+----RESIDENTIAL ACCESS ALLIGNED WITH C VS ----+--------EDGE OF EX ISTING PAVEM ENT ,!'_t!tri-+----+---...,_ ___ STREET LIGHT TO IMPROVE SAFETY PROPOSED RESI DE N TI A L ENT RA N CE RES I DENTIAL SITE EXHIBITS DATE: December 9, 201 4 #101 4030 CI TY CO U N CI L SUBM ITT A L SCALE: I"= 30' 124x36 sheel) SCALE: I"= 60' p2xl8 sheet) Item 9.b. - Page 96 Residential Side Yard Easements Courtland & Grand Side Yard Examples RESIDENTIAL SITE EXHIBITS DATE: December 9, 2014 #1014030 CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTAL rrm="'"''""°"~~~~-~~~EX 3 Item 9.b. - Page 97 Courtland & Grand -=----EXISTING POLE MOUNTED LIGHT 1-.1 -'----':,__-__::._ __ pROPOSED STR EET LIGHT LO CATION SITE LIGHTING EXHIBIT CONCEPT LIGHTING LEGEND • STREET/ PARKING LOT LIGHT • BOLLARD PATH LIGHT • WALL LIGHT NOTES: LIGHTING WILL POTENTIALLY UTILIZE FIXTURES THAT ARE FLUORESCENT, HIGH-INTENSITY DISCHARGE (HID), LIGHT EMITIING DIODE (LED). OR LOW PRESSURE SODIUM LAMPS . STREET/ PARKING LOT LIGHTS WILL INCLUDE CUT OFF SHIELDS AS REQUIRED, AND LAMPS WILL BE NO LIGHT ABOVE HORIZONTAL OR DARK SKY CERTIFIED . fB NORTH DATE: December 9, 2014 #1014030 CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTAL Item 9.b. - Page 98 Courtland & Grand OPTIONAL PLAY STRUCTURE POTENTIAL PLAY --w---J==1---f-f--~~ STRUCTURE LOCATION PO SSIBL E PLAY ST RU CT URE PLAY STRUCTURE EXHIBIT DATE: December9, 20 14 11014030 CITY COUNCIL SU BMITTAL NORTH Item 9.b. - Page 99 December 3, 2014 Matthew Downing, Assistant Planner City of Arroyo Grande Planning Division 300 E. Branch St. Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 ATTACHMENT 1 RE: Courtland and Grand Mixed-Use Project -December City Council Submittal Dear Matt: On behalf of our clients, MFI Limited and NKT Commercial, RRM Design Group submits this additional/revised information for review for the Courtland and Grand Mixed-Use Commercial and Residential project located at East Grand Avenue and Courtland Street. This application reflects changes and recommendations from the pre-SAC, the two pre- application Council meetings, SAC, the ARC, Traffic Commission, and the November Planning Commission meeting. Through this process, RRM Design Group has spent a significant amount of time reviewing and discussing comments received from Council Members, ARC members, Traffic Commissioners, Planning Commissioners and members of the public. We have included revised plans and additional exhibits to address the concerns we heard. 1.0 SETTING AND BACKGROUND I. I Introduction The Courtland and Grand project site is located within the Western Gateway segment in the City of Arroyo Grande along East Grand Avenue. The project team proposes to develop ·a uniquely designed site located across two parcels within the existing Berry Garden Specific Plan area. True vertical mixed-use buildings front onto East Grand Avenue with residential units located above commercial. Attractive streetscape treatments and outdoor plaza spaces define the street level building uses and entice 3765 s Higuera St. Ste 102. San LUIS Obispo, CA 93401 p: (805) 543-1794 • f· (805) 543-4609 www.u!l'mde$ig111.com a California corporation• Lenny Grant, Architect C26973 •Jerry Michael, PE 36895, LS 6276 • Jeff Ferber, LA 2844 Item 9.b. - Page 100 Matthew Downing Courtland And Grand Mixed-Use Project December 3, 2014 Page 2 of 7 pedestrian activity. An internal pedestrian pathway connects the mixed-use commercial portion of the project south to the residential portion opening up onto a central neighborhood green that is at the heart of the site. Tucked behind the commercial are 41 detached townhome units, that will serve a wide range of entry-level and workforce housing needs within the Arroyo Grande community. 1.2 Existing Setting The project site is located on the East Grand Avenue Corridor, south of East Grand Avenue and east of Courtland Street. It can be accessed from both East Grand Avenue and Courtland Street. Surrounding land uses include a small shopping center to the west in the City of Grover Beach, commercial uses to the north across Grand Avenue, commercial uses to the east across Courtland Street, and residential development to the south. The site consists of two parcels (APN 077-131-052 and APN 077-131-054) for a combined 4.37 acres, and is identified by the Berry Gardens Specific Plan as Subarea 3. This application breaks Subarea 3 into Subareas 3a and 3b. 1.3 Application History The 1998 Berry Gardens Specific Plan has been built out except for the East Grand Avenue frontage identified as Subarea 3. In 20 I I, a Specific Plan amendment was approved to accommodate the Peoples' Self- Help Housing (PSHH) in Subarea 4. In thi.s Specific Plan amendment, it was stated that Subarea 3 shall be designated as an unplanned subarea, subject to a future specific plan amendment. Prior to the 20 I I approval, a commercial project was proposed and denied due to a number of reasons, including traffic and neighborhood compatibility. The proposed project today address these issues with a less intense mixed-use project. In July and August of 2014, the City Council, staff, and the community reviewed a conceptual site plan, elevations, and perspectives for Subarea 3. The project team has incorporated the input received into the attached submittal package. The recommendations included the incorporation of true vertical mixed-use and the more contemporary styled architecture. 3765 s. Higuera St .. Ste 102. San LUIS Obispo, CA 93401 p· (805) 543-1794 • f (805) 543-4609 www .1nrmde~i~llil.com a Callforrna corporatron •Lenny Grant, Archrtect C26973 •Jerry Mrchael, PE 36895, LS 6276 • Jeff Ferber, LA 2844 Item 9.b. - Page 101 Matthew Downing Courtland And Grand Mixed-Use Project December 3, 2014 Page 3 of 7 On October 8th a Staff Advisory Committee meeting was held and Draft Conditions and comments received. The Plans have been updated to reflect input from staff, Police and Fire. On November 3rd the Architectural Review Commission reviewed the project and gave feedback. The Plans have been updated to reflect input from ARC. November 18th the Planning Commission, reviewed and gave recommendations for the project. These recommendations are addressed in the final exhibits in the submittal package. On December 2"d, the Planning Commission gave further feedback that will be incorporated in to the final plans. 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 Concept The Courtland and Grand project 1s envisioned as "mixed-use small town style" in both a vertical and horizontal mixed-use arrangement. Both commercial and residential uses are proposed, with Subarea 3a more commercially focused, and Subarea 3b residentially oriented. Subarea 3a contains I 1,000 +/-square feet of mixed-use commercial and four (4) mixed-use residential condominium units of 900-1,000 square feet, situated above the commercial with three (3) outdoor plaza spaces located a ground level. The outdoor plazas will be ideal settings for enjoying a cup of coffee, outdoor dining, and displaying public art. The mixed-use commercial has two (2) buildings fronting onto a pedestrian-friendly streetscape on East Grand Avenue, with parking tucked behind. The massing of the building compliments the existing buildings across East Grand Avenue and creates an inviting Gateway to Arroyo Grande. Subarea 3b will feature 41 residential units in a small lot, detached townhome style. These desirable unit types are much needed on the central coast and will serve the local workforce and first-time home buying populations. The lot sizes range from 2, 146 to 4,207 sf. In the center of the residences, there is a neighborhood green that provides a communal outdoor space for the residents. The units facing the green have generous landscape buffers and wide front porches that engage the neighborhood. 3765 s. Higuera St., Ste 102. San LUIS Obispo, CA 93401 p (805) 543-1794 • f· (805) 543-4609 www.ll'll'mde$ll~[/'\l.~om a California corporation• Lenny Grant, Architect C26973 • Jerry Michael, PE 36895, LS 6276 • Jeff Ferber, LA 2844 Item 9.b. - Page 102 2.2 Project Objectives Matthew Downing Courtland And Grand Mixed-Use Project December 3, 2014 Page 4 of 7 The project will serve as a catalyst for future improvements along East Grand Avenue. Project objectives include: a. Promote high-quality mixed-use commercial/retail development within the City of Arroyo Grande's Gateway Mixed-Use District; b. Increase the City of Arroyo Grande's supply of entry-level/workforce housing stock; c. Produce a functional, aesthetically pleasing project that will serve as a landmark in the City of Arroyo Grande's Gateway and complete build-out of the Berry Gardens Specific Plan; and d. Improve pedestrian and bike circulation in the Gateway Mixed-Use District. 2.3 Architectural Character · The architectural character for the mixed-use commercial and residential portions of the Courtland and Grand project reflect a contemporary style that was desired by the City to aide in uniquely defining the Western Gateway of the City. Architectural elements of the mixed-use commercial portion focus on traditional detailing with a more contemporary massing arrangement. These detailed elements resonate with the surrounding site context while at the same time uniquely distinguishing the project within the Western Gateway. For the residential portion of the project, a more contemporary, mid-century architectural style is proposed. The more contemporary, mid-century architecture is seen as aiding in the natural transitioning from the existing single-family architecture of Berry Gardens and the massing of the new Peoples' Self- Help Housing Apartments up to Grand Avenue. Moreover, with both portions of the project rooted in a more contemporary architectural style, the East Grand Avenue area will become both visually and aesthetically identifiable from the more well-established Village area of Arroyo Grande and set precedent for future redevelopment and design within the City's Western Gateway. 2.4 Circulation Internal vehicular circulation 1s provided separately for Subareas 3a and 3b. Subarea 3b residential will have one (I) full right-in and right-out access point from Courtland Street and will include an emergency fire access road to the adjacent PSHH site to the south. 3765 S Higuera St., Ste 102 •San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 p: (805) 543-1794 • f: (805) 543-4609 www.1nrmdesi91ll'il.com a California corporation• Lenny Gran!. Architect C26973 •Jerry Michael, PE 36895, LS 6276 • Jeff Ferber, LA 2844 Item 9.b. - Page 103 . Matthew Downing Courtland And Grand Mixed-Use Project December 3, 2014 Page 5 of 7 East Grand-hybrid solution alternative (Sheet A2 and LI): During previous meetings with the City Council and Staff, 1t was suggested that consideration be given to eliminating the central access point along East Grand Avenue between the two mixed-use commercial buildings. After further study, consultation with RTA, concurrence with ARC and to address concerns about impacts related to attracting quality tenants, this alternative illustrates a hybrid approach that keeps both access points and reduces the access drive widths. Under this alternative, a narrow right-in only access centrally located between the two mixed-use commercial buildings and a narrow right-out only access near the western property boundary is proposed. By narrowing the central access to a right-in only, additional space becomes available to allow the commercial mixed-use buildings to be located closer together and for the incorporation of larger, more pedestrian-friendly plaza areas, including both access points along East Grand Avenue will help attract higher quality tenants in this development. Per the ARC recommendation there will be planters and railings on either side of the entry drive to frame the plazas on either side or direct pedestrians to cross at designated location. Per the Planning commission recommendation there would be a change in paving for the drive lane to further delineate the vehicular space from the plaza space. East Grand Alternative 2 (Sheet EX I): This alternative was proposed at the November 18th Planning Commission and recommended at the December 2nd Planning Commission meeting. This alternative has a right in and right out access centrally located and a narrow right-out only access near the. western property boundary. This alternative would allow RTA to keep the existing bus stop at the current location while maximizing the circulation for the retail patrons and mixed-use residents. East Grand Plaza Alternative-no center access (Sheet A9): This Alternative was generated after the August City Council recommendations. This alternative eliminates the central access and includes a right-in and right-out access along the western property boundary with the City of Grover Beach. If the central access point is completely eliminated, the project will need to make the western access point full right-in and right-out. Under this scenario, RTA has stated that the existing bus stop west of the project site would have to be moved directly in front of the western mixed- use building or further up Grand Avenue to the east. Relocating the RTA bus stop in front of the western rnixed-use building would be incompatible with the residential 3765 s. Higuera St .• Ste 102. San LUIS Obispo, CA 93401 p (805) 543-1794 • f: (805) 543-4609 www.1rtrmdie~igll'll.eom a Callfornra corporalron •Lenny Grant, Architect C26973 •Jerry Mrchaei, PE 36895, LS 6276 •Jeff Ferber. LA 2844 Item 9.b. - Page 104 Matthew Downing Courtland And Grand Mixed-Use Project December 3, 2014 Page 6 of 7 component of the mixed-use building and the expanded pedestrian plaza spaces located at ground level adjacent to the mixed-use building. The constant bus acceleration noise as a bus pulls away from the stop is a significant concern as is the viability of attracting quality tenants without the central access. All alternatives include 61 parking spaces located to the rear and side of the commercial mixed-use buildings, four (4) of which will be designated specifically for residential use. 2.5 Neighborhood Green/Common (Sheet L2 and EXS) A main feature of the Courtland and Grand project is the "neighborhood green" located at the center of Subarea 3b. Perimeter pathways traversing through the site provide direct linkages to the neighborhood green space for all residents of the project while also providing a connection for the residents to the commercial along East Grand Avenue. A picnic pavilion has been placed as a focal feature within the neighborhood green and incorporates multiple areas for sitting and ample space for both small and large gatherings. The central lawn provides for passive play opportunities with more intimate sitting areas located along the perimeter of the space. With residences fronting onto the neighborhood green, front patios and generous landscape plantings have been incorporated to provide buffers to the neighborhood green area. Accent trees define the edge of the neighborhood green space with rich colors and texture providing for an overall sense of place. Overall focus of the landscape design has been placed on incorporating a low water and drought tolerant plant palette reflective of a more dynamic, contemporary landscape that is complementary to the architectural style proposed for both the mixed-use and residential portions of the project. Per the Planning commission recommendation a play structure has been added to the neighborhood green (sheet EX5). 3.0DENSITY The revised density for the residential portion of the Courtland and Grand project is now approximately 18.92 density units/acre in addition to the four residential units located within the vertical mixed-use buildings. This density calculation includes the neighborhood common green, walkways, guest parking spaces, fire access and other public spaces. 37 65 s Higuera SI . Ste 102 • San LUIS Obispo. CA 93401 p. (805) 543-1794 • I (805) 543-4609 W"WW.trtrm<die$HgJfl"l:.com a Cahforn1a corporal1on •Lenny Grant. Arch1fecl C26973 •Jerry Michael, PE 36895, LS 6276 •Jeff Ferber, LA 2844 Item 9.b. - Page 105 4.0 CONCLUSION Matthew Downing Courtland And Grand Mixed-Use Project December 3, 2014 Page 7 of 7 The Courtland and Grand project is a unique part of the revitalization story of East Grand Avenue, one that is appropriate for the site in both size and scale while at the same time being responsive to current market conditions. True vertical mixed-use has been thoughtfully incorporated into the project that creates a unique and distinguished project desired by the City for the Western Gateway segment of Arroyo Grande. The projects modern, contemporary architectural style not only defines the Courtland and Grand project but also sets a precedent for future renovation and architectural design within the Western Gateway. The neighborhood green space located at the center of the residential portion of the project provides a communal gathering space that is the heart of the project. The Courtland and Grand project will act as a catalyst for the East Grand Avenue Mixed-Use Corridor and stimulate additional new mixed-use development and redevelopment along Grand Avenue. We appreciate your careful consideration of this request and look forward to working with you on this project. Please feel free to contact me with any questions about this application at (805) 543- 1794, Ext. 222. Sincerely, O.~. i?t4 Debbie Rud~ AP Principal cc: Andrew Mangano, MFI Limited Nick Tompkins, NKT Commercial Enclosures: Updated Specific Plan Amendment Updated Architecture, Landscape Architecture and Civil Engineering Package d/i\\s/o(l/es-sr\o,,.stte\2014\/ 0 I 4030-Courtland-and-Grand-Ave-M1xed-Use-FeaS1b1/ny-Study\Plannmg\Appl1canon\dlr-Appltca1J0,,_Leuer-l I-I 0-14-Admm docx 3765 s Higuera St .. Ste 102. San LUIS Obispo, CA 93401 p. (805) 543-1794 • f (805) 543-4609 www.nmdre~i91fl'll.com a California corporation• Lenny Grant. Architect C26973 • Jeny Michael, PE 36895, LS 6276 •Jeff Ferber. LA 2844 Item 9.b. - Page 106 Minutes: City Council Meeting Tuesday, July 8, 2014 ATTACHMENT 2 Page4 8.p. Consideration to Appropriate Additional Funding for the Old Ranch Road Propert Improvements (Tract 3018) Project, PW 2013-10. Action: Appropriated an additional $30,000 towards the Old Ranch Road 8 operty (Tract 3018) Improvements Project to cover additional PG&E design and c struction expenses. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS 9.a. Consideration of Application for Certificate of Public Conve Chief Annibali presented the staff report and recommended that th Council adopt a Resolution granting a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity Central Coast Taxi for the operation of a taxicab service within the City limits, continge upori full and total compliance with all conditions and requirements in Chapter 5.72 "Taxica s" of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code. Sammy Orr, Central Coast Taxi, introduced himself a Cl thanked the Council for the opportunity to operate his business in the City. Mayor Ferrara opened the public hearing, and pon hearing no comments, he closed the public hearing. Action:. Council Member Costello mo d to adopt a Resolution entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE Clrt F ARROYO GRANDE GRANTING A CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND. NECESSITY TO CENTRAL COAST TAXI FOR THE OPERATION OF A TAX/CA SERVICE WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS CONTINGENT UPON FULL AND TOTAL COM IANCE WITH ALL CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS IN CHAPTER 5.72 "TAXIC S" OF THE ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL CODE". Council Member Barneich seco tled, and the motion passed on the following roll call vote: AYES: Co ello, Barneich, Brown, Guthrie, Ferrara NOES: ABSENT: 11. NEW BUSINESS Mayor Ferrara declared a conflict of interest due to ownership of real property near the project, stepped down from the dais and left the room. 11.a. Consideration of Pre-Application No. 14-002; Specific Plan Amendment, Tentative Parcel Map and Conditional Use Permit for Subdivision of Two (2) Commercial Parcels into Forty-Two (42) Residential Lots, One (1) Common Area Lot, and Two (2) Commercial Lots; Location: Southwest Corner of East Grand Avenue and Sot,1th Courtland Street; Applicant: MFI Limited & NKT Commercial. Item 9.b. - Page 107 Minutes: City Council Meeting Tuesday, July 8, 2014 Page5 Associate Planner Downing presented the staff report and recommended that the Council review the conceptual plans and provide comments to the applicant. Staff responded to questions from Council. Mayor Pro Tern Guthrie invited public comment. Speaking from the public were Debbie Rudd and Scott Martin of RRM Design Group; Nick Tompkins, developer; John Mack, Loganberry Avenue; Patty Welsh, Pradera Court;; Michael Morrow, Raspberry Avenue; and Chris Richardson, Nipomo Street. Council questions and discussion ensued regarding the history of the project and the commercial and retail potential. Mayor Pro Tern Guthrie offered comments in favor of the project but stated he would like to see more ideas on the residential component with a little higher density; expressed concern about the location of the bus stop; and commented on the repositioning of the existing shopping center that may shape the future of other areas. Council Member Costello commented on whether the project is right for the location; would like to increase the commercial component; liked the condominium look; was not in favor of higher density; commented on the topography; and noted an economic study may have an impact on the project. Council Member Brown stated the project would be revenue neutral; he would like more vertical mixed use on the west side, higher density, and a larger commercial component. Council Member Barneich commented she would like to see something more modern; would like a "pocket neighborhood" and displayed examples. No formal action was taken on this item. Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie called for a break at 8:00 p.m. The Council reconvened at 8:10 p.m. Mayor Ferrara returned to the dais. 11.b. Consideration of Pre-Application No. 14-001; Specific Plan Designa · , General Plan Amendment, Development Code Amendment and 1ve Tract Map; Location: Traffic Way and East Cherry Avenue; Applica · angano Homes, Inc. Associate Planner Heffernan presented the staff re and recommended that the Council review the conceptual plans and provide com s to the applicant. Randy Russom, RRM esign, spoke regarding the conceptual project and responded to questions from Co Staff resP, ed to questions from Council regarding the pedestrian path, agricultural mitigation, and a ess issues. - Item 9.b. - Page 108 ATTACHMENT 3 Minutes: City Council Meeting Tuesday, August 12, 2014 4 Action: Council Member Barneich moved to adopt a Resolution entitled: "A RE LUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ESTABLISHIN A "NO TRUCK PARKING" ZONE ON CERTAIN AREAS OF BELL AND BENNETTS EETS". Council Member Costello seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll II vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Barneich, Costello, Brown, Guthrie, Ferrara None None 8.j. Consideration of an Amendment to Consult t Services Agreement with Omni- Means for On-Call Engineering Consul t Services Related to Traffic and Circulation. Recommended Action: Approve Amen ent No. 3 to the Agreement with Omni-Means for on-call traffic and circulation engi ring consultant services. Staff responded to questions by Coun · ember Brown regarding the contract process. Action: Council Member Brow moved to approve Amendment No. 3 to the Agreement with Omni-Means for on-call traffi and circulation engineering consultant services. Council Member Barneich secondeo, and t motion passed on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: No Bro , Barneich, Costello, Guthrie, Ferrara N e 10. CONTINUED BUSINESS Mayor Ferrara declared a conflict of interest due to ownership of real property near the project, stepped down from the dais and left the room. Mayor Pro T em Guthrie took over as Presiding Officer. 1 O.a. Continued Consideration of Pre-Application No. 14-002; General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan Amendment, Tentative Tract Map and Conditional Use Permit for Subdivision of Two (2) Commercial Parcels into Forty-Two (42) Residential Lots, One (1) Common Area Lot, and Two (2) Commercial Lots; Location: Southwest Corner of East Grand Avenue and South Courtland Street; Applicant: MFI Limited & NKT Commercial. Associate Planner Downing presented the staff report and recommended that the Council review the conceptual plans and provide comments to the applicant. Staff responded to questions from Council. Mayor Pro Tern Guthrie invited public comment. Speaking from the public were Debbie Rudd and Scott Martin of RRM Design Group; and Nick Tompkins, applicant for the project. Council Member Barneich suggested eliminating the second driveway; favored modern buildings for the commercial component; favored mid-century modern style for the residential Item 9.b. - Page 109 Minutes: City Council Meeting Tuesday, August 12, 2014 Page5 component; favored smaller residential units above the businesses; and commented she would favor affordable residential units. Discussion ensued regarding the center driveway in relation to the bus stop nearby. Council Member Costello commented on the pedestrian orientation within the project and favored the center driveway; favored the mixed-uses with residential units above both buildings; favored patio seating on Grand Avenue, and favored the proposed mid-century style. Council Member Brown expressed concern with the General Plan amendment and that the project is revenue neutral; however, he favored detached housing and the project overall. Mayor Pro Tern Guthrie provided favorable comments for the overall project; favored the front and side yards; favored the modern style architecture; supported elimination of the center driveway; and favored the interior patio. City Manager Adams provided a summary of staff's involvement with the project. No formal action was taken on this item. Mayor Pro Tern Guthrie called for a break at 7:52 p.m. The Council reconvened at 8:04 p.m. Mayor Ferrara returned to the dais. 11. NEW BUSINESS 11.a. Consideration of a Resolution Upholding the Appeal of the D Luis Obispo County Health Department, Thereby Appro ·ng Submitted by Best Western Casa Grande Inn. Community Development Director McClish presented the st eport and recommended that the Council adopt a Resolution upholding an appeal of the 1sion of the San Luis Obispo County Health Department, thereby approving the swimming ool plans submitted by the Best Western Casa Grande Inn. Building Official Hurst explai the construction that had taken place and the his interpretation of the Building Code. Curt Batson, Director of Environment reasons for the denial of the projec . ealth representing the County Health Officer, explained Ray Bunnell, owner of th est Western Casa Grande Inn, stated that he would remove he waterfall. Mayor Ferr. a invited public comment. Speaking from the public was Gail Lightfoot, stating that as a reti d RN she felt that CPR could safely be administered. Bu" ing Official Hurst provided an interpretation of the relevant Code. Item 9.b. - Page 110 ATIACHMENT4 Courtland and Grand Mixed \ Use Project Prepared by: Iii! nm mm ns E GINEERING SOLUTfONS Item 9.b. - Page 111 COURTLAND AND GRAND MIXED USE PROJECT Prepared For: City Of Arroyo Grande 300 E. Branch Streetf L"''"F Arroyo Grande, G~l~ti2'o '.;'.\~ October 2014 25-1275-30 _..r . .: '>:";!~ ,~;<'"' R 1923TIA001.docx Item 9.b. - Page 112 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 3 Existing Conditions .......................................................................................... . Existing Transportation System ........................................... . Data Collection & Existing Traffic Volumes .......... 6 Existing Transit Services .............................. . Traffic Analysis Parameters ......... . Existing Traffic Operations .................... . Project Description .................................. . . .................... 13 Project Site Access ..................... . Site Access Trip Generation & Distribution Existing Plus Project ......................... . ~~';, C I f C d"f ~f_-:-?::,.~~-·~-:. ,-~'',·'t1 19 umu a 1ve on '2~};;~ ... ,(':': .................... , ..................................................... . Cumulativ,E14'J~rProject T ra olumes ....... J\ ................................................................ 19 A~.i+v "h~ ~\~ Cumulative Pl1:.1s~Rroject ........ ~ ..... ·:.'.·~·;:::::.-;'.':~.~···\·('. ................................................................ 21 ~,::'.~~\ .. ~·j~~:~~~;~:.:::;~~:v '.:';~"'"'' ····"" ~~ Project Impacts an~~;~~/W,Ons .................................................................................................. 24 ~-~t"-:_., ;~~~~-~ Plu~~oJ~,~t Conditions .............................................................................. 24 -,_~ ~·-~ -"' ....... ~ ~;~~ Cumfllali\(e ConaitiC:>ns •............................................................................................. 24 ,_:t:"·!~\ '~:;;:1 Courtland and Grand Mix Use Project City of Arroyo Grande Page i R1923TIA001 docx Item 9.b. - Page 113 UST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Project Location and Vicinity Map ................................................................................. .4 Figure 2 -Existing Control and Lane Geometrics ................................ . Figure 3 -Existing Traffic Volumes ..................................................... . 12 Figure 4 -Trip Distribution ....................................................................... . Figure 5 -Existing Plus Project Volumes .................................... . /,,", ,(.;_: •L••~ '); Figure 6 -Cumulative No Project Volumes .......................... ~··· 4~;;:,;1:. ................................ ::9,.,20 .•.•. y "t··"''i,_ . . . /'"ij~iy-:,. ':.?':> ">. Figure 7 -Cumulative Plus Project Volumes .................... ".:.·~::: ............................................... :-.~'22·;·'> />;":FY' ·,,,: r· /. ··""7 /::~.. v \ ,,.,:;_:_r.-t •. /:.: -~'ffp8' -. "":. '"'~·.'~.>?' {; ~r'"'-:~ /'-, -, •," LIST OF TABLES~':~:;::~.. L~';:'.:_~;y ~#.:-t1%"~t :";q~y-' Table 1: LOS Criteria and Definition For Intersections ......... :':'<0}!'.~f/ ........................................... 8 E"·•, ~:.;~~Y:\. Table 2: Existing Conditions: lntersectio,i{b~$'!'~ ...................... ~~~~,~\.,, .................................. 10 y-·,N:: "\_-:,·''•P . . . (/\ ' . '*l,, ... ,. {;J~~~:-, Table 3: Project Tnp Generation ··············\i::"··;;·········~~-:.,,11~-:~.l~·~··········::..{-tf;i.1-.............................. 15 Table 4: Existing Plus Project conditions: l~t~~{ctiop~&:)x:· .... J'~~~[?i? ..................................... 17 T bl 5 C I t . N D~~-,.0. d"t" \l;~t;~i~~t·:i~;;;VLOS ~-· 19 a e : umu a 1ve o,.r:,r 1ect·~0n 1 ions: n er;s_e.c ion .................................................. . ,( ,h" "ir~:<:'.;, t" \"f3\<~-/ L • \: Table 6: General eJ~n.;· ·nd Propo,?eg Project Tn "''·"9mparison ................................................. 21 /'"i~y ' .• . \ • 71. ~~:P 1:{~ ·7 ,~'~:{> ~""' f"fn,.".t,;lu • '{ ,,,~, t, Table 7: Curllt;.1lati/e Plus Proje<i(t:Gonditions: lnterS:~ction LOS ................................................. 23 "':"J-.:: /-::;::;.';;; -~ \F ' /¥:<~,~ : . r';,] ?J>,-~' .<·-: 3,f, l;'~; 7,,,r-- Table 8: Cumula ·~ us f?>faJ·eet'"'C"cfnam0nMJv'litig·'ated Intersection LOS ................................. 24 ., 'r / ".,.. • .............,, ,.,',,,,, /"0=~1'" ··::;•" > '<~·:.~;;,;t.0u ~--p;:f'~ ;: "''L:f.~_ ,'"\,. ·~~~~1),,_, Courtland and Grand Mix Use Pro1ect City of Arroyo Grande APPENDIX Page 1i R1923TIA001.docx Item 9.b. - Page 114 hitroductoon This report has been prepared for the City of Arroyo Grande (City) to present the results of a Transportation Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) performed by OMNI-MEANS for !b~ proposed Courtland and Grand Mix Use Project (Project). The proposed project contain~4~j@OO square feet, five 650 square feet residential units above outdoor plaza, and 41 townl'io):ne residential units. Figure 1 illustrates the project location and vicinity map. /~1:S r Ji:(.)}). The following scenarios are analyzed as a part of the TIAR, as establi~ .. "In tf:l§',g>tJginal Scope of Work: £",·:)r '\.' '.~·:: y'' '<{ • Existing Condition t'.':,;; \"~t-:,, 6> Existing Plus Project Condition d 1p/ ~!~:~,~~ o Cumulative No Project Condition ·"/ ·'{, / e Cumulative Plus Project Condition f." $~ki.,. / /_{;.':)P" The Existing conditions analyzes current traffic operamsn~'N\(lthin}t'ie'~study area. Traffic counts , ___ ,, .. ~ ·-. ' were taken at all study locations in order to simulate typie~tw~eKday conditions during the AM and PM peak hours. ~:;~~( The Existing Plus Project conditions bl:l~~~WWil;zJhe Existing cot~ili6ns analysis by generating l-----.·~7",, "1 '1' ii :J...~~ "': '"<"'t.t trips for the proposed project over the Ex~stihg.intersec:;tions volumes:.'.'···· The Cumulative No Project conditions a~~~e~~~~~i[greGast~ using the City of Arroyo Grande Travel Demand Model, assuming f~1(;~,pild-w{f'.::"_~)'f'th~1E;1ty;s·~,General Plan land uses and circulation network. The 9~~,~eneral P1aq:1;1~.U¢(!'.Jse on the pro'posed project site is "Mixed Use" which allows for,, ~~.~~~\of commer~,~t~1ses and multi-family housing. The Cumulative fZJ~~:·· r~ject c~~ifiions analyt~~~~uildout of the City's General Plan with the proposed proj8.ty,t:~§/ii'a uses sub~'!!f!Jted for the ~9Wc;ble development under the General Plan. Since the pr@~P~~d project Plcf~.~"' 9'-Sir,JQle famil~;~b'ousing, the project will require a General Plan amend~~~:~~-~.d will r,~~f!lf;L. 'l:~s~;Jn1~J;~~:.;~ix of us~~ than. allowed .under the existi.ng General Plan. Th~~f~£~,1,f~~;-·Cumu at1vS-::Rlus}:Pro1ect cond1t1on will result in fewer new trips generated at the prnj~.~f?;~jfe than under the Cumulative No Project analysis, which simulates Title of Report Client G~·n~~~~?~~~n land uses. , ~ ,:;-. ..,,~ ~. ~ ·">~ .. ·~;'·:~, -~~:,> '~fx.l' "',,,:•~ Page 3 R1923TIA001.docx Item 9.b. - Page 115 j ( ":.' / / '; c I I '. i-. I /--I ! ., / .. I i I i I I I .! ·1 E.. "' I ~ _j .,,. ·/ I j" I Courtland and Study Area 11/5/2014 4 4-5 PM K \PRJ\1923\Tl92.3\Tl92JTG001 DWG ! : I I I i I I~ · 1 I I ! j , ,---/ !- I I I i I l--1 IY GIV1Nn1 AVE . J J. .I ONGBAANCH ,,1 VE \ / ', -_, -.... ( I I ! q 1--i Cl;; -•, I ~I ; / ~~;:J::t-'--:__:~~::..i~~-t~~-A~S~'Ho:......oS~T~~' ~ l __ -- 1 I ! \ :FARROLL AVE ; -I -I ·1 I ; ·' J I ' i it; I ! ·-1 ::;i j I~ -1 , I I ! , v / i' I J : I ! I "\ ., i .. I I .. I r J THE . 1· ~IKE,. r .L, '-' "'I tti l .. FAIR OAKS A VE ,. J I I l i i_I Project Transportation Improvement Study · .. · I I Item 9.b. - Page 116 Existing Conditions The City of Arroyo Grande is an incorporated community located with the "Five Cities" area of San Luis Obispo County, California. The city is located approximately 10 miles soyth"of the City of San Luis Obispo, along the US 1901 coastal corridor. The City is 5.84 squar~~?roiles in area ,&x;~....,.H:r and is at an elevation of 114 feet. The City is located contiguous with the inp,!ff_Cfrated areas of the City of Pismo Beach to the northwest and the City of Grover Beach to~l;t6,('Nest. Based on the data provided by Census 2010, population in the City has increS:l~ff'~[g~!y 1,400 from 15,851 in 2000 to 17,252 in 2010, a 9% increase. 4-(~~1" ~;::--~~~-, __ ' "':;r ,,,;;-,, 1-,_ "" ,' H!~ 0 "<.1 The proposed project is located on the southwest corner of /.'~~'~rtland Street an~'·>~-,;:~:and Avenue. /.-.,.,,y -.· ,., •f}' ~~~· : -~~ Existing Transportation System /:---~;v , '" ~~) The following roadways provide primary circulation \/ifi!fi!ri~the City fo~~~~o Grande and in the > J"<O,--.'('j,~ / ,'• ~-,i" vicinity of the propose project. ~--:._\lh:,, /?")i' '"' ~,,;q .. 0~ £"7 US 101 is a major north-south freeway facility that trave~~~~(s%~' coastal California. US 101 serves as the principal inter-regional auto and truck travel roClte,:tJi'9t connects San Luis Obispo fa~ "''' ., County (and other portions of the Cent~J;£?~~~~t,.,., with the San Fr-.9n~i~~o Bay Area to the north and the Los Angeles urban basin to the~~g~r(~~:-i~Q,j,l\}_1§~n Luis ObisQ<9;,~Q,,_unty, US 101 provides m~jor c~nnection between and through s~~~;a! citie,~Jf:llf,~~~-':: the "Fi~~f,9ities" area of the San Luis Obispo County, US 101 represents Ci':,,,maJor recr~<;Jt J;,§,S~~~ll as commuter travel route and has a general four-lane divided freeway1\cross2 {ection lfiJ:6.!?)'rnph posted speed limits. Within the Ci~y of Arroy~_nde, US 1br~:~it~t~:Sflill-accesS'interchanges with Oa_k Park Boulevard, Brisco Roadir.lalqyc:)l:i~oad and 1Gr(;lno/Avenue/Branch Street as well as d1rect1on , /~4Jr~---.-< "'-*'.;l:'i~ \"'"" f' ( / interchange acce~-~-~~ "ffic=vvl}~J)d Fair Oa\~~.({enue. El Camino ,f(ear is a two t&~~!mree lane no'tTI:.~1:;ast-southwest arterial that operates as a frontage ~~~n the south:;~~~~~s 101:·~·;) Oak Park .gJb{~.varp'4~~g~~;.~;:,:fj~~e north-south street that runs along the ""'"-it ->,;tr.,,;;-•--'!.,. --~ northwestern City}Jijrtjt )ine, defining Arroyo Grande's boundary with the adjacent Cities of Q~oy~rit}_G,ach an~cf~fof.Qo Beach. Oak Park Boulevard forms a full-access interchange with ,,,~t:J_pl'l:@it;:~'n9·~xtend§\~_(}Q!9, of US 101 into the City of Grover Beach, approximately defining :~·,_>ihe City df<&;!J~¥~ GraM~~~t'c;>uthwestern City limit line. North of the City of Arroyo Grande, .,,.. Oak Park B(Yt:JJfi~ard fork8"!!1t~)Pld Oak Park Road, which extends north into County lands, and into Noyel"=""·· d which ~'€3-,etends 1n a northeasterly direction to connect with SR 227. ';;,-., E Grand Aven , . ,, a four to five lane road that runs in the east-west direction. E Grand <~~~'::~nue starts ''~:l/City Limits and continues east until it connects to SR 227. ~ ""'.c'"< L('?f" .• / w<fiiktland S,t[!~et is a north-south road that starts at Newport Avenue to the north and tefm'ilfiate~h'Ash Street to the south. Courtland Street is a two lane collector roadway. "'~i~;¥:)Y' Elm Street is a north-south road that terminates 500 feet north of Brighton Avenue and Cabrillo Highway to the south. Elm Street is a two lane collector throughout. Halcyon Road is a north-south road that terminates at US 101 to the north and continues into the City of Callender. Halcyon Road is two lane major collector throughout. Courtland and Grand Mix Use Pro1ect Crty of Arroyo Grande Page 5 R1923TIA001.docx Item 9.b. - Page 117 Data Collection & Existing Traffic Volumes The traffic impact analysis for the Courtland and Grand Mix Use Project focuses on seven study intersections. The study intersections were selected based on consultation with City staff and a twenty (20) project-trip threshold, consistent with the Draft City Traffic Impact Stuc:jy:~uidelines, whereby a study intersection is analyzed if 20 or more project-generated tripsf~r:~;iprojected to travel through it. Intersection counts for the AM and PM peak hour ~ffi~,,.fonducted on Wednesday September 24, 2014. They were the following locations:fi·:~fi%;~: ;:~> ,.;"·, ,,,?''\., ···.·-·"'-, 1. Oak Park Boulevard & W Grand Avenue/E Grand Avenue /(:}v~ '-~·;i~ 2. Courtland Street & E Grand Avenue v· '(i 3. Elm Street & E Grand Avenue £!;,·, '"'::> ': 4. Brisco Road & E Grand Avenue ".-:'::)/ 5. Oak Park Boulevard & El Camino Real . _;.{/:;;/ 6. Oak Park Boulevard & CA 101 On Ramp/W Branch~Street 7. Courtland Street & Ash Street <5Y: ,,f(1) The AM peak hour is defined as the one continuous hour'; eaWtraffic flow counted between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m., and the PM peak hour is defin~'tlL -~~'~on'e continuous hour of peak '<; .,, traffic flow counted between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. under tY'~$2~1.~vy_eekday conditions. Existing Pedestrian & Bi~j {:?i.~es ~~'" The City of Arroyo Grande recently adopt~a1he 2ff1'2~iqye[e;&,,,Trail Ma~ter Plan which includes proposed bicycle and pedestrian trails, Js. ;~ell as o~s"{e~t~'t;ilcy<?te fa,cilities to complete the partial network already in place in the City ~i:ta1.Coum{y";:,the pl~rrte:ne~urages the use of walking and bicycling and recogni?,??'t!)r:ee classes cit.·.~JkesXi'ay~: ,...,. L4~}:~. ~. ·_,, .. ~; .... ¥:~)-, "''"',, Class I Multi U~e~f!~fhtYPfb'?ll~~known as . . paths, Class I facilities are multi-use facilities that provide A~-Ct)fi:;pletely s'E;pEirated right'!rfrf~\,yay for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrian§~~(l:l"cross floi!~:~~~~-~rnffi~~tJnimized. Class II ~e'·;,l:::aqe kno,wn.·a?iliike:l9!lel?JC!a~ll facilities provide a striped and signed lane for one way tfit'}igf§,!,!p~ijl/bn each sia1f::'.of~Ystreet or highway. The minimum width for bike lanes ranges beftWe'~tillfour and five feet depending upon the edge of roadway conditions '-'·"'' '• r. .:~~;~i~.~ lanes:~.~~=fre: .. 9emarcated by a six-inch white stripe, signage and pavement lege. n s'·"' :· . .;:.. ·· ···"°> ~~t~ ~ \~ ,...._ Class II~ B;S(~~'1;1,te kno~~) bike routes, Class Ill facilities provide signs for shared use <=".: with motor vehicl.~~~within th€ same travel lane on a street or highway. Bike routes may be ~ .,,. enhanced with ~aming or guide signs and shared lane marking pavement stencils. While .~~'~lass Ill routes ~~9i:f?ot provide measures of separation, they have an important function in -·;providing contil)4]cy;to the bikeway network. In th~~faject yi~i~?rthere are currently Class II Bike Lanes on E Grand Avenue, El Camino Real, af7io~b~k.·~park Boulevard. A Class II Bike Lane will be added to Courtland Street to connect tlii~rcSJect to E Grand Avenue and to the Berry Gardens Neighborhood. Existing Transit Services The City of Arroyo Grande public transportation is provided by South County Area Transit (SCAT), a branch of San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority's (SLORTA). SCAT routes 21, Courtland and Grand Mix Use Project City of Arroyo Grande Page 6 R1923TIA001.docx Item 9.b. - Page 118 22. 23, and 24 serve major roadways in the City. Out of those routes, SCAT routes 21 and 24 directly serve the project area with a bus stop that will be relocated in front of the proposed commercial development on E Grand Avenue. Additionally, route 23 is within close proximity and will also provided transit options for the development via Oak Park Boulevard. ~<;>ute 10 is a regional transit route that is served by these three routes and a park and ride atd:l_Ei'{Qyon Road and El Camino Real. /;(~Y Traffic Analysis Parameters £~,~~ · This TIAR provides a "planning level" evaluation of traffic conditi©n·;;,;'which-;::;rs:;considered {i..,;,,,~ J ... ~ ("'->t'"~,,;,!; sufficient for .CEQA/NEPA clearance purposes. The "planning leve1Yevaluation';;i.nq0rporates appropriate heavy vehicle adjustment factors, peak-hour factQ.e~'".~~md signal lost-tT'ftl:e~~tE)ctors. ~OS op:rations h.ave been. determined usi~g HCM-20J9f?f9~lhodol.ogies for ?ele(w(n~~g intersection delay, mcorporatrng the aforementioned factot~;·"'~he following subsections ol!Jtl!f!e,. ,,(;!'_~--~"-'if ,, ~ .. ~,«'>lt. the methodology and analysis parameters used tp~\q~antify traff1q, operations at sttigw;r . , /~w~'i">/ /~> 'fr.1 ""' intersections. /: .. :::.7 ""'·'.'l~ . .:r, Intersection LOS Methodologies ~?~?'' Levels of Service (LOS) have been calculated for all iflte~~~~~ion control types using the methods documented in the Transport9tion Research Bo~fd~£j:ibUcation Highway Capacity Manual, 2010. Traffic operations have,~~if.~h?'<;!·l,!~,ntified through'<tb~Jj~termination of "Level of Service" (LOS). Level of Service is a qu~li~ti\YE:iilifi:Era.~_ure of traffic o)e:rgtiqg conditions, whereby O ... _.. :!, .... \~">"""•-~ '~·'~"~:;..,n'''""' a letter grade A through F is assigned~1~\'!-~n 1nte~~~!~r:i;:-.or roadwa.X;tsegment representing progressively worsening traffic conditiol'\~f:·.\For sig11,a!iz n}er.~ections and All-Way-Stop- Controlled (AWSC) intersection, the interS'~dion d,~tais;;-an ""''~osiare average values for all \,•re<-~ .. ~~•? ~t.~ intersection move_ments. -~~i;J';Y_o-Way-Sto~..:;o~~Dt~IJea (TWSC) 111tersections, the int~:section delays and LOS 1s rep(~-~.§ntat1v.e of those fQi;:.ti;i~/worst-case movement. LOS definitions for different types of int~~cm'.frl ~i:>qf~Js are outli{t+i* fn Table 1. Al; ,c·:::·;;( ,_ Synchro 8 M~f ~ng j ;n:" _ . " '; . The Synchr~~€!L~1g_n 8 s~~ar;~;:~~~~?;r:;:T-r~~L?_,. re has been ~sed _to 1r:iplement the HCM- 2010 analysis m~tf.iooolog1~s, .:Y,he~peaki.b£>.vr;.capac1ty tables contained m this report present the intersection delay''ag ··li::.GS .. e~timates as caiC'tit'c:ited using the Synchro software. '<; ~.,.:.-· ·~~:;;):'. ~j~ ~~ ~} Courtland and Grand Mix Use Pro1ect City of Arroyo Grande Page 7 R1923TIA001.docx Item 9.b. - Page 119 TABLE 1: LOS CRITERIA AND DEFINITION FOR INTERSECTIONS i:~,~t~~.:~T~p~\ti·:~:~·>·: .. '<~.· ,;· ·.·. ·· '·'.;_:~'_·:.··> .. . .. · , ... :;~~,t~.p~~;~~;t:yfVe~~~~.~;·l~Way' ::~service flow ~.r..:i:>elay ,, . · ~ :. •. · :".· '· ~Maneuveraoilit · .. · .Signalized •::;sign :,sto : : .: : A B c D <lJ ::0 :5: cu 0 Ci5 u:: <lJ ::0 :5: cu 0 Ci5 u:: Ol c ..c <lJ (.)_ cu .0 0 co . a. u; :s: a. c 0 -< :::::> u:: ;very slight delay. Progression 1s .Turning movements }very favorable, with most are easily made, and 1vehicles arriving during the green :nearly all drivers find ~ hase not sto 1n at all. ,freedom of o erat1on . .Vehicle platoons are . '.Good progression and/~r short iforn:ied. Many drivers _ · :::> 0 0 icycle lengths. More vehicles stop :begin to feel ~.) d rthan for LOS A, causing higher ·somewhat restricte~/V < a2n0 0 ~levels of average delay. :within groups ,p · ·vehicles. .·. Gen~J;¥J~~on~1g~(eCI4:Cfl5etfhetg~i~;/" 'limit o • · · fusJE( delay. TfYere are typically .• ? nd1cat1v ~obr progression, long queues of ~9,§;{Ycle le~~;:.~?"'an~ high vehicles waiting ~!!,!_m:s~!o-capa~~t'.:r:~t1os. upstream of the ·lndi~~§·e,!~ cycle fatlJ;i,[g~?.are intersection. fre uetl1~e~currence~·;i;;:<~ · Genera1r?flic~nsidered 'to be \;f";,rJc1~~ : unaccept~t;>je to most drivers. ·Often oq9~n~ with over satura · -· ay also occur at high..:V,~J:i)lle-to-capacity ratios. Tti~i!Mfe many individual cycle ail~~Ers. Poor progression and ~ng cycle lengths may also be major contributing factors. .Jammed conditions. Back-ups from other locations restrict or prevent movement. Volumes may vary widely, depending principally on the downstream back-up conditions. and < 55.0 >55.0 and < 80.0 > 80.0 References: 2000 Highway Capacity Manual Courtland and Grand Mix Use Project City of Arroyo Grande >15.0 and < 25.0 >25.0 and < 35.0 >35.0 and < 50.0 > 50.0 >15.0 and < 25.0 >25.0 and < 35.0 >35.0 and < 50.0 > 50.0 Page 8 R1923TIA001.docx Item 9.b. - Page 120 Level of Service Thresholds The City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element specifies minimum level-:;.of-service standards for all the streets and intersections within the City's jurisdiction. In se'tti0n CT2, the City establishes the following performance standards for acceptable LOS:£,,'/ CT2. Attain and maintain Level of Service (LOS)'C' or better on aJ!~~~i~~ir::<md controlled intersections. /~)~i' ~, .. :'\ '~t? "'<··' :i:~ CT2-1 Where deficiencies exist, mitigate to an LOS 'D' at a ,,r.111l]!rnum and plan ~~!9'!ement to achieve LOS 'C' (LOS 'E' or 'F' unacceptable = s;Jgnificant adverse impa'6t:t.~nl@ss Statement of Overriding Considerations or CEQA FJ9~in:9'§ approved). The desl'§q:,;~·rid funding for such planned improvements shall be ~@I~fltly definite to enable constnictl~.~>· within a reasonable period of time. ~2t<'' /'x;v In addition to the City of Arroyo Grande designated L@~~:!·q:'..as fil~~;:plinimum acceptable LOS standard on City facilities, Caltrans LOS policy for state ~gtfr~~y(wiWalso be implemented. The ~'~~w' -<~ dJr' Caltrans published Guide for the Preparation of Traffic lmpact'.;:Jh'.ldies (dated December 2002) sta~~~::a~~l::~:~vors to maintain a '~~e tra~~treen LOS "C" and LOS "D" on State highway facilities, howe~r;)9a1tr1fitrs:'i!f6~!;10Yl(l~dges t118'i~tns may not be always feasible. and recommends that the le'ci9\agzncu.~.!:l-~t1lf~!~~).ca1trans to determine the appropriate target LOS." \'~?~ ./;/ ~< ... ;f? ~~ '\: ":'\c iT"-),1f Consistent with Caltr~~.J;J?$\[~!~~Sluoted ab6 · . d City ~ollc1es, .LOS "C" has been taken as the general thresholcil;Ef0r~acceJ:>tatilE:l operat10 t study mtersect1ons and roadway segments /~''r>_J \ __ H;; /',:;:; maint~med by th/.~iW, and. LO~:"!~J1" has beeri~~~~n. as the general threshold for acceptable operations at s~~f mtersec?:~t°-roa~ys m{!~~\?'ned by the State, ";:,~,~"'-4//~;;Y .( ·>, Courtland and Grand Mix Use Project City of Arroyo Grande Page 9 R1923TIA001.docx Item 9.b. - Page 121 Existing Traffic Operations The Existing condition analysis investigates current traffic operation within the City of Arroyo Grande in the vicinity of the project site. Figure 2 shows existing intersection Ian~,-geometries and control, while Figure 3 shows existing peak hour volumes at the studyQ!.m~rsections. Existing AM and PM peak hour intersection traffic operations are quantifies)!:S,ip~lntersection lane geometrics and traffic volumes. Table 2 shows the peak hour intersectic;1i,1'.g~T§vel of service operations at study locations under existing conditions. :~i)" TABLE2: EXISTING CONDITIONS: INTERSECTION LOS .b 2 Courtland St & E Grand Ave 3 Elm St & E Grand Ave 4 Brisco Rd & E Grand Ave 5 Oak Park Blvd & El Camino Real 6 Oak Park Blvd & CA 101 On Ram IW Branch St 7 Courtland St & Ash St Notes 1 TWSC =Two Way Stop Control 2 LOS = Delay based on worst mmor street approach for As presented in table 2, all study interse Courtland and Grand Mix Use Pro1ect City of Arroyo Grande ~l~i~:~~~ c c c 31.5 c 16.2 B 13 0 B Page 10 R1923TIA001.docx Item 9.b. - Page 122 ATLANTIC CITY AVE I • ·1 \ I I ! i 1· I: I : .. ; w cR.itND) A vk . I~ I I>) Courtland and • ' o/ Existing '~ .:•: •).?'•'~"~' ,. Lane ~·~-~:~l6metrics and Control y 11/6/2014 2 18 PM K \PRJ\192J\T1923\T192JTG001 DWG .~~ii l ~ v-t3 ..__ ~,~;?:~~ : 0 0 '~:~r·'~;.:~ I) Cl:1 I;.) ~ ~ •. ~. .: ' '\_ 9:: i:t; ~-~· .. tr C'.; Cl:1 .. I "'lil;:" ""' ------. ·~,I'' ~ c:; ' CAMINO REAh L_ ~~ ~ ..,__ .;----..,--- dOlS 0 ~ Cl:1 ~ i:t; __+ STOP ~ o.; --v t § ~ 0 c:; I;.) H.STRE r· .. Study Item 9.b. - Page 123 ~~ ~"'" ~~N .:::-0¥ rooo "'"'- ..J i l 124(181i-J 296(507 - 20(46 ~ (- , / / ( } I I ~ ATLANTIC, CITY AVE I - ! j . I ! r· i ---i -1 i ! : i i w CRAND/ Avk I I I ! -! --I ! I ONCBRANCH A VE ,' f Courtland and Existing L111(163) :.:: r..i 4-268(490) t3 rn(117) 0 o.::i It I ~ IDLO'CO ~ "l[) n ~N-r--.~~ ~ "'"'"' NN 2§ n- A E · 11/5/2014 4 45 PM I< \PRJ\192J\T192J\T1923TC001 owe ~ ~ t')~l[) -"" -co- L18(51) ¥~ "-" ..J i l 4-419(630) r27(76) 57(94l_; 420(755 -It I 14(37 ~ ~ "'"'"' ~ '<l"f'l- llS'F GRAND AVENUE Traffic 3 \ .l I I 1"~ I I~ Volumes 4 LEGEND. xx (XX) 7 EL ,c MINO REAL ' L12(21) 4-118(134) r10(21) . ·ASH STREET' AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES Improvement Study Item 9.b. - Page 124 Project Descroption The proposed project is located south of E Grand Avenue and west of Courtland Street. The concept for the project is mixed-use small town style in a vertical and horizontat~mixed-use arrangement. However, since the project proposes to construct some single far:fiITY,1,~ousing, it A..~·,. will require a General Plan amendment, as the current "Mixed Use" designation allows for commercial and multi-family housing only. The full size proposed project ~i~~~Jfla'n is presented in the Appendix, and is shown in Inset 1 below. jp,~r.,:;)<~~~·~,. 0, ! •• :·:;;~ ' .. ~ INSET 1 ·;:. ··:.'" ' \ '· ·>;'>, =, '':Pf' "' !~'h. PROPOSED PROJECT SITE PLAN /'-... \;X '~,;,8'".'" ,I,:~~;;) ~{~.~ ~\'\.. ~' ?,_ -~.:'.'.>·, ~)·' '<:tz::~/: :"' Tlte,.-~£.?S<?posed Rt6J€?ct is divided into two subareas. The northern subarea is primarily comm~};~f!l, d~.i~fcyp'fnent containing approximately 11,000 square feet of commercial, with five "';lv~'l'!"'~Of' ""'"'~ r~ ,.,, (5) mulfi~~f'.f:rn~iesidential units above commercial uses. A proposed outdoor plaza will have dining and'<~t1l:>lic art with a pedestrian-only connection to the southern residential subarea. The southern residential subarea is residential and includes 41 single family residential units. The residential subarea will have a neighborhood green in the center of the property. A bike path system will be added to Courtland Street to connect the proposed project to Grand Avenue and to the Berry Gardens neighborhood. Courtland and Grand Mix Use Pro1ect City of Arroyo Grande Page 13 R1923TIA001.docx Item 9.b. - Page 125 Project Site Access OPTION , e: Courtland and Grand Mix Use Pro1ect City of Arroyo Grande INSET 2 OPTION "A" SITE ACCESS PLAN t.:t"f.>;j 4D $0 4-+-1 -+°\--''-, -,,,---t- 1".,,40 Page 14 R1923TIA001.docx Item 9.b. - Page 126 Under either Option "A" or "B", two full-access driveways would be provided off of Courtland Street. The northernmost driveway would serve the northern, mixed use, subarea. The southern driveway would serve the residential subarea. No vehicular cross-subarea access is proposed, however it is anticipated that pedestrian trips between the residential subarea and the mixed use subarea will occur, creating a project-wide "internal trip" capture. Site Access Evaluation -~T::'. From an intersection operations standpoint, either access alternativ~"' . .. J1s~jmilarly. The restriction to right turns benefits operations on E Grand AvenuEkC~?'the ~~~it'on of new protected parallel parking stalls will benefit visitors. However, Qptioi)f"A" has tff ntial to introduce confusion as visitors will not be able to leave the si "' ·om the same dr "'' they entered, and may attempt to exit via the entrance drivewg. .' ion "B" also benefif it access by relocating the bus stop adjacent to the new dever:.,µ:ient. / Trip Generation & Distribution '"'~:11~4:~ Consistent with the City's Draft Traffic Impact Study Gui0 ~ ··· were derived using the Institute of Transportation Engi Edition. Table 3 presents the estimated trip generation for th Ab·~ <(s:.~~,l 4'• PRo.t·~ It:;~ :{/\:i;1];~{~~; ... : :;·: ; ~j )1:1~~1~:><' : ., "· .·: tuarid''.~_e:cai~9~~:(itE'~.dii~):'.. _ .. · iShoppmg Center (820) :Apartment (220) 1;;i1~~t~~~);.~~?· : :shopping Center&::··~ Internal CaptiJ1J~.''w(Townl29Ji'sgs• Pass-By Tnp R,flii!Jstion (40%)" ~et New Project Trips 6 0 86 -16 70 0 37 -10 27 4~>·/ s, PL~j~pnrip generation forecasts [si.[~E) Generation Manual 9th I rop'osed land use. 'i:~~:.~ •f;r~~tt ,~:: " ~ '{: •, -'f''* ':,"-• \' ::."::'~,:~ k4'>"~": ~~~?--1 -~~'S ~~M-~e'?_k1J:loui:·:r~iP.iRat~7Unit"'l ::!'/.f;:,~ ~ :'T~~lt( · :::1!13.•::,1i$Out~cyo·', ! 38% 12.41 48% 52% 75% 5 0 49 -6 43 1.15 4.08 20 -7 152 -44 108 63% 65% -13 13 -5 82 -23 59 37% 35% -6 7 -2 70 -21 48 tes. 'i~<---~--~-~·~·~~0\:lf:j1 As~v ed inJ.aJiJ~:'3, the proposed project will generate an estimated 86 new AM peak hour trips a .2 ~·t~!V.±!?M peak hour trips. ~~~~~'f:iJ;Y Project trl~j~dT§tribution estimates were developed using Traffix software using the trips _,,,. generated by the ITE Trip Generation Manual. Trips were distributed along paths to develop travel patterns that were superimposed on-top of existing conditions at the study intersections. Figures 4 illustrate the trip distribution of inbound and outbound trips. Courtland and Grand Mix Use Pro1ect City of Arroyo Grande Page 15 R1923TIA001.docx Item 9.b. - Page 127 \ ' v I 1 j " ' .!. J 'I -i i I ', -i -! ' ,,, f"' 1-, ' ,_ " J_ -I ;' I I I 1-TLANTIO CITY A VE I I { I I 1 ,. L I I ' L -i '!-1--l I , I I , I-"I I Wi GRAND: A VE I I ---1 .l ' : -1 11/5/2014 4 45 PM K \PRJ\1923\T1923\T192JTG001 DWG ', .._,_ I I I I { I I I I I ,, j f .... i "' I ~ ~ -I I ASH ST 1-1 \ J ( 1 FARROLL AVE I I I I , I ~--\ [ 11 1 lE'. l 11;) ""1 Impact Study ,,, { -' I FAIR OAKS AVE " ' I! I \ ""' l Item 9.b. - Page 128 Existing PhJs Project Existing Plus Project conditions were developed by superimposing proposed AM and PM peak hour project-generated trips (Table 3) using the proposed project trip distributiol)j(figures 4A and 48) onto existing traffic volumes (Figure 3). The resulting Existing Plu,s.fR~/Jject traffic volumes are presented in Figure 6. Intersection analysis was performed as~1wji;ig.r the existing intersection lane geometrics and control types (Figure 2). Table 4 preser:ifi';'/W;1e results of the Existing Plus Project conditions analysis. d},"~['f:£:.;~.,, J''.»'/ ~ «·'', TABLE 4: .·tJ,/ 'Z-·~);l· EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS: INTERS~fIION'LOS '\\~~1};~'-. Courtland and Grand Mix Use Project Ctfy of Arroyo Grande Page 17 R1923TIA001 docx Item 9.b. - Page 129 _...Nr::- '°"'"' n~lO OJ"<t-N -o..,. .::..Do L120t173) _,...._ OJo_ ¥~ L18(51) 1'1N-..,._,.... j i l -275 498) :;;; Jil -419(630) h ~73(120) ~37(98) VJ c 124(181l_J R:i 58(95l_J ~ Ii I ~ "l i I 301(517 -.. ~ 424(765 -~ 20(46 -----., ~ 0:: 18(43-----., ~ lO <D-§ ..,. lO I') OJnf'1 ~N-~~ ..... ~~ ~ tO tO" c NtO V tO f')N NN ~ '-' n- ·EAST GRAND' A ENUE 4 ~~ ~ NNl'1 L36(14) ,J i l -369(453) 16(17l_J Ii I 312(459 - 38(71-----., AST GRAND .A 6 '<.,;,:!:...·~ / \~ '',-" J /~' ~ ...,,-I\ .,_, ' -' '\, .; .. .{ AVEN '>i N' N' "~'° ~OJ~ ..... ~ .... NVN ~,.--.. ..,. <DI') N'°f'1 ~ NC.00 L116(112) ~ l[)OJN -Nm ~ i l -20(34) :;;, ~8(23) c 234(500 ,_j R:i It I ~ '52(7,1}~ ~ 148( 440 "· ),;. ~ :"'1 OlON '\~~' ,.._ Nf'1 ~'°~ i.v,.· -~N lOl')N 0 ~ " E REAL L13(24) L223(143i'' ~~ 4-21(58f'(:: ,J i l -118(134) h <l-529(828) VJ (' ~' I ' J I Iri'ANf'IC CITY A VE 1 I r -J l I, I w1 cRJ.Nn/ Av}- I _/ I t; ~ 0, I - 1 ! ) ONCBRANCH A VE ! . I j -! e-.. r Cl) PROJECT ~ I I ~ I I '' ' I ' -1 -- _j 'I I r'q I<:>; I ~ :;:; <:..> ir-160(481)"1{ c ir-10(21) i:t1 "' 'd' '!tl:,tf ~' ',: .,27(50l _J I t I ~ '<.!, 92(160 - /,~~ Q'; '·~8(24-----., ~ ,-~~,.;. ?~~,:-~ ~'° .... ~ )' ;;:; - t4fi5 ~ ~ '"-!ti.,;.~~;~", ;§' \!e · ·:·ASH STREET 9 -,;:;- ~OJ I OJ- .::..¥ "tO j i 8(21)-3 I t 2(5)'1 -.:o-:=-~n N.::;, C'i LEGEND· xx AM PEAK HOUR ' 7 )'·'·.,~ '<s. ,, \: ~ -', }:.::~;~i.4:J'.,___+--rl -!-I -,:__,,-+-_:.+=F-=;::=-_::;_:_=---- l\"f'> J;.,"""(). /i-r.i ·~'/ "'-1 (XX) -PM PEAK HOUR itj FAIR OAKS AVE Courtland and G·f~rfd;-Jviixe/9:;~§e Project Transportation Improvement Study Existing Plus Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 11/5/2014 1 44 PM K \PRJ\1923\r192J\T19231G001 OWG ~ I ~ 485(869j-h 18(43 -----., ..,. § I') 0 c '-' E -;;- ~ro ..,._ ::::,,00 OJ lO j ~ ~ 23(9)-3 Ii ~ h 6(2)-----., r::)r::' § ~N N- 0 c 0 '-' TRAFFIC VOLUMES TRAFFIC VOLUMES ~ lit:' ~ .... ~ q h '-' [:; c ~ ~ --.: ~ § c '-' Item 9.b. - Page 130 Cum lative Conditions Cumulative conditions refer to an analysis scenario approximately 20 years in the future. Cumulative conditions were analyzed by deriving traffic volume forecasts using~the City of Arroyo Grande Travel Demand Model, assuming full build-out of the City's G@1lr~~Plan land uses and circulation network. ./<:~~l" "'~-.. ';),-" Cumulative No Project conditions will assume that the proposed pr9. ,,:,-;~·: ... \,.,is developed /',,~' '""-> consistent with the existing General Plan land use designation, "Mi~~;~~ , J;\i}:ih allows for commercial and multi-family residential development. ~>;; ~!!:: A::.. Cumulative Plus Project conditions will be developed by repl~~!f:'9 the existing Ge .• ;. )j?lan land uses on the proposed project site with the proposed pi~~Pland uses, which include~~:"r~, ix of commercial, multi-family housing, and single family hoµ(ii'.igY """ Lf2:f)7 Cumulative No Project Traffic Vohfij'.~ A:/ The existing City Travel Demand Model was used to ge; t ~:tCumulative base condition volumes. Future lane geometrics are the same as the existi , , , ·'Section lane geometries and control as shown in Figure 2. Figure 6 shows Cumulative No:;;_'F!J~1f3C?f peak hour traffic volumes at study intersections. Table 5 shows t · e K"'hour intersections~le"veJ of service operations at study locations under Cumulative No Pr-0, , , ~ ti~p_!=>. '· ,,:~:· :i :<; '.,,;;·: ,,~ 'Ji;ABLE 5~··· . : ~ ~~ ~ CUMULATIVE NO PROJEC::l::GONDITION' • \ 2:·;~~-£,~":'.·:~,·-·-=~-:t:::-:;-;---:--r:--=-:-:---:-....,....-=--:-~= 2 Courtland St & E,Grand· Ave 3 Elm St & E Grahcl~:4.ve 4 Brisco Rd &~E~Grand Ave 5 Oak Park Btvdi:&'.;El~Camino R~al 6 Oak Park Blvd &"e&:~ CM. O.r.i;~amp/VV Not~& ~~ _ ,, '{ti~~,~~ 1~~c,.,,,, aY:Stop Control:ti'~~\ Y-::;Aiiilf~:elikiii:lllr'-.:·: _, ·J.,&-'-'"PM·'Peait~Aour>!(·': i 27 5 c 232 c c c c c 12.1 B arrant·' :'·'--. · ·•. '• ,,,_.,, arrant:·, " ~:~~ ~ '3 /?r ;•::;"):<,:?:'>,. -'"~0 ~ ~"~; N>"" " ,'."" :3 .. ''•;. Met? •. , '.! ~E>el11Y: .. LOS·>-·itMet? ·,,; 336 c 31.4 c 25.3 c 26.9 D Yes 42.4 D 37 9 D 15 1 c 't,-.: -> ,,,~/'l'l... ~~:>;J ..... ':!., 12.lfGS =Dela asfi{!~?'.!!r{orst mm6(S!f~?t, approach for TWSC intersections, average of all approaches for Signal ~ s presented~~~' 5, t~-, sections are projected to operate at unacceptable LOS in Cumulative No Pfdj~(£t conditions. The Brisco Road/E Grand Avenue and Oak Park pulevard/EI Camin8:i ,:-~al intersections are both projected to operate at LOS D in the PM peak Recommend mprovements to mitigate these deficiencies are proposed in the 1s report. Courtland and Grand Mix Use Pro1ect City of Arroyo Grande Page 19 R1923TIA001.docx Item 9.b. - Page 131 ~ ~l[)l[) l[)NI') aJ l[)"' :::::,'O'li) OON "<t"1N ) i l 125(185l_J 375(590 - 30(55 ~ '• '' I ATLANTIC, CITY A VE J : I -I 1 .. 1 f _ I E.. ..,, L215~265~ -355 575 .r165(210) "I t I 'OL()l{) l[)CON ~NN o~ "ll[)l[) l[)- r<JN •, i:: _, i I i I. i .. I ~ w' CRAN Di A vE / -- I : 1- 1 I ' ,! ,i I l'-....J I -! j i-;..._ ' Courtland and I f- Cumulative 11/5/2014 4 44 PM K \PRJ\1923\T192J\T1923TG001 OWG ~ 0 l[)~"' ,,.,o_ -ao~ ~o l[)l[)N <ON- ) i l t::i c 80(115l_J 660(995 _.,. 45(70 ~ ~ ~ c:: ::.:: ~ 3 8 h ~Oln L60(95) C>l ~'°"" L75(5o) ~DO -<O <O -640(850) .J i l -560(635) .rB0(130) .r90(175) "I t I 125(125l_J It I 545(690 - 'OL()l{) § 40(70 -ii s~ ~l[)l[) c l[)"<tr-- aJ C,,) I '! FAIR OAKS A VE ~8 ~"~ 'i.O~ L170(150) aJOlN _,,,_ i l -30(45? ..-10(25 27:"6(5~5};:;;! It I 55D5 ~ 160(450 ,., 0-lDO'lO ~.~~· l'-l[)r<J ~r--~ "" l[)~l[) l[)l[)N ...., Cl() CAMINO REAL ~ ~ O~l[) r--001 L60(70) U=),::.U) Nl[)<O .J i l -120(135) ..-10(25) 30(40l_J 95(165 _.,. It I 30(25 -ii ~ -~ ~l[)l[) l[) -...., BRANGH ·STREE ,,· ~~~ " H STREET LEGEND· xx AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (XX) -PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES Peak Hour Traffic Volumes t::i c ~ ~ c:: ~ ~ .- ~ ~ § ~ Item 9.b. - Page 132 In order to develop Cumulative Plus Project traffic volumes, the trips generated on the proposed project site according to existing allowable General Plan land uses were estima:t@il,, using ITE Trip Generation methodologies. The trip generation of the existing General Plafil(~g~">uses was then compared to the trip generation of the proposed project in order to ..&:~.~t~Frhine the net change in trip generation resulting from the proposed change in land use. 'c:J!5Je 6 presents the trip generation comparison. i~,.-~,., "'·:~\;~j TABLE 6: ,, GENERAL PLAN AND PROPOSED PROJECT TRIP COMPjl.RISON .,..,.-...,.-,,,--,,.,,,-,,,==-====-,,,.-.,.,-=--.,,-y--~=,,--=~=-;:~,7:::;-...,.,,-,---,,,,.,,--,,,-,,-:::--,,,--,= t'F · : -,·. <· :: .· ,;f:t:·,:·: ·. fL:anci;l:is'e ~ai~9ol1J.1i:i-E·.~13d~> ,. )Shopping Center (820) iMulti-Famil Res1dential 3 48 31 17 Internal Capture w!Commerc1al -21 -14 -7 ; General Plan Allowed Uses 119 114 tProposed Project Uses 59 48 i Net Trip Generation Difference -60 -66 !Notes. rt·:-:fksf = 1,ooffsquare feet -DU= dwe//mgunft- i2~ Tnp. rates based on 7fE"ffj·-;-~~1ion Manual 9th e . e curve equations · ---· -----------·-- ·-~-~.·-~-~----.. , ·------------"iJ.>.'!::;.'Ll'"'-----------------------~-~~---·-~-;3 Assumes allowable Ge J8' e" developmentias follows -Half of 4 35 acre sit opes a ercial at 0. ,fi.~/ ~~ jlf" 0site}Cievelopes a th a 25 umflacre density Courtland and Grand Mix Use Project City of Arroyo Grande Page 21 R1923TIA001.docx Item 9.b. - Page 133 .J i l L215(255} ::,.: -355(565 ~ ,r-165(205 c 125( 185l __J. .. , t i 375(580--.. I 30(55 ~ ~ o~ ":· --.J ' ATLANTIC CITY AVE I ' I I' I i -I I I I ·/ I. -1 ! ' ' I --j j -I i WI CR~Nni A vk I . I I ONCBRANCH A VE l")lf)lf) ~N I I I- Cumulative 11/5/2014 4 44 PM I< \PRJ\1923\T1923\T1923TG001 DWG CQ ~ ~ :,.:; C'J ., .J!l L60(95) -640(850) ... ,r-75(110) VJ 80(115l___f ~ t r'" 660(980--.. I 45(70 ~ ~ U1i75U=) <X) "¢" T GRAND A "ENUE ~ ~ ... § 8 L60(70) -120(135) SH STREET" N' v ~N ro~ _ro ~I") ,...__ ) i 8(21) __J. I t 2(5)~ ~ ~.-.. N_ K 01 ROJECT DRIVEWAY 2 LEGEND: L170(150) rcq I I -30(45) ~ + ~ ~10(25) c CQ ~ c;; :,.:; C'J :..., :«: -790(1055) ~ ~ ~~~~---.~~~~-~ c::i ~ 775(1131~§ 18(43 ~ 8 I v I") 0 ·EAST GRAND AVENUE ;:;) I") ~N "¢~ _N ~n ro-... .J i VJ ~ 23(9) __J. I t ~ ... 6(2)~ no § ~.-.. N;::;. c <O <:..J " ROJECT DRIVEWAY 3 ... <:..J r:; c g: :<=: ~ § c <:..J xx AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (XX) -PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES Study Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Item 9.b. - Page 134 TABLE 7: CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS: INTERSECTION LOS V.. . .. , , · · · 'AM»Peak Hour . · · : " ·: :·eM 'Peak: Hour 1 . Control ·. Targ~t ·. · " · · • arrant kit . . . 1r1i'erse~tio~ · , ,. Type 1:2 :, :. Los· < 0elay",\;1;os: ;d;~~-> '.Met?3 1 Oak Park Blvd & E Grand Ave Si nal C 27 7 c 2 Courtland St & E Grand Ave Signal C 23 1 c 3 Elm St & E Grand Ave S1 nal C 21 o c 5 Oak Park Blvd & El Camino Real Signal C 24 4 C 6 Oak Park Blvd & CA 101 On Ramp/W S1 nal D 27 1 C 7 Courtland St & Ash St TWSC C 12 1 Courtland and Grand Mix Use Pro1ect City of Arroyo Grande Page 23 R1923TIA001.docx Item 9.b. - Page 135 Project Impacts and Mitigations This sections presents intersection level of service deficiencies and recommended improvements to mitigate project impacts at the study intersections to LOS "C" Q(:::better. The City is currently considering revisions to the City's General Plan LOS policy, wlJJ~idfay include allowing LOS "D" operations. Should the City adopt an LOS "D" accElpf~ole operations threshold, these improvements would need to be revisited to determine thei_r6}eclssity. ""•_,,--::.,"'" Existing Plus Project Conditions No intersection deficiencies or project impacts were conditions. Cumulative Conditions ::\?'1!,Q, Under buildout of the City's General Plan, Cumulativ~!_N?f;Project conditi~"S, slightly more trafff{ is generated than under the proposed project land B~~s~(-.Cumula~~'ff!ltis Project conditions). However, under either analysis scenario, the same infet§'~}tonA~fi~lencies are identified and the same improvements to mitigate these deficiencies are"':'rZi -~~¢! ::.:£ .. Notes"~s:,: /'~~c:1;;Y -"'{:. /~'·"'·-t~ 1. TWSC , .. ajr.Stop Control 2. LOS = D twba~iid on worst minor street approach for TWSC intersections, average of all approaches for Signal 3. Warrant = alf{d on California MUTCD Warrant 3 Courtland and Grand Mix Use Project City of Arroyo Grande Page 24 R1923TIA001.docx Item 9.b. - Page 136 Appendix: Project Site Plan Level of Service Item 9.b. - Page 137 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES NOVEMBER 18, 2014 regarding amending the Telecommunication Facilities Siting Condition No. 8 to specify protection of the equipment cabinet. Associate Planner Heffernen responded to questions from proposed project. ATTACHMENT 5 amending regarding the Russell Story/NSA representing Verizon Wireless, responde o questions from the Commission regarding the proposed project. Vice Chair Sperow opened the public hearing, an upon hearing no comments, she closed the public hearing. Action: Commissioner Goss moved to tinue this matter to a date uncertain and directed staff to return with siting guidelines that in de small cell facilities, more information regarding the cost associated with underground v ting and bollard specifications. Commissioner George seconded, and the motion pa ed on the following roll vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Comm· 1oner Russom recused himself from Item 8.b. due to having a conflict of interest and ste ed down from the dais. 8.b. CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002, SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 14-009, AND VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001; SUBDIVISION OF TWO (2) COMMERCIAL PARCELS INTO FORTY-ONE (41) RESIDENTIAL LOTS, ONE (1) COMMON AREA LOT, AND TWO (2) COMMERCIAL LOTS; LOCATION - SOUTHWEST CORNER OF EAST GRAND AVENUE AND SOUTH COURTLAND STREET; APPLICANTS MFI LIMITED AND NKT COMMERCIAL; REPRESENTATIVE -RRM DESIGN GROUP Assistant Planner Downing presented the staff report and recommended that the Planning Commission review the proposed project and make a recommendation to the City Council. Assistant Planner Downing and Director McClish responded to questions from the Commission regarding the proposed project. Debbie Rudd representative, and Scott Martin, architect, RRM Design Group, presented the proposed project to the Commission. Nick Tompkins, owner/applicant, responded to questions from the Commission regarding the proposed project. Andy Magano, applicant, responded to questions from the Commission regarding the costs of the proposed homes. Vice Chair Sperow open the public hearing. John Fowler, CEO, Peoples' Self Help Housing, referred to his written correspondence and spoke in support of the proposed project. LeAnn Akins, Cornwall Avenue, stated the project is _beautiful, but not for this location; expressed concern regarding lack of revenue from the proposed commercial development; \ Item 9.b. - Page 138 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES NOVEMBER 18, 2014 PAGE3 water; sustainability; the entry level work force cannot afford the cost of the homes; and unsure if the proposed project should move forward. Brenda Goroski, Strawberry Avenue, expressed concern with safety of foot traffic on Courtland Street and Courtland Street not being wide enough for on-street parking. John Mack, Loganberry, thanked the developer and the team for the proposed project; stated he is in support of the proposed commercial development but stated he thought the residential needed some refinements including, driveways need separation; more parking is needed; driveway needs to be aligned with the access across Courtland Street; pedestrian circulation needs to be addressed; and guest parking is remote. The Commission took a break at 8:15 p.m. and reconvened at 8:22 p.m. Nick Tompkins and Andy Magano addressed concerns of the Commission. Individual Commissioners provided the following: directed staff and developer to take another look at the driveways on Courtland Street; investigate room for on-street parking on Courtland Street; look into a crosswalk on Courtland Street; check on sufficient lighting in the housing development; indicated that internal pedestrian walkways are a safety issue; potentially widen plaza and put in and out in the middle; and see if play structure in green area is feasible. Action: Commissioner Goss moved to continue this item to a date certain of December 2, 2014. Commissioner Sperow seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll call vote: -AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Goss, Sperow, Keen, George None Russom 9. NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEM None 10. NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS SINCE NOVEMBER 4 20 11. COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS Commissioner George asked that when the Commission has lar get the packet earlier. 12. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS Community Developer Director McClish stated that an upcoming City Council agenda, there is tentatively scheduled to be consideration of a mergency water ordinance. 13. ADJOURNMENT On motion by Commissioner Goss econded by Commissioner George and unanimously carried, the meeting adjourned at . 7 p.m. ATTEST: DEBBIE WEICHINGER LISA SPEROW, VICE CHAIR SECRETARY TOT LANNING COMMISSION Item 9.b. - Page 139 Cll " ~ z p Table 16.36.030(A) Uses Permitted Within Mixed Use and Commercial Districts IMU =Industrial Mixed Use District (El Camino) FOMU =Fair Oaks Mixed Use District TMU =Traffic Way Mixed Use District HMU= Highway Mixed Use District VCD = Village Core Downtown District OMU=Office Mixed Use District VMU =Village Mixed Use District RC = Regional Commercial District GMU =Gateway Mixed Use District HCO = Historic Character Overlay District (Design Overlay Dis- trict 2.4) P = Permitted Use MUP = Minor Use Permit CUP= Conditional Use Permit PED =Not permitted in pedestrian oriented storefront locations on ground floor facing E. Grand Avenue, East/West Brarich Street or prime real estate space within shopping centers NP= Not Permitted Permit Required By District All new commercial buildings or third-story components require a CUP VMU VCD D-2.11 Allowed Land Uses and Permit TMU HCO HCO OMU1 Specific Use Standards Requirements-LAND USE IMU D-2.11 D-2.4 D-2.4 GMU FOMU HMU D-2.20 RC2 and other references A. SERVICES -BUSINESS, FINANCIAL, PROFES- SIONAL ATM NP p MUP MUP p p p p p Bank Fmancial Services NP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP CUP Medical Services -doctor's of-NP MUP MUP/ MUP MUP/ MUP MUP p CUP fice PED PED Medical Services -cl1111c, lab, NP MUP CUP/ MUP MUP/ MUP MUP MUP CUP urgent care PED CUP/ PED Medical -hospital NP NP NP NP NP NP NP CUP NP )> ~ n :::c s: l"T'I z -I CJ') Item 9.b. - Page 140 VMU VCD D-2.11 Allowed Laud Uses and Permit TMU HCO HCO OMU1 Specific Use Standards Requirements-LAND USE IMU D-2.11 D-2.4 D-2.4 GMU FOMU HMU D-2.20 RC2 and other references Office -accessory MUP p MUP MUP PIPED p p p p Office -government MUP CUP MUP MUP CUP CUP CUP MUP CUP Office -processing MUP CUP CUP MUP MUP/ MUP CUP p NP PED Office -professional MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP/ MUP MUP p CUP PED Veterinary clinic, animal hospi-CUP CUP NP CUP CUP CUP CUP MUP CUP ta! B SERVICES-GENERAL Adult day care -14 or fewer NP NP MUP/ MUP MUP/ MUP NP MUP NP 16 52 120 clients PED PED Adult day care -15 or more NP NP NP NP CUP/ CUP NP CUP NP 16 52 120 clients PED Automotive and vehicle ser-MUP MUP NP NP NP NP MUP NP NP 16.52 210 vices -Ma1or repair or body work Automotive and vehicle ser-MUP MUP NP NP NP NP MUP NP NP 16 52 210 vices -mmor maintenance or repair mcluding t1re services Catermg services MUP MUP MUP/ MUP MUP/ MUP MUP MUP NP PED PED Child day care center -14 or NP NP MUP/ MUP MUP/ MUP NP MUP MUP fewer PED PED Child day care center -15 or NP NP MUP/ MUP MUP/ MUP NP CUP NP 16 52 120 more PED PED Dnve-through services NP CUP NP CUP NP NP CUP CUP cup Eqmpment rental MUP CUP NP CUP NP NP CUP CUP NP Kennel, ammal boardrng CUP CUP NP CUP NP NP CUP CUP NP 16 52 100 Lodging-Bed & breakfast mn NP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP CUP 16 52 080 NP Item 9.b. - Page 141 Vt w 0\ Allowed Land Uses am! Permit Requirements-LAND USE Lodging-Hotel or motel Lodging-Recreational Vehicle (RV) Park Maintenance services-chent site services Mortuary, funeral home Personal services Personal services-Restricted Pubhc safety fac1hty Repair service-Equipment, large apphances, etc Social services orgamzat10n Tele-communication facilities (commercial) Vacation rentals and homestays C INDUSTRY, MANUFAC- TURING AND PROCESS- ING, WHOLESALING, STORAGE Agncultural product processing Construction yard Dnve-thru services Furmture and fixtures manu- facturmg, cabinet shop Industrial research and <level- opment IMU NP NP MUP CUP NP NP MUP MUP NP CUP NP CUP MUP NP MUP CUP VMU VCD D-2.11 TMU HCO HCO D-2.11 D-2.4 D-2.4 CUP CUP CUP NP NP NP MUP NP MUP NP NP NP MUP MUP. MUP CUP NP NP p MUP/ p PED MUP NP CUP CUP NP CUP MUP NP CUP MUP MUP MUP CUP NP CUP NP NP NP CUP NP CUP NP NP NP NP NP NP OMUi Specific Use Standards GMU FOMU HMU D-2.20 RC 2 and other references CUP CUP CUP CUP NP See General Plan Pol- icy LU7-4 NP NP NP NP NP NP MUP MUP MUP NP NP NP NP CUP NP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP NP NP CUP NP NP 16 52 030 p p p p p CUP MUP MUP NP NP CUP/ MUP CUP MUP NP PED CUP CUP MUP CUP CUP MUP MUP MUP MUP NP 16 52 230 16.52 240 NP NP NP NP NP 16 52 095 NP MUP NP NP NP 16 52 095 NP NP CUP CUP CUP NP MUP NP NP NP 1652095 NP NP NP NP NP 16 52 095 Item 9.b. - Page 142 C/l c :g z 0 .1>5 .,, '.j;'. Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements-LAND USE Laboratory · Medical, analyti- cal, research and development Manufacturing or Processing - Light Printmg and publishing Recycling -scrap and d1sman- thng yard Recycling -Small collection facility Storage· Outdoor Storage (mmi -storage) Wholesalmg and distribution Winery D. RETAIL TRADE Accessory retail uses Adult business Alcoholic beverage sales Artisan shop Auto, velucle and heavy equip- ment sales & rental Auto, vehicle parts sales w/ m- stallation services Auto, vehicle parts sales with- out installation services IMU CUP MVP MUP CUP CUP MVP MUP CUP CUP p CUP NP MUP MUP MUP MUP VMU VCD D-2.11 TMU HCO HCO D-2.11 D-2.4 D-2.4 CUP NP NP CUP NP NP MVP NP NP NP NP NP MVP MVP/ MUP PED MVP NP NP NP NP NP CUP NP NP CUP NP NP p p p NP NP NP CUP CUP CUP MUP MUP MUP MUP NP NP MUP NP NP MUP NP NP OMV' Specific Use Standards GMU FOMU HMU D-2.20 RC2 and other references NP NP CUP MUP NP 16 52 095 NP NP CUP NP NP 16 52 095 CUP CUP MUP MUP NP 1652095 NP NP NP NP NP 16 52 095 MUP/ MVP MUP MUP MVP 16 52.095 PED NP NP NP NP NP 1652095 NP NP NP NP NP 16.52.095 NP NP CUP NP NP 16.52 095 NP NP CUP NP NP 16 52 095 p p p p p Subject to Busmess License clearance NP NP NP NP NP Subject to Section 16 52 030 for location parameters and <level- opment standards CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP MUP MUP MUP MUP CUP/ PED NP NP MUP NP NP 16 52 060 16 52 070 NP NP MUP NP CUP CUP/ CUP/ MUP NP CUP PED= Use not allowed PED PED within 200 feet of E Grand Avenue Front- age Item 9.b. - Page 143 VMU VCD D-2.11 Allowed Land Uses and Permit TMU HCO HCO OMU1 Specific Use Standards Requirements-LAND USE IMU D-2.11 D-2.4 D-2.4 GMU FOMU HMU D-2.20 RC2 and other references Building and landscape maten-MUP MUP CUP CUP MUP/ MUP MUP NP MVP ais sales-indoor PED Convenience store CUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP Drive-through retail NP CUP NP NP CUP3 NP CUP CUP CUP 16 52 090 LU7-4 Extended hour retail CUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP Farm supply and feed store MUP CUP NP CUP NP NP CUP NP CUP Farmers market CUP MUP MUP MUP CUP CUP MUP CUP CUP Formula Business Permit Permit NP NP For Permit Permit Permit Permit Permit required required D-24 required reqmred required reqmred required as 1denti-as ident1-as identi-as 1dent1-as ident1-as 1dent1-as 1denti- lied by lied by lied by lied by fied by lied by lied by underly-underly-underly-underly-underly-underly-underly- mg land mg land mg land mg land mg land ing land mg land use use use use use use use Fuel dealer (propane for home CUP CUP NP NP NP NP CUP NP NP and farm use) Gas station CUP CUP NP NP NP NP CUP NP NP 16.52170 General retail-5,000 sf or less NP MUP p p p p MUP MUP p Section 8.38 P-Subject to Busmess License clearance General retail -5,001 to 19 ,999 NP CUP MUP CUP MUP MUP MUP CUP p Section 8 38 sf P-Subject to Busmess License clearance General retail -20,000 sf to NP MUP NP NP CUP CUP CUP NP p Note Maximum 102,500 sf Building Size per/dis- tuct, Section 16 52 220 and Section 8 38 General Retail-Restricted CUP NP NP NP NP NP CUP NP NP Subject to Section 16 52 030 for location parameters and <level- opment standards Item 9.b. - Page 144 VMU VCD D-2.11 Allowed Land Uses and Permit TMU HCO HCO OMU1 Specific Use Standards Requirements-LAND USE IMU D-2.11 D-2.4 D-2.4 GMU FOMU HMU D-2.20 RC 2 and other references Groceries, specialty foods -NP MUP CUP CUP MUP MUP MVP CUP MUP 20,000 sf or less Groceries, specialty foods NP CUP NP NP MUP MUP MUP NP CUP Note Maximum 20,000 sf to 102,500 sf Bmldmg Size per/dis- tnct and Section 16.52 220 Outdoor retail sales and activi-MUP MVP MUP MUP CUP CUP MUP NP CUP 16.52 220 ties Mobile home, _boat, or RV sales MUP CUP NP NP NP NP CUP NP NP Produce stand MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP CUP Restaurant, cafe. Coffee shop CUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP CUP 16 52 180 LU7-4 Second hand store NP NP MVP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP NP Shoppmg center NP NP NP CUP CUP CUP NP NP CUP Warehouse retail CUP CUP NP NP NP-CUP CUP NP CUP 16.52 160 E RECREATION, EDUCA- TION & PUBLIC ASSEM- BLY USES Bar/tavern/night club CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP NP CUP Club, lodge, pnvate meetmg NP MUP MUP CUP MVP/ MUP MUP CUP NP hall PED Commercial rec1eation or CUP MUP CUP CUP CUP CUP MUP NP CUP/ sports facility -Indoor PED Commercial recreation or CUP CUP NP CUP NP CUP CUP NP NP sports facility -Outdoor Community center NP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP NP Conference/convention facility NP CUP CUP NP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP Equestrian facility CUP CUP NP NP NP NP CUP NP NP Fitness/health fac1hty NP CUP CUP CUP MUP MUP CUP CUP CUP Library, museum NP CUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP NP Park, playground NP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP NP Item 9.b. - Page 145 VMU VCD D-2.11 Allowed Land Uses and Permit TMU HCO HCO OMU1 Specific Use Standards Requirements-LAND USE IMU D-2.11 D-2.4 D-2.4 GMU FOMU HMU D-2.20 RC2 aud other references ~ Religious fac1hty NP CUP CUP/ CUP CUP/ CUP CUP CUP NP PED PED School -Elementary, middle, NP NP NP CUP NP NP NP CUP NP secondary School -Specrnhzed education/ MUP MUP CUP/ CUP CUP/ CUP MUP CUP NP traimng PED PED Studio -art, dance martial arts, NP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP/ music, etc PED Theater, aud1tonum NP NP CUP CUP CUP CUP NP CUP CUP F RESIDENTIAL USES Assisted Livmg NP NP CUP CUP CUP/ CUP/ NP CUP NP PED PED Home occupation NP MUP p p p p MUP p NP 16.16 090 Multi-falillly housmg not lo-NP NP NP CUP CUP/ CUP/ CUP (on CUP (on NP Minimum density cated within a mixed use proj-PED PED lots lots (75% of total density ect >20,000 >20,000 allowed by district) square square reqmred by Housing feet feet) Element is not re- quired on lots frontmg E Grand Ave , E. Branch Street or m HMU or IMU dis- tncts Multi-family housing in a NP NP MUP/ MUP CUP/ CUP/ CUP CUP NP Mmimum density mixed use project PED PED PED (75% of total density allowed by d1stnct) required by Housmg Element is not re- quired on lots fronting E Grand Ave , E. Branch Street or m HMU or IMU dis- tricts Item 9.b. - Page 146 VMU VCD D-2.11 Allowed Land Uses aud Permit TMU HCO HCO OMU1 Specific Use Standards Requirements-LAND USE IMU D-2.11 D-2.4 D-2.4 GMU FOMU HMU D-2.20 RC2 and other references Residential care facihty, 6 or NP NP MUP/ MUP MUP/ MUP NP MUP NP less clients PED PED Residential care facility, 7 or NP NP CUP/ CUP CUP/ CUP/ NP CUP NP more chents PED PED PED Single family res1denlial witlun NP NP NP MUP NP NP NP NP NP a mixed use project Requirements of this section supercede corresponding requirements in the PD I I district. 2 Requirements of this section supercede correspondmg requirements in the PD 1 1 district and PD 1.2 district 3 Drive-through retail only allowed withm shoppmg centers with three or more major tenants en " "" "" ...... z 0\ 0 w "" °' -"" 0 " w ... 0 Item 9.b. - Page 147 ( ' ,....., Matt Downing ATIACHMENT7 From: Sent: To: Cc:" Subject: Rudd, Debbie L. •m] Monday, Noveml::i Matt Downing Andrew D. Mangano; Nick Tompkins; Cabral, Darin J. Fwd: PSHHC opposes Pedestrian Access between SubAreas 3 and 4 (E Grand Ave & S Courtland Street) Hi Matt, this is s letter from People's Self Help Housing in reference to the pedestrian access discussion. It was forwarded to Theresa, but we wanted to send it to you as well. Thanks, Debbie Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Nick Tompkins~ II 9.> Date: November 3, 2014 at 10:18:58 AM PST >,Andy Mangano >,"Darin J. estrian Access between SubAreas 3 and 4 (E Grand Ave & S Begin forwarded message: To: Cc: Subject: FW: PSHHC opposes Pedestrian Access between SubAreas and 4 (E Grand Ave & S Courtland Street) Dear Nick, I understand that the City of Arroyo Grande ARC will meet today to review a project proposed at your property at the corner of Grand Ave and South Courtland, next to our property where we recently completed construction of the Courtland Street Apartments. In reviewing the staff report, there is a discussion of pedestrian access between Subarea 4 (our property) and Subarea 3 (your property). We did not request or pursue neg9tiating such an access agreement with you since under the proposed residential use of your property, we do not believe it is in the best interest of our residents to encourage access. We would prefer the nearby and proposed sidewalks along Courtland Street be the access for our residents to access Grand Avenue when walking from our site. Likewise we also prefer to limit access of non-resident pedestrians through our site. We pride ourselves in providing secure, 1 Item 9.b. - Page 148 ; r ,~ stable and well-managed properties, in part through the utilization uf strategically-sited security cameras and on-site resident management which we have designed around the current property layout design. Knowing who is on the site at all times adds to the level of security that our residents enjoy and is critical to the success of our managing the site well. Although the Specific Plan references it, at the time it was last updated, that was contemplated to be for a predominately non-residential commercial use on Subarea 3, and the intent was to encourage interaction/access between our residential use and the then proposed commercial use. We do not believe the interaction between Subareas provides benefits to either of the two Subarea's residential uses. We therefore, for this and security reasons, strongly oppose creating a pedestrian path connecting our property to your proposed residential project. Respectfully, John Fowler, CPA. President & CEO Peoples' Seif-Help Hm..1sing Opening Doorsr Building Neighf:Jorhoodsr Improving lives. 3533 Em plea Street San LUIS Obispo, CA 93401 (805) 540-2462 Fax: (805) 544-1901 Website: Facebook: h o://tinvurl.com/ybgk936 Twitter: http://twitter.com/PSHHC Attention: Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual ,sender, except where the message states otherwise and the sender is authorized to state them to be the views of any such entity. The information contained in this message and or attachments is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/ or privileged material. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any system and destroy any copies. 2 Item 9.b. - Page 149 California MUTCD 2014 Edition ATTACHMENT 8 (FHWA's MUTCD 2009 Edition, including Revisions 1 & 2, as amended for use in California) ,. Figure.38-17. ExamplesafYieJd Lines.at Unsignalized fltidblockCrossw~lks Chapter 3B -Pavement and Curb Markings Part 3 -Markings -20toson-I ft~,·~ ·II--~~~. Legend -Direction of travel November 7, 2014 Item 9.b. - Page 150 California MUTCD 2014 Edition (FHWA' s MUTCD 2009 Edition, includmg Revisions 1 & 2, as amended for use m Califorrua) Figure;3B-17 (CA). Examples ofCrosswaTk'El1hancements at Dncontrol[ed Multilane.Approaches Chapter 3B -Pavement and Curb Markings Part 3 -Markings -~ ,... "'"" i: ·legend ;;;> .--- ..,, -rnrectionoftravet "'Opticmal , 'NOTE: Adequate vlsibiftty ·Bhould beprovfl:led. · Page 731 November 7, 2014 Item 9.b. - Page 151 California MUTCD 2014 Edition (FHWA's MUTCD 2009 Edition, including Revisions 1 & 2, as amended for use in California) CHAPTER 4D. TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL FEATURES Section 4D.01 General Support. Page 851 01 The features of traffic control signals of interest to road users are the location, design, and meaning of the signal indications. Uniformity in the design features that affect the traffic to be controlled, as set forth in this Manual, is especially important for the safety and efficiency of operations. 02 Traffic control signals can be operated in pre-timed, semi-actuated, or full-actuated modes. For isolated (non- interconnected) signalized locations on rural high-speed highways, full-actuated mode with advance vehicle detection on the high-speed approaches is typically used. These features are designed to reduce the frequency with which the onset of the yellow change interval is displayed when high-speed approaching vehicles are in the "dilemma zone" such that the drivers of these high-speed vehicles find it difficult to decide whether to stop or proceed. Standard: 03 When a traffic control signal is not in operation, such as before it is placed in service, during seasonal shutdowns, or when it is not desirable to operate the traffic control signal, the signal faces shall be covered, turned, or taken down to clearly indicate that the traffic control signal is not in operation. Support" . 04 Seasonal shutdown is a condition in which a permanent traffic signal is turned off or otherwise made non- operational during a particular season when its operation is not justified. This might be applied in a community where tourist traffic during most of the year justifies the permanent signalization, but a seasonal shutdown of the signal during an annual period of lower tourist traffic would reduce delays; or where a major traffic generator, such as a large factory, justifies the permanent signalization, but the large factory is shut down for an annual factory vacation for a few weeks in the summer. Standard: , 05 A traffic control signal shall control traffic only at the intersection or midblock location where the signal faces are placed. oa Mid block crosswalks shall not be signalized if they are located within 300 feet from the nearest traffic control signal, unless the proposed traffic control signal will not restrict the progressive movement of traffic. Guidance: 01 A midblock crosswalk location should not be controlled by a traffic control signal ifthe crosswalk is located within 100 feet from side streets or dnveways that are controlled by STOP signs or YIELD signs. os Engineering judgment should be used to determine the proper phasing and timing for a traffic control signal. Since traffic flows and patterns change, phasing and timing should be reevaluated regularly and updated if needed. og Traffic control signals within 112 mile of one another along a major route or in a network of intersecting major routes should be coordinated, preferably with interconnected controller units Where traffic control signals that are within 112 mile of one another along a major route have a jurisdictional boundary or a boundary between different signal systems between them, coordination across the boundary should be considered. Support· 10 Signal coordination need not be maintained between control sections that operate on different cycle lengths 11 For coordination with grade crossing signals and movable bridge signals, see Sections 4D.27, 4J 03, 8C 09, and 8C.10. Section 4D.02 Responsibility for Operation and Maintenance Guidance: 01 Prior to installing any traffic control signal, the responsibility for the maintenance of the signal apd all of the appurtenances, hardware, software, and the timing plan(s) should be clearly established The responsible agency should provide for the maintenance of the traffic control signal and all of its appurtenances in a competent manner Chapter 4D -Traffic Control Signal Features Part 4 -Highway Traffic Signals November 7, 2014 Item 9.b. - Page 152 Safety E cts of Marked vs. Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled locations: Executive Summary and Recommended Guidelines FHWA-RD-01-075 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Research and Development Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center 6300 Georgetown Pike Mclean, VA 22101-2296 \· .' ~ '°, .:, ".' February 2002 Item 9.b. - Page 153 FOREWORD The Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Research Program's overall goal is to increase pedestnan and bicycle safety and mobility. From better crosswalks, sidewalks, and pedestrian technologies to expanding public educational and safety programs, the FHW A's Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Research Program strives to pave the way for a more walkable future. The following document summarizes the results of a study that exammed the safety of crosswalks at uncontrolled crossing locations and provides recommended guidelines for pedestrian crossings. The crosswalk study was part of a large FHW A study "Evaluation of Pedestrian Facilities" that has produced a number of other documents regarding the safety of pedestrian crossings and the effectiveness of mnovative engineering treatments on pedestrian safety. It is hoped that readers also will read the reports documenting the results of the related pedestrian safety studies. The results of this research will be useful to transportation engineers, planners and safety professionals who are involved m improving pedestrian safety and mobility. NOTICE Michael F. Trentacoste Director, Office of Safety Research and Development This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade and manufacturers' names appear in this report only because they are considered essential to the object of the document. Item 9.b. - Page 154 I ReportNo 2 Government Access10n No FHW A-RD-01-07 5 4. T1tleandSubt1tle SAFETY EFFECTS OF MARKED VS. UNMARKED CROSSWALKS AT UNCONTROLLED LOCATIONS: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOM:MENDED GUIDELINES 7 Author(s) Charles V. Zegeer, J. Richard Stewart, Herman H. Huang, and Peter A. Lagerwey 9 Performing Orgamzatlon Name and Address Uruversity of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center 730 Airport Rd., CB # 3430 Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3430 12. Sponsormg Agency Name and Address Office of Safety Research and Development Federal Highway Administration 6300 Georgetown Pike McLean, VA 22101-2296 15 Supplementary Notes Technical Renort Documentation Parre 3 Rec1p1ent's Catalog No 5 Report Date 6 Performmg Orgamzatlon Code 8 Performmg Orgamzatlon Report No 10. WoikUrutNo (1RA1S) 11 Contract or Grant No DTFH61-92-C-00138 13 Type ofReport and Penod Covered Final Report October 1996 -March 2001 14 Sponsonng Agency Code This report is part ofa larger study for FHWA entitled "Evaluation of Pedestrian Facilities." FHWA Contracting Officer's Technical Representatives (COTRs): Carol Tan Esse and Ann Do, HRDS. 16. Abstract Pedestrians are legitllllate users of the transportation system, and they should, therefore, be able to use this system safely. Pedestrian needs in crossing streets should be identified, and appropnate solutions should be selected to improve pedestrian safety and access. Decidmg where to mark crosswalks is only one consideration m meeting that objective. This study involved an analysis of 5 years of pedestrian crashes at 1,000 marked crosswalks and 1,000 matched unmarked comparison sites. All sites in this study had no traffic signal or stop sign on the approaches. Detailed data were collected on traffic volume, pedestrian exposure, number of lanes, median type, speed limit, and other site variables. Poisson and negative binomial regressive models were used. The study results revealed that on two-lane roads, the presence of a marked crosswalk alone at an uncontrolled location was associated with no difference in pedestrian crash rate, compared to an unmarked crosswalk. Further, on multi-lane roads with traffic volumes above about 12,000 vehicles per day, havmg a marked crosswalk alone (without other substantial llllprovements) was associated with a higher pedestrian crash rate (after controllmg for other site factors) compared to an unmarked crosswalk. Raised medians provided significantly lower pedestnan crash rates on multi-lane roads, compared to roads with no raised median. Older pedestrians had crashes that were high relative to their crossmg exposure. More substantial llllprovements. were recommended to provide for safer pedestnan crossings on certain roads, such as adding traffic signals with pedestrian signals when warranted, providing raised medians, speed-reducmg measures, and others. 17 KeyWords Marked Crosswalk, Safety, Pedestrian Crashes 18. Thstnbutlon Statement No restrictions. This document is available to the public through the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161. 19 Secunty Class1ficanon (oftlus report) 20. Secunty Class1ficanon (oftlus page) 21. No of Pages 22 Pnce Unclassified Unclassified 33 Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authonzed Item 9.b. - Page 155 APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS TO SI llNITS APPROXJMA.TECONVEASIQNS FROM SI UNITS Symbol Whon You Know-Mulllplf By Ta Fjod Symbol srmhol Wh1n Voo Know UuUlplJ' By To fjnd Symbol LENGnt !!:;NGTH Kl. ioohe:& 25.t m~l!Bra mm mm milliTiemra 0009 moo"& iT n fas! c:t..!!05 JllllteB m Ill melsr5 3~ feal It y<J rams CUl14 ffl~OO m m rnelaf& 1.00 yard!! ~·(! mi rnJaa 1-61 kflom«en lln1 t.rn kilo~$ l;l.~t miles nil AREA. AREJ.\ rii ,cq!IW~ 645.:?: ~Jl'~H~~i mmt m.mt &qtJllra roilmel!lt~ l,l,l,)')11$ ,.;qoom inOOlle ~1t It' ~fll>al ~-W<l sqJllfll'~i mi mt oquammmera l0.7$4 ~~fool Ill yd' ~y~ Q_Q3tj aqulll'el IDll'ten: mt 111t P.J1111113 malarl l.1!15 ~qusre y{ll1;ft;: yd! a.:: tlCNt O.AO!'i ~ h~ 'ha hoolarlltl 2A7 R~ eo;: mi" ~-~ UiSI MJU8R1 kilameMO kM1 ~mt EqtJlllm~flV.I~ (1_300, 5-q1Jara nlOO!; rnl' VOLUME VOLUME tgz lluid DLllC0ll :291l1 mlll~ ml ml mi!litaro!: 0004 llu1dllunce~ llw: gtil gllliorur .$_™ !it&rs L L (lat:& 0264 gal'lon~ 13'11 h* cubic~t 0028 cublcmot.l;INJ: m> m' rubic meieru ~.71 rutuci<Jet It> )'Cl' tWicyards 071'>5 cubic lllQttlr$ Ill' m' oobic mBlE!f~ 1.307 wbioymde yd' ~= t.an: · Vol!Jmos liJKlllkh° llhfm ~000 l shall t.e ~ ifl m' MASS MASS oz: Qta!Dllt ~JI~ sir am~ " ~ grams 0..035 outu::.,u oz lb ~ <1,)454 f(Jli>grame kg ~ijl krogram~ ~202 poo!'lds ,II) T llhDtt tQM {2000 It>) 0.007 ~ fd.:I Mil magagl\lm' 1-103 shorUOf1$ (2Q(lO lb) T (or 'lnmOO 1orq {Qro) {Qr"L"I (or•ma~l))t11 TEMPERATURE [e~ae1) TErl4PERATURf (e-xact) 'f ~~ S{F-.$2yg Cek:lw "C <"{) Celmn 18C-ra2 FahraflhOO •F tempel>lllml nr{F-32}11,l;'I tumpsralt.lm tempm~rl) temperature ILLUMINATION JLLIJMINATION ft:: ~· 10.7$ lu:K Ix i:... luio; Cl_0029 lcat-caadl(i~ fo ~ foot~ i.42$ ~· oo'm• cdlm' candelslrn• 0 21119 loot-la~ .:d FORCE a:n!;f PRESSURE Of STRESS FORCE and PRESSURE or STRESS lb! p<;>Yndloo:e 445 nl'l'ftQns N N n°"'bn~ 0225 p-xr.lldff>t"CQ lb!lin' pouoolomt per 600 l.a"f'll1i;:als ~Pe kPa kilopesc.1b 0,14$ paundtorc<> p:i r ib~·•<l" ~IMh Eq.tMQ iaY-h I • SI k Iha &)'n-.bol b ~ ln1:l•rrn11boni!I Syi;lem ol Uml& P.pproprlilt.i--{R;M:;ect s.itp~n 1l>vr 1 '"-'J) mo.IOOrig ehoi.h.l be mznt. It> CO<flPiy .....ih S!Y.tioo ~ of ASTM Erea Item 9.b. - Page 156 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page BACKGROUND AND IN1RODUCTION .............................................. 1 How to Use This Study ..................................................... 1 What Is the Legal Definition of a Crosswalk? ...................................... 2 Why Are Marked Crosswalks Controversial? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Where Are Crosswalks Typically Installed? ........................................ 3 STUDY PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVE ................................................. 3 DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY .................................. 4 STUDY RESULTS . . ............................................................ 6 Significant Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Marked vs. Unmarked Crosswalk Comparisons ..................................... 7 Pedestrian Crash Types ..................................................... 9 Pedestrian Crash Severity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Lighting and Trme of Day . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Age Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Driver and Pedestrian Behavior at Crosswalks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... 15 STUDY CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................... 17 What Are Possible Measures to Help Pedestrians Cross Streets Safely? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 PROPOSED RECOMMENDATIONS FOR INSTALLING MARKED CROSSWALKS .............. 26 OTHER FACTORS ............................................................. 27 REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. · .............................................. 28 Ill Item 9.b. - Page 157 LIST OF TABLES Page , Table 1. Recommendations for installing marked crosswalks and other needed pedestrian improvements at uncontrolled locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ 19 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Pedestrians have a right to facilities where they can cross the road safely and without unreasonable delay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Figure 2. Cities and States used for study sample .. , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......... 4 Figure 3. Crosswalk marking patterns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................... .'. 5 Figure 4. Pedestrian crash rate vs. type of crossing ...................................... 8 Figure 5. Pedestrian crash rates by traffic volume for multi-lane crossings with no raised medians-marked vs. unmarked crosswalks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10 Figure 6. Percentage of pedestnans crossing at marked and unmarked crosswalks by age group and road type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Figure 7. Illustration of multiple-threat pedestrian crash .................................. 12 Figure 8. Pedestrian crash types at uncontrolled marked and unmarked crosswalks . . . . . . . ....... 14 Figure 9. Percentage of crashes and exposure by pedestnan age group and roadway type at uncontrolled marked and unmarked crosswalks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Figure 10. Raised medians and crossmg islands can improve pedestnan safety on multi-lane roads 20 Figure 11. On some high-volume or multi-lane roads, traffic and pedestnan signals are needed to better accommodate pedestrian crossings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Figure 12. Curb extensions at intersections or midblock locations will shorten the crossing distance for pedestrians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......... 21 Figure 13 Raised crosswalks can control vehicle speeds on local streets at pedestrian crossmgs 22 Figure 14. Adequate lighting can improve pedestrian safety at night . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Figure 15. Grade-separated crossings are sometimes used when other measures are not feasible to provide safe pedestrian crossmgs . . . . . . . . . . . . ........... : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Figure 16. Pedestrian warning signs are sometimes used to supplement crosswalks ............... 23 Figure 17. Railmgs in the median direct pedestrians to the tight and may reduce pedestnan crashes on the second half of the street . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 lV Item 9.b. - Page 158 BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION Pedestrians are legitimate users of the transportation system, and they should, therefore, be able to use this system safely and without unreasonable delay (figure 1). Pedestnans have a right to cross roads safely and, therefore, planners and engineers have a professional responsibility to plan, design, and install safe crossing facilities. Pedestrians should be included as "design users" for all streets. As a startmg point, roads should be designed with the premise that there will be pedestrians, that they are going be able to cross the street, and that they will be able to do it safely. The design quest10n is "How can this task be best accomplished?" Providing marked crosswalks has traditionally been one measure used in an attempt to facilitate crossings. They are commonly used at uncontrolled locations and sometimes at midblock locations. However, there have been confhctmg studies and much controversy regarding the safety effects of marked crosswalks. This study evaluated marked crosswalks at uncontrolled locat10ns and offers guidelines for their use. Figure 1. Pedestnans have a right to facilities where they can cross the road safely and without unreasonable delay. How to Use This Study Marked crosswalks are 011e tool to get pedestrians safely across the street. When considering marked crosswalks at uncontrolled locations, the question should not simply be. "Should I provide a marked crosswalk or not?" Instead, the question should be: "Is this an appropriate tool for getting pedestrians across the street?" Regardless of whether marked crosswalks are used, there remains the fundamental obhgation to get pedestrians safely across the street. In most cases, marked crosswalks are best used in combinat10n with other treatments (e.g., curb extensions, raised crossing islands, traffic signals, roadway narrowing, enhanced overhead lighting, traffic calmmg measures etc.). Thmk of marked crosswalks as one option in a progress10n of design treatments. If one treatment does not adequately accomplish the task, then move on to the next one. Failure of one particular treatment is not a license to give up and do nothmg. In all cases, the final design must accomplish the goal of gettmg pedestrians across the road safely. Item 9.b. - Page 159 What Is the Legal Definition of a Crosswalk? The 1992 Umform Vehicle Code (Section 1-112) defines a crosswalk as: CI) (a) That part of a roadway at an intersection included within the connections of the lateral lines of the sidewalks on opposite sides of the highway measured ji-om the curbs, or in the absence of curbs, from the edges of the traversable roadway; and zn the absence of a sidewalk on one side of the roadway, the part of a roadway included within the extension of the lateral lznes of the existing sidewalk at rzght angles to the centerline. (b) Any portion of a roadway at an intersection or elsewhere distinctly indicated for pedestrian crossing by lines or other markings on the swface. Thus, legal crosswalks exist at all public intersections where there is a sidewalk on at least one side of the street. The only way a crosswalk can exist at a midblock location is if it is marked. Furthermore, accordmg to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) (Section 3B-18), a crosswalk may be marked with paint, thermoplastic materials, and plastic tape, among other matenals.<2J Specifically, crosswalks serve as the pedestrian right-of-way across a street. The level of connectivity between pedestnan facilities is directly related to the placement and consistency of street crossrngs. Why Are Marked Crosswalks Controversial? There has been considerable controversy in the United States regarding whether providing marked crosswalks will increase or decrease pedestnan safety at crossing locations that are not controlled by a traffic signal or stop sign. Many pedestrians consider marked crosswalks as a tool to enhance pedestrian safety and mobility. They view the markings as proof that they have a nght to share the roadway, and m their opinion, the more the better. Many pedestrians do not understand the legal defimtion of a crosswalk and think that there is no crosswalk unless it is marked. They may also think that the driver will be able to see the crosswalk markings as well as they do, and they assume that it will be safer to cross where drivers can see the white crosswalk lines. When citizens request the mstallat10n of marked crosswalks, some engineers and planners still refer to the 1972 study by Bruce Herms<3l as justificat10n for not mstalling marked crosswalks at uncontrolled locations. That study found an increased mcidence of pedestrian collis10ns m marked crosswalks, compared to unmarked crosswalks, at 400 uncontrolled intersections in San Diego, California. Questions have been asked about the validity of that study, and the study results have sometimes been misquoted or misused. Some have mismterpreted the results of that study. The study did not conclude that all marked crosswalks are "unsafe" and it did not include school crosswalks. A few other studies have also tried to address this issue since the completion of the Herms study. Some were not conclusive because of their methodology or sample size problems, while others have fueled the disagreements and confusion on this matter. Furthermore, most of the previous crosswalk studies have analyzed the overall safety effects of marked crosswalks but did not mvestigate their effects for various numbers of lanes, traffic volumes, or other roadway features. Like other traffic control devices, crosswalks should not be expected to be equally effective or appropriate under all roadway conditions. 2 Item 9.b. - Page 160 Where Are Crosswalks Typically Installed? The practice of where to install crosswalks differs considerably from one junsdict10n to another across the United States, and engineers have been left with using their own judgment (sometimes mfluenced by political and/or public pressure) in reaching decisions. Some cities have developed their own guidelines on where marked crosswalks should or should not be installed. At a mmimum, many cities tend to mstall marked crosswalks at signalized intersections, particularly urban areas where there is a considerable amount of pedestrian activity. Many junsdictions also commonly mstall marked crosswalks at school crossing locations (such· as where adult crossing guards are used) and they are more likely to mark crosswalks at intersections controlled by a stop sign. At uncontrolled locations (i.e., sites not controlled by a traffic signal or stop sign), some agencies rarely, if ever, choose to mstall marked crosswalks, while other agencies have installed marked crosswalks at selected pedestrian crossmg locations, particularly m downtown areas. Some towns and cities have also chosen to supplement selected crosswalks with advance overhead or post-mounted pedestiian wa1ID11g signs, flashing lights, STOP FOR PEDESTRIANS IN CROSSWALK signs mounted at the street centerline (or mounted along the side of the street or overhead), and/or supplemental pavement markmgs. STUDY PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVE Many highway agencies routrnely mark crosswalks at school crossmgs and signalized mtersect10ns. While questions have been raised concerning marking criteria at these sites, most of the controversy on whether to mark crosswalks has pertarned to the many uncontrolled locations in U.S. towns and cities. The purpose of this study was to determine whether marked crosswalks at uncontrolled locations (i.e., locat10ns with no traffic signal or stop sign on the approach) are safer than unmarked crosswalks under various traffic and roadway condit10ns. Another objective was to provide recommendations on how to provide safer crossings for pedestnans. This mcludes providing assistance to engmeers and planners when making decisions on: Where crosswalks may be installed. Where an existing crosswalk, by itself, 1s acceptable. Where an existing crosswalk should be supplemented with addit10nal improvements. Where one or more other engineeiing treatments (e.g., raised median, traffic signal with pedestrian signal) should be considered instead of having only a marked crosswalk. Where marked crosswalks are not appropriate. The results of this study should not be misused as justification to do nothing to help pedestrians to safely cross streets. Instead, pedestrian crossing problems and needs should be routinely identified, and appropriate solutions should be selected to improve pedestrian safety and access. Deciding where to mark or not mark crosswalks is only one consideration in meeting that objective. This Executive Summary is based on a major study for the Federal Highway Administration on the safety effects of marked crosswalks vs. matched unmarked crossmgs that was conducted by the University of North Carolina's Highway Safety Research Center.<4> 3 Item 9.b. - Page 161 DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY An ideal study design would mvolve removing all crosswalks in several test cities and randomly assigning sites for crosswalk markings and also to serve as unmarked control sites. However, it would be rmpossible to get the level of cooperat10n from the cities that is needed to conduct such a study due to liability considerat10ns Also, such random assignment of crosswalk marking locations would result m many crosswalks not being marked at the most appropnate locat10ns. Thus, because of such real-world constraints, a treatment and matched comparison site methodology was used to quantify the pedestrian crash risk of marked vs. unmarked crosswalks. This allowed for selection of a large sample of study sites in cities throughout the Umted States where marked crosswalks and similar unmarked companson sites were available. At intersections, the unmarked crosswalk comparison site was typically the opposite leg of the same intersection as the selected marked crosswalk site. For each marked midblock crosswalk, a nearby midblock crossing location was chosen as the companson site on the same street (usually a block or two away) where pedestnans were observed to cross. (Even though an unmarked midblock crossing is not technically or legally a "crosswalk," it was a suitable comparison site for a midblock crosswalk). The selection of a matched comparison site for each crosswalk site (typically on the same route and very near the crosswalk site) helped to control for the effects of vehicle speeds, traffic mix, and a variety of other traffic and roadway features. A before/after experiment was not considered to be practical because of regression-to-the-mean problems, limited sample sizes of new crosswalk installations, etc. A total of 1,000 marked crosswalk sites and 1,000 matched unmarked (companson) crossing sites in 30 cities across the Umted States (see figure 2) were selected for analysis. Test sites were chosen without any prior knowledge of their crash history. School crossings were not mcluded in this study because of crossmg guards and/or special school signs and markings that may increase the difficulty of quantifying the safety effects of crosswalk markmgs. Figure 2. Cities and States used for study sample. 4 Item 9.b. - Page 162 Test sites were selected from the following cities. East: Cambridge, MA; Baltimore, MD (city and county); Pittsburgh, PA; Cleveland, OH; Cincmnati, OR Central: Kansas City, MO; Topeka, KS; Milwaukee, WI; Madison, WI; St. Louis, MO (city and county). South: Gainesville, FL; Orlando, FL; Winter Park, FL; New Orleans, LA; Raleigh, NC; Durham, NC. West: San Francisco, CA; Oakland, CA; Salt Lake City, UT; Portland, OR; Seattle, WA. Southwest: Austin, TX; Ft. Worth, TX; Phoenix, AZ, Scottsdale, AZ; Glendale, AZ; Tucson, AZ; Tempe, AZ. Detailed information was collected at each of the 2,000 sites, including pedestrian crash history (average of 5 years per site), daily pedestrian volume estimates, average daily traffic (ADT) volume, number of lanes, speed limit, area type, type of median, type and condition of crosswalk marking patterns, location type (midblock vs. intersection), and other site characteristics. Various crosswalk markmg patterns are given m the MUTCD. (2J All of the 1,000 marked crosswalks had one of the marking patterns shown in figure 3 (i.e., none had a brick pattern for the crosswalk). Very few of the marked crosswalks had any type of supplemental pedestrian warning signs. Furthermore, none of the test sites had traffic-calmmg measures or special pedestrian devices (e.g., in-pavement flashmg hghts). Estimates of daily pedestrian volumes at each crosswalk site and unmarked comparison site were determined based on pedestrian volume counts at each site, which were expanded to estimated daily pedestrian volume counts based on hourly adjustment factors. Specifically, at each of the 2,000 crossmg locat10ns, tramed data collectors conducted on-site counts of pedestrian crossings and classified pedestrians by age group based on observat10ns. Pedestrian counts were collected simultaneously for 1 hour at each of the crosswalk and comparison sites. Full-day (8-to 12-h) counts were conducted at a sample of the sites and were used to develop adjustment factors by area type (urban, suburban, fringe) and by time of day. The adjustment factors were then used to determine estrmated daily pedestrian volumes m a manner similar to that used by many cities and States to expand short-term traffic counts to average annual daily traffic (AADT). Collecting the volume counts simultaneously at each crosswalk site and its matched companson site helped to control for time-related influences on pedestrian exposure. Solid Standard Continental Dashed Zebra Ladder ~la ill m ·~ -~ lttRi f,S .ii'i -m ~ i tl'.i 111111 m Ii -6 91; !II El -I'S f'1 m Ii -£\l I Figure 3. Crosswalk marking patterns. 5 Item 9.b. - Page 163 This methodology was intended as a measure at the crosswalk and companson sites for use as a control vanable in the analysis. Collecting the volume counts simultaneously helped to control for time-related influences on pedestrian exposure. · The crash data periods varied somewhat from city to city and averaged approximately 5 years per site (typically from about January 1, 1994 to December 31, 1998). Police crash reports were obtamed from each of the cities, except for Seattle, where detailed printouts were obtained for each crash. Crashes were carefully reviewed to assign a crash type and to ensure accurate matching of the correct locat10n (and whether the crash occurred at the location, i.e., at or withm 20 ft ( 6.1 m) of the marked or unmarked crossmg of interest). Standard pedestnan crash typology was used to review pohce crash reports and determine the appropriate pedestrian crash types (e.g., multiple threat, midblock daiiout, mtersection dash), as discussed later. All treatment (crosswalk) and comparison sites were chosen without pnor knowledge of crash history. All sites used in this study were intersection or midblock locations with no traffic signals or stop signs on the main road approach (i.e., uncontrolled locations). This study focused on pedestnan safety and, therefore, data were not collected for vehicle-vehicle or single-vehicle colhs10ns, even though it is recog-mzed that markmg crosswalks may mcrease vehicle stoppmg, which may also affect these collis10n types. The selected analysis techniques were deemed to be appropnate for the type of data in the sample. Due to relatively low numbers ofpedestnan crashes at a given site (e.g., there were many sites with zero pedes- trian crashes in a 5-year period), Poisson modelmg and negative binomial regression were used m the analysis of the data. Usmg these analysis techniques allowed for detennmmg statistically valid safety relationships. In fact, there were a total of 229 pedestrian crashes at the 2,000 crossing sites over an average of 5 years per site. This translates to an overall average of one pedestrian crash per crosswalk site every 43.7 years. All analyses of crash rates at marked and unmarked crosswalks took into account traffic volume, pedestnan exposure, and other roadway features (e.g., number of lanes). To supplement the pedestrian crash analysis, a corresponding study by Knoblauch, et al. <5l was also conducted on pedestrian and driver behavior before and after marked crosswalks were installed at selected sites in California, Mmnesota, New York, and Virginia, as discussed m more detail later in this publication STUDY RESULTS Significant Variables 1. Poisson and negative bmomial regression models were fit to pedestiian crash data at marked and unmarked crosswalks. These analyses showed that several factors in addit10n to crosswalk markings were associated with pedestrian crashes. Traffic and roadway factors found to be related to a greater frequency ofpedestnan crashes included higher pedestrian volumes, higher traffic ADT, and a greater number of lanes (i.e., multi-lane roads with three or more lanes had higher pedestrian crash rates than two-lane roads). For this study, a center two-way left-tum lane was considered to be a travel lane and not a median. 2. Surprismgly, after controlling for other factors (e.g., pedestrian volume, traffic volume, number of lanes, median type), speed limit was not sigmficantly related to pedestnan crash frequency. Certainly, one would expect that higher vehicle speed would be associated with an mcreased probability of a pedestiian crash (all else bemg equal). However, the lack of associat10n found m this 6 Item 9.b. - Page 164 analysis between speed limit and pedestrian crashes may be due to the fact that there was not a lot of variation in the range of vehicle speed or speed limit at the study sites (i.e., 93 percent of the study sites had speed hmits of25 to 35 mi/h [40.2 to 56.3 km/h]). Another possible explanation, as hypothesized by Garder, (6l is that pedestrians may be more careful when crossing streets with higher speeds; that is, they may avoid short gaps on high-speed roads, which may minimize the effect of vehicle speed on pedestnan crash rates.(6l In terms of speed and crash seventy, the analysis showed that speed hmits of 35 mi/h (56.3 km/h) and greater were associated with a higher percentage of fatal and Type A injuries (43 percent) compared to sites having lower speed hmits (23 percent of the crashes resultmg in fatal or Type A IDJUnes). 3. The presence of a raised median (or raised crossing island) was associated with a sigmficantly lower pedestnan crash rate at multi-lane sites with both marked and unmarked crosswalks. These results were in basic agreement with a maJor study by Bowman and Vecelho(7l and also a study by Garder(8l that found safety benefits for pedestrians due to raised medians and refuge islands, respectively. Furthermore, on multi-lane roads, medians that were painted (but not raised) and also center two-way left-tum lanes did not offer significant safety benefits to pedestrians, compared to multi-lane roads with no median at all. 4. There was also a sigmficant regional effect; that is, sites in western U.S. cities had a significantly higher pedestrian crash rate than eastern U.S. cities (after controlling for pedestrian exposure, number oflanes, median type, and other site conditions). The reason(s) for these regional differences m pedestrian crash rate is not known, although it could be related to regional differences m dnver and pedestnan behavior, higher vehicle speeds in western cities, differences in pedestrian- related laws, variations in roadway design features, and/or other factors. 5. All of the vanables related to pedestnan crashes (i.e., pedestnan volume, traffic ADT, number of lanes, existence of median and median type, and region of the country) were then included in the models for determining the effects of marked vs. unmarked sites. Factors having no significant effect on pedestnan crash rate included: area (e.g., residential, central business distnct [CBDJ), location (i.e., intersection vs. midblock), speed llllit, traffic operation (one-way or two-way), condition of crosswalk marking (excellent, good, fair, or poor), and crosswalk marking pattern (e.g., parallel lines, ladder type, zebra stnpes). One may-expect that crosswalk markmg condition may not necessarily be related to pedestrian crash rate, smce the condition of the markmgs may have varied over the 5-year analysis period, and the condition of the markmgs was observed only once Furthermore, m some regions, the crosswalk markings may be less visible durmg or after rain or snow storms It is also recognized, however, that some agencies may mamtam and restripe crosswalks more often than other agencies included in the study sample. Marked vs. Unmarked Crosswalk Comparisons 6. The results revealed that on two-lane roads, there were no significant differences m pedestrian crashes for marked vs. unmarked crosswalk sites. In other words, pedestrian safety on two-lane roads was not found to be different, whether the crosswalk was marked or unmarked. This conclusion is based on a sample size of914 crossing sites on two-lane roads (out of2,000 total sites). Specifically, bmomial comparison of pedestnan crash rates for marked vs. unmarked sites withm subsets by ADT, median type, and number of lanes are shown in figure 4. 7 On multi-lane roads with ADTs of 12,000 or less, there were also no differences m pedestrian crash rates between marked and unmarked sites. On multi-lane roads with no raised medians and ADT's greater than 12,000, sites with marked crosswalks had higher pedestrian crash rates than 7 Item 9.b. - Page 165 Q) -ca 0::: .!: II) l1! CJ c: ca ·c:: ..... II) 00 Q) "t:J Q) D.. II) C> c: "iii II) 0 I- CJ c: .2 ·-:!: I- Q) 0. (fj Q) .c: (fj ca I- CJ c: ca ·c:: -I/) Q) "'C Q) D.. - M U No Median All ADT's 2 Lanes (914 Sites) M u M u M ·u M· u M u No Raised Median No Raised Median No Raised Median Raised Median Raised Median ~ 12,000 ADT 12,000-15,000 ADT > 15,000 ADT ~ 15,000 ADT > 15,000 ADT 3 to 8 Lanes 3 to 8 Lanes 3 to 8 Lanes 3 to 8 Lanes 3 to 8 Lanes (260 Sites) (149 Sites) (417 Sites) (87 Sites) (173 Sites) Type of Crossing Figure 4. Pedestrian crash rate vs. type of crossing. Item 9.b. - Page 166 unmarked crossmgs. On multi-lane roads (roads with 3 to 8 lanes) with raised medians and vehicle ADT's greater than 15,000, a significantly higher pedestrian crash rate was associated with marked crosswalk sites compared to unmarked sites. 8. Best-fit curves on multi-lane undivided roads were produced for pedestrian crashes (per million pedestnan crossings) at marked and unmarked crosswalks as a function of vehicle volume (ADT), as shown in figure 5. Similar analyses were conducted for multi-lane divided roads. This analysis for multi-lane undivided roads revealed that: For traffic volumes (ADT's) of about 10,000 or less, pedestrian crash rates were about the same (i.e., less than 0.25 pedestrian crashes per million pedestnan crossings) between marked and unmarked crosswalks. For ADT's greater than 10,000, the pedestrian crash rate for marked crosswalks became increasingly worse as ADT increased. The crash rate at unmarked crossings mcreased only slightly as ADT increased. Note that each point on the graph represents dozens of sites, that is, all of the sites correspond- ing to the given ADT group. For example, the data point for marked crosswalks with ADT's greater than 15,000 corresponds to more than 400 sites. All analyses in this study took into account differences in pedestrian crossing volume, traffic volume, and other important site variables. The results given above may be somewhat expected. Wide, multi-lane streets are difficult for many pedes- trians to cross, particularly if there is an insufficient number of adequate gaps in traffic due to heavy traffic volume and high vehicle speed. Furthermore, while marked crosswalks m themselves may not increase measurable unsafe pedestnan or motonst behavior (based on the Knoblauch et al. study),<5l one possible explanation is that installmg a marked crosswalk may increase the number of at-risk pedestnans (particular- ly children and older adults) who choose to cross there mstead of at the nearest signal-controlled crossing. The pedestrian crossing counts at the 1,000 marked crosswalks and 1,000 unmarked comparison crossmgs from this study may partially explain the difference. Overall, 66.1 percent of the observed pedestrians crossed at marked crosswalks vs. 33.9 percent at unmarked crossmgs. More than 70 percent of pedestrians under age 12 and above age 64 crossed at marked crosswalks, while about 35 percent of pedestrians m the 19-to 35-year-old range crossed at unmarked crossings, as shown in figure 6. The age group of pedestrians was determmed from on-site observation. An even greater percentage ofolder adults (81.3 percent) and young children (76.0 percent) chose to cross in marked crosswalks on multi-lane roads compared to two-lane roads. Thus, instalhng a marked crosswalk at an already undesirable crossmg location (i.e., wide, high-volume street) may mcrease the chance of a pedestrian crash occumng at such a site if a few at-risk pedestrians are encouraged to cross where other adequate crossing facilities are not provided. Tills explanation might be evidenced by the many calls to traffic engineers from citizens who state: "Please install a marked crosswalk so that we can cross the dangerous street near our house." Unfortunately, simply installing a marked crosswalk without other more substantial crossmg facilities often does not result m the majonty of motorists stopping and yielding to pedestrians, contrary to the expectations of many pedestnans. 9. On three-lane roads (i.e., one lane m each direct10n with a center two-way left-tum lane), the crash nsk was slightly higher for marked crosswalks compared to unmarked crosswalks, but this difference was not significant (based on a sample size of 148 sites). 9 Item 9.b. - Page 167 2.0 Multi-Lane, Undivided Roads Only O> 1.8 c: U) U) 0 1.6 I... <..> c: cu ·;:: 1.4 -U) Q) -0 Q) a.. 1.2 c: 0 :2E 1.0 !.. Q) 0.. ...... U) 0.8 0 Q) ..r: U) cu s.. 0.6 <..> c: cu "i: 0.4 ....... II) Q) -0 Q) D.. 0.2 0.0 -ADT < 10,000 ADT > 10,000 No difference in pedestrian crashes A:1 .... Higher pedestrian crash rates at between marked and unmarked ~ "' marked crosswalks compared to -crosswalks unmarked crosswalks / / / Note: Each data point represents 7 multiple sites within an ADT range. @ /' ~ ~ ,~---------------o 0 __ ..,.,.,.,,,,_,.,,------.,.......,.. _,,,,."""""" ------- ~~ 0 -------~ @ 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 Vehicle Volume (ADT) -----~-.-M_a_r_k-ed _________ O_U_n_m_a_r_k_e_d---~I ~~--B-e-s-t--F-1t_C_u_r_v_e_M_a-rk_e_d __ """ ____ B_e_s_t--F-it_C_u_r_v_e_:_U_n_m_a_r_k_ed-~ Figure 5. Pedestrian crash rates by traffic volume for multi-Jane crossings with no raised medians -marked vs. unmarked crosswalks. Item 9.b. - Page 168 90 --·- 80 O> i:: fl) 70 fl) 0 s... () c: 60 rn "i: """" fl) (!) 50 "'C °' a. <( 40 "P 0 °' 30 O> rn ... i;: °' 0 20 i- (l) a. 10 <12 ~ 81.3 -<:::) HS.7 13-18 19-25 26-35 36-50 51-64 65+ Pedestrian Age -~Marked (All Sites) -B-Unmarked (All Sites) --@--Marked (4 or more lanes) ~Marked (2 lanes) O Unmarked (4 or more lanes) 0 Unmarked (2 lanes) ---Marked = 66.1 % overall Unmarked= 33.9% overall Note Overall, for the 2,000 study sites, 66 1 % of the pedestrians crossed in marked crosswalks, while 33 9% crossed at unmarked crossings. Figure 6. Percentage of pedestrians crossing at marked and unmarked crosswalk~ by age group and road type. Item 9.b. - Page 169 Pedestrian Crash Types 10. The greatest difference in pedestrian crash types between marked and unmarked crosswalks mvolved "multiple-threat" crashes. A multiple-threat crash involves a driver stopping in one lane of a multi-lane road to permit pedestrians to cross, and an oncommg vehicle (in the same direction) strikes the pedestnan who is crossmg in front of the stopped vehicle. This crash type involves both the pedestnan and driver failing to see each other in time in order to avoid the collis10n (see figure 7). To avoid multiple-threat collisions, drivers should slow down and look around stopped vehicles in the travel lane, and pedestrians should stop at the outer edge of a stopped vehicle and look into the oncoming lane for approachmg vehicles before stepping into the lane. Figure 7. Illustration of multiple-threat pedestrian crash. A total of 17.6 percent (33 out of 188) of the pedestnan crashes m marked crosswalks were classified as multiple threat. None of the 41 pedestrian crashes in unmarked crosswalks were multiple threat. This findmg may be the result of one or more of the following: Dnvers may be more likely to stop and yield to pedestrians in marked crosswalks compared to unmarked crossings, since at least one motonst must stop for a pedestnan in order to set up a multiple- threat pedestnan collision. Also, pedestnans may be more likely to step out in front of oncoming traffic m a marked crosswalk than at an unmarked location m some mstances. A second explanation is related to the fact that most of the total pedestrians who are crossing multi- lane roads are crossing in a marked crosswalk (66.l percent), as shown earlier in figure 5. Furthermore, of the pedestnan age groups most at risk (the young and the old), an even greater proportion of these pedestrians are choosing to cross multi-lane roads in marked crosswalks (76 percent and 81.3 percent, respectively). Another possible explanation could be that some pedestrians crossmg in a marked crosswalk may be less likely to search properly for vehicles (compared to an unmarked crossmg) when stepping out past a stopped vehicle and into an adjacent lane (i.e., pedestrians not realizing that they need to search for other oncommg vehicles after one motorist stops for them). Further research on pedestrian and motorist behavior could help to gain a better understanding of the causes and potential effects of countermeasures (e.g., advance stop lines) related to these crashes. There is also a need to examme the current laws (and a possible need for changes in the laws) on motorist responsibility to yield to pedestnans and how these laws differ between States. A d1stribut10n of pedestrian crash types is shown in figure 8, which includes all of the 229 pedestnan collisions at the 2,000 study sites 12 Item 9.b. - Page 170 11. Motonsts failing to yield (on through movements) represented a large percentage of pedestrian crashes ill marked crosswalks ( 41.5 percent) and unmarked crosswalks (31. 7 percent). Likewise, vehicle tum and merge crashes, also generally the fault of the driver, accounted for 19.2 percent (marked crosswalks) and 12.2 percent (unmarked crosswalks) (see figure 8). These results indicate a strong need for 1IDproved dnver enforcement and education programs that emphasize the importance of yielding to or stopping for pedestrians. More pedestrian-friendly roadway designs may also be helpful ill reducmg such crashes by slowing vehicles, providing pedestrian refuge (e.g., using raised medians), and/or better warning to motorists about pedestrian crossings. 12. A substantial proportion of pedestrian crashes involved dartout, dash, and other types of crashes in which the pedestrian stepped or ran in front of an oncoming vehicle at unmarked crosswalks (23 of 41, or 56.1 percent) and a lesser proportion occurred at marked crosswalks (41 of 188, or 21.8 percent). Police officers sometimes unjustifiably assign fault to the pedestnan, which suggests the need for more police training. Specifically, it may be questioned why so many pedestrian crashes were designated by the police officer as "pedestnan fails to yield," since in most States, motorists are legally required to yield the right-of-way to pedestrians who are crossing in marked or unmarked crosswalks. Of course, some state ordmances do specify that pedestnans also bear some responsibility for avo1dmg a collision by not stepping out into the street directly mto the path of an oncoming motonst who is too close to the crosswalk to stop in time to avoid a collision. It is likely that police officers often rely largely on the statement of the motorist (e.g., "the pedestrian ran out in front of me" or "came out of nowhere") m determining fault in such crashes, particularly when the driver was not paying proper attention to the road, the pedestnan is unconscious, and there are no other witnesses at the scene. However, it is also true that a major contributmg factor is the unsafe behavior of pedestnans. Keepmg that in mind, dartouts, dashes, and failure of the pedestrians to yield were indicated by police officers as contributing causes m 27.9 percent (64 of229) of the pedestrian crashes at the study sites. These results are indicative of a need for improved pedestnan educational programs, which is in agreement with recommendations in other important studies related to lllprovmg the safety of vulnerable road users. <9l Fmihermore, speeding drivers often contribute to dartout crashes, in addition to unsafe pedestrian behaviors. Creating more pedestrian-friendly crossmgs, by mcluding curb extensions, traffic-calming measures, etc. may also be useful in reducing many of these crashes, as discussed later. Pedestrian Crash Severity 13. An analysis was conducted to compare pedestrian crash seventy on marked vs. unmarked crosswalks. Crash seventy did not differ sigmficantly between marked and unmarked crosswalks on two-lane roads. On multi-lane roads, there was evidence of more fatal and Type A injury pedestnan crashes at marked crosswalks compared to unmarked crosswalks. This result is probably due to older pedestrians being more likely than other age groups to walk in marked rather than unmarked crosswalks. Furthermore, they are much more likely to sustaill fatal and serious injuries than younger pedestrians. As mentioned earher, speed limits of 35 mi/h (56.3 km/h) and higher were associated with a greater percentage of fatal and Type A injuries (43 percent); whereas sites with lower speed limits had 23 percent of pedestnan crashes resultmg in fatal or Type A injunes. Lighting and Time of Day 14. Nighttime pedestnan crash percentages were about the same at marked and unmarked crosswalks (approximately 30 percent). In terms of time of day, the percentage of pedestrian crashes in 13 Item 9.b. - Page 171 45 40 II) Q) 35 ..c: II) cu I.. u c: 30 cu ·.:::: ..... II) Q) 25 -0 Q) a.. <( 20 ..... .... """ 0 Q) C> 15 cu .... c Q) 0 I.. Q) 10 D.. 5 0 *Note The "Fail to Yield" designation -t-------------------------<was assigned based on the police officer's determination of who was at fault, and is not necessarily a proper -t-------------------------<or legally correct conclusion for a given crash. 17.6 12.2 10.1 9.8 0.0 41.5 Multiple Threat Vehicle Turn/Merge Dartout Dash Pedestrian -Fail to Motorist -Fail to Yield* Yield* Crash Type l'!E!Marked EI Unmarked Figure 8. Pedestrian crash types at uncontrolled marked and unmarked crosswalks. Item 9.b. - Page 172 marked crosswalks tended to be higher than for unmarked crosswalks dunng the mornmg (6 to 10 a.m.) and afternoon (3 to 7 p.m.) peak periods, but lower in the midday (10 a.m. to 3 p.m.) and evenmg (7 p.m. to midnight) periods. This is probably because pedestrians are more likely to cross in marked crosswalks than in unmarked crossmgs during peak traffic periods (e.g., walking to and from work) than at other times. Adequate rughttime lighting should be provided at marked crosswalks to enhance the safety of pedestrians crossing at night. Age Effects 15. A separate analysis of pedestrian crashes and crossing volumes by age of pedestrian was conducted. For virtually every situation studied (i.e., marked and unmarked crossings on two-lane and multi-lane roads), pedestrians age 65 and older were oveffepresented m pedestrian crashes compared to their relative crossing volumes. Figure 9 shows the relative proportion of crashes and exposure for various age groups for marked crosswalks on two-lane and multi-lane roads. For a given age group, when the proport10n of crashes exceeds the proportion of exposure, then crashes are overrepresented; that 1s, pedestrians in that population group are at greater risk of being in a pedestrian crash than would be expected from their volume alone. The pedestrian age groups younger than 65 showed no clear increase in crash risk compared to their crossmg volumes. One possible reason that young pedestrians were not overinvolved in crash occurrence is the fact that many crashes mvolvmg young pedestrians (particularly ages 5 to 9) occur on residential streets, whereas this study did not include school crossings and most sites were drawn from collector and arterial streets (where marked crosswalks exist), which are less likely to be frequented by unescorted young children. Also, some of the young children counted in this study were crossing with their parents or other adults, which may have reduced their risk of a crash. Some of the possible reasons that older pedestrians are at greater risk when crossmg streets compared to other age groups are that older adults are more likely (as an overall group) than younger pedestrians to have: Slower walking speeds (and thus greater exposure time). Visual and/or hearing impairments. Difficulty in judging the distance and speed of on-commg traffic. More difficulty keeping track of vehicles coming from' different directions, mcludmg turning vehicles. Inability to react (e.g., stop, dodge, or run) as quickly as younger pedestrians in order to avoid a collision under emergency conditions (m some cases, due to prescript10n medication, which may affect Judgment and/or the ability to react to motor vehicles). Driver and Pedestrian Behavior at Crosswalks 16. A complementary study was conducted by Knoblauch et al. <5l on pedestrian and motorist behavior and also vehicle speed before and after crosswalk mstallation at sites in California, Minnesota, New York, and Virginia (on two-lane and three-lane streets) to help gam a better understanding of the effects of marked crosswalks vs. unmarked crossings. The study results revealed that very few motorists stopped or yielded to pedestrians either before or after marked crosswalks were mstalled. After marked crosswalks were mstalled, there was a small rncrease m pedestrian scanning behav10r (before steppmg out into the street). Also, there was approxmrntely a 1-mi/h (1.6-km/h) reduction in vehicle speed after the marked crosswalks were ms tailed. <5l These behavioral results from the Knoblauch et al. study tend to contradict the "false sense of security" claims attributed to marked 15 Item 9.b. - Page 173 30 25 20 ..... c: Q) 0 15 ... Q) a. 1 o 5 o 30 25 20 ..... c: Q) 0 15 ... Q) a. 1 o 5 o 2-Lane Roads, Marked Crosswalks : -~------~ @------'Si <12 13-18 19-25 26-35 36-50 51-64 Pedestrian Age Q 65+ 30 25 .... c 20 -c: Q) 0 15 ... Q) a. 1 o 5 o o-Pedestrian Exposure _£,_Pedestrian Crashes 2-Lane Roads, Unmarked Crosswalks ·e_ : . : . -.. o--- <12 13-18 19-25 26-35 36-50 51-64 65+ Pedestrian Age Multi-Lane Roads, Marked Crosswalks Multi-Lane Roads, Unmarked Crosswalks <12 30 p _o-25 . f> 20 -c: Q) 0 15 ... Q) a. 1 o .. 5 Cl o 13-18 19-25 26-35 36-50 51-64 65+ <12 13-18 19-25 26-35 Pedestrian Age Pedestrian Figure 9. Percentage of crashes and exposure by pedestrian age group and roadway type at uncontrolled marked and unmarked crosswalks ·-e \ \ • . 36-50 51-64 Age ... 65+ Item 9.b. - Page 174 crosswalks, since observed pedestrian behavior actually improved after marked crosswalks were installed at the study sites. However, it should also be remembered that measures such as "pedestrian awareness" and "expectation that motorists will stop for them" cannot be collected by field observation alone. It should be mentioned that installing marked crosswalks or other measures can affect pedestiian level of service if the measures mcrease the number of motorists who stop and yield to pedestrians. Future studies using focus groups of pedestrians and also questionnaires completed by pedestrians in the field could shed light on such measures. STUDY CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Pedestrians are legitrmate users of the transportation system and they should, therefore, be able to use this system safely. Pedestiian needs m crossing streets should routmely be identified, and appropnate solutions should be selected to improve pedestrian safety and access. Deciding where to mark crosswalks is only one consideration in meeting that objective. The study results revealed that under no condition was the presence of a marked crosswalk alone at an uncontrolled location associated with a significantly lower pedestrian crash rate compared to an unmarked crosswalk. Furthermore, on multi-lane roads with traffic volumes greater than 12,000 vehicles per day, having a marked crosswalk was associated with a higher pedestrian crash rate (after controlling for other site factors) compared to an unmarked crossmg. Therefore, adding marked crosswalks alone (i.e., with no engineering, enforcement, or education enhancement) is not expected to reduce pedestrian crashes for any of the conditions mcluded in the study. On many roadways, particularly multi-lane and high-speed crossing locations, more substantial improvements are often needed for safer pedestrian crossings, such as providing raised medians, installing traffic signals (with pedestrian signals) when warranted, implementing speed-reducing measures, and/or other practices. In addition, development patterns that reduce the speed and number of multi-lane roads should be encouraged. Street crossing locations should be routmely reviewed to consider the following available options: Option 1 -No special provisions needed. Option 2 -Provide a marked crosswalk alone. Option 3 -Install other crossing improvements (with or without a marked crosswalk) to reduce vehicle speeds, shorten crossing distance, or increase the likelihood of motonsts stopping and yieldmg. Smee sites in this study were confined to those havmg no traffic signal or stop sign on the main road approaches, it follows that these results do not apply to crossings controlled by traffic signals, stop or yield signs, traffic-calmmg treatments, or other devices. They also do not apply to school crossmgs, since such sites were purposely excluded from the site selection process. The results of this study have some clear implications on the placement of marked crosswalks and the design of safer pedestnan crossings at uncontrolled locations. These mclude: 1. Pedestrian crashes are relatively rare at uncontrolled pedestrian crossmgs (1 crash every 43.7 years per site in this study); however, the certamty of mjury to the pedestnan and the high likelihood of a severe or fatal mjury in a high-speed crash makes it cntical to provide a pedestnan-friendly transportation network. 2. Marked crosswalks alone (i.e., without traffic-calming treatments, traffic signals with pedestnan signals when warranted, or other substantial improvement) are not recommended at uncontrolled crossing locations on multi-lane roads (i.e., 4 or more lanes) where traffic volume exceeds approx- rmately 12,000 vehicles per day (with no raised medians) or approximately 15,000 ADT (with 17 Item 9.b. - Page 175 raised medians that serve as refuge areas). This recommendation is based on the analysis of pedestrian crash expenence, as well as exposure data and site conditions described earlier. To add a margm of safety and/or to account for future mcreases m traffic volume, the authors recommend against installing marked crosswalks alone on two-lane roads with ADT's greater than 12,000 or on multi-lane roads with ADT's greater than 9,000 (with no raised median). The authors of this study also recommend against installing marked crosswalks alone on roadways with speed limits higher than 40 mi/h (64.4 km/h). Instead, enhanced crossing treatinents (e.g., traffic-calming treatments, traffic and pedestrian signals when warranted, or other substantial improvement) are recommended. Specific recommendations are given later m table 1 regarding installation of marked crosswalks and other crossing measures. It 1s lillportant for motorists to understand their legal responsibility to yield to pedestrians at marked and unmarked crosswalks, which may vary from State to State. Also, pedestnans should use caution when crossmg streets, regardless of who has the legal right-of-way, since it is the pedestrian who suffers the most physical injury in a collision with a motor vehicle. 3. On two-lane roads and lower volume multi-lane roads (ADT's less than 12,000), marked crosswalks were not found to have any positive or negative effect on pedestrian crash rates at the study sites. Marked crosswalks may encourage pedestnans to cross the street at such sites. However, it 1s recommended that crosswalks alone (without other crossing enhancements) not be installed at locations that may pose unusual safety nsks to pedestrians. Pedestrians should not be encouraged to cross the street at sites with limited sight distance, complex or confusing designs, sites with certam vehicle mixes (many heavy trucks), or other dangers, without first providing them with adequate design features and/or traffic control devices. 4. At uncontrolled pedestrian crossing locations, installing marked crosswalks should not be regarded as a magic cure for pedestrian safety problems. However, they also should not be considered as a negative measure that will necessarily increase pedestrian crashes. Marked crosswalks are appropnate at some locat10ns (e.g., at selected low-speed two-lane streets at downtown crossing locations) to help channel pedestnans to preferred crossmg locations, but they should also have other roadway improvements (e.g., raised medians, traffic-cahning treatinents, traffic and pedestnan signals when warranted, or other substantial crossing improvement) when used at other locations. The guidelines presented in table 1 are intended to provide guidance for mstallmg marked crosswalks and other pedestrian crossing facilities. Note that speed limit was used in table 1 in addition to ADT, number of lanes, and presence of a median. In developing the table, roads with higher speed lm1its (higher than 40 mtfll [64.4 km/h]) were considered to be inappropriate for addmg marked crosswalks alone. This is because virtually no crosswalk sites where speed limits exceed 40 mi/h (64.4 km/h) were found in the 30 U.S. cities (and thus could not be included in the analysis). Also, high-speed roadways present added problems for pedestnans and thus require more substantial treatinents in many cases. That may be why Germany, Finland, and Norway do not allow uncontrolled crosswalks on roads with high speed llllits. (6) 5. For three-lane roads, addmg marked crosswalks alone (without other substantial treatinents) is generally not recommended for ADT's greater than 12,000, although exceptions may be allowed under certain condit10ns (e.g., lower speed roads). 6. If nothmg else is done beyond marking crosswalks at an uncontrolled location, pedestrians will not expenence increased safety (under any situat10ns included m the analysis). This fmding is in some ways consistent with the companion study by Knoblauch et al <5l that found that markmg a 18 Item 9.b. - Page 176 Table 1. Recommendations for installing marked crosswalks and other needed pedestrian improvements at uncontrolled locations.* Vehicle ADT Vehicle ADT Vehicle ADT Vehicle ADT Roadway Type < 9,000 >9000 to 12,000 >12,000 -15,000 > 15 000 (Number of Travel Lanes Speed Limit** and Median Type) ~30 35 40 ~30 35 40 ~30 35 40 ~30 35 mi/h mi/h mi/h mi/h mi/h mi/h mi/h mi/h mi/h mi/h mi/h 2 Lanes c c p c c p c c N c p 3 Lanes c c p c p p p p N p N Multi-Lane (4 or More Lanes) c c p c p N p p N N N With Raised Median"'** Multi-Lane (4 or More Lanes) c p N p p N N N N N N Without Raised Median "' These guidelines include intersection and m1dblock locat10ns with no traffic signals or stop signs on the approach to the crossmg. They do not apply to school crossings. A two-way center turn lane is not conside1ed a median. Crosswalks should not be installed at locations that could present an increased safety risk to pedestrians, such as whe1e there is poor sight distance, complex or confusing designs, a substantial volume of heavy trucks, or other dangers, without first providmg adequate design features and/or traffic contiol devices. Adding crosswalks alone will not make crossings safer, nor will they necessarily result m more vehicles stoppmg for pedestrians. Whether or not marked crosswalks are installed, it is important to consider other pedestrian facJlity enhancements (e.g., raised median. trnffic signal, roadway narrowing, enhanced overhead lighting, traffic-calming measures, curb extensions). as needed, to improve the safety of the crossmg. These are general recommendations; good engineering judgment should be used in individual cases for deciding where to install crosswalks. *"' Where the speed linut exceeds 40 mi/h (64 4 km/h) marked crosswalks alone should not be used at unsignalized locations C = Candidate sites for marked crosswalks Mmked crosswalks must be installed carefully and selectively Before installing new marked crosswalks, an engineering study is needed to determine whether the location is suitable for a marked c1osswalk. For an engineering study, a site 1eview may be sul1icient at some locations, while a mo1e in-depth study of pedestdan volume, vehicle speed, sight distance, vehicle mix, etc. may be needed at other sites. It is recommended that a minimum of20 pedest11an crossings per peak hom (or 15 or more elderly and/01 child pedestrians) exist at a location before placing a high priority on the installation of a mmked crosswalk alone. I'= Possible increase in pedestrian crash risk may occur if crosswalks arc added without other pedestrian facility enhancements. These locations should be closely monitored and enhanced with other pedestrian crossing improvements, if necessary, befo1e adding a marked c1osswalk. 40 mi/h N N N N N = Marked crosswalks alone arc insufficient, since pedestrian crash risk may be increased due to providing marked crosswalks alone. Consider using other treatments, such as traffic-calming treatments, traffic signals 'lith pedestrian signals where warranted, or other substantial crossing improvement to improve crossing safety for pedestrians. *i<* The raised median or crossmg island must be at least 4 ft (1.2 m) wide and 6 ft (l 8 m) long to adequately serve as a refuge area for pedestrians in acco1dance with MUTCD and American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) guidelines. Item 9.b. - Page 177 crosswalk will not necessarily increase the number of motonsts that will stop or yield to pedestnans. Research from Europe shows the need for pedestnan nnprovements beyond uncontrolled crosswalks. cio-ii) 7. In some situations (e.g., low-speed, two-lane streets m downtown areas), mstalling a marked crosswalk may help consolidate multiple crossing points. Engineenng judgment should be used to install crosswalks at preferred crossing locat10ns (e.g., at a crossing location at a streetlight as opposed to an unlit crossmg pomt nearby). Also, higher priority should be placed on providing crosswalks where pedestrian volume exceeds about 20 per peak hour (or 15 or more elderly pedestrians and/or children per peak hour). 8. Marked crosswalks and other pedestrian facilities (or lack of facilities) should be routinely monitored to determine what improvements are needed. What Are Possible Measures to Help Pedestrians Cross Streets Safely? 9 Although simply installing marked crosswalks by themselves cannot solve pedestrian crossing problems, the safety needs of pedestnans must not be ignored. More substantial engmeering and roadway treatments need to be considered, as well as enforcement and education programs and possibly new legislation to provide safer and easier crossings for pedestnans at problem locations. Transportation and safety engineers have a responsibility to consider all types of road users in road- way plalllllllg, design, and mamtenance. Pedestrians must be provided with safe facilities for travel. A vanety of pedestrian facilities have been found to improve pedestnan safety and/or ability to cross the street under various condit10ns.(7-22) Examples of some of these pedestnan improvements include: Providing raised medians (figure 10) or intersection crossing islands on multi-lane roads, which can significantly reduce the pedestrian crash rate and also facilitate street crossing. Also, raised medians may provide aesthetic improvement and may control access to prevent unsafe turns out of driveways. Refuge islands should be at least 4 ft (1.2m) wide (and preferably 6 to 8 ft [1.8 to 2.4 m] wide) and of adequate length to allow for pedestrians to stand and wait for gaps in traffic before crossmg the second half of the street. When built, the landscaping should be designed and mamtained to provide good vis1bihty between pedestnans and approaching motorists. [--:~----' -- L i)\\\ . -;:_ _. :---.;._ ~ -L C • " --• i~ "' • • - , __ _ ... -L.......r Figure 10. Raised medians and crossing islands can improve pedestnan safety on multi-lane roads. 20 Item 9.b. - Page 178 Installing traffic signals (with pedestrian signals), where warranted (see figure 11). Figure 11. On some high-volume or multi-lane roads, traffic and pedestrian signals are needed to better accommodate pedestrian crossings. Reducmg the effective street crossing distance for pedestnans by narrowing the roads or by providing curb extensions (figure 12) and/or raised pedestrian islands at intersections. Figure 12. Curb extensions at intersections or midblock locations will shorten the crossing distance for pedestrians. Another option is to reduce four-lane undivided road sections to two through-lanes with dual left-tum lanes or left-tum bays. Reducing the width of the lanes may result in slower speeds in some situations, which can benefit pedestrians who are attemptmg to cross the street. This creates enough space to provide median islands. The removal of a travel lane may also allow enough space for sidewalks and/or bike lanes. 21 Item 9.b. - Page 179 Installing traffic-calming measures may be appropriate on certain streets to slow vehicle speeds and/or reduce cut-through traffic, as described in the report entitled, Traffic Calming: State of the Practice. 0 7l Such measures may include: Raised crossings (raised crosswalks, raised intersections) (see figure 13). Figure 13. Raised crosswalks can control vehicle speeds on local streets at pedestrian crossings. Street narrowing measures (chicanes, slow points, "skinny street" designs). Intersect10n designs (traffic mini-circles, diagonal diverters). Some of these traffic-calming measures may not be appropriate on major collector or artenal streets. Providing adequate nighttlffie lighting for pedestrians (figure 14). Adequate mghttir\}e lighting should be provided at marked crosswalks and areas near churches, schools, and community centers with mghttime pedestrian activity. Figure 14. Adequate lighting can improve pedestrian safety at night. 22 Item 9.b. - Page 180 Designing safer intersections for pedestrians (e.g., crossing islands, tighter tum radii). Providing narrower widths and/or access management (e.g., consolidation of driveways). Constructing grade-separated crossings or pedestrian-only streets (see figure 15). It should be mentioned that grade-separated crossings are very expensive and should only be considered in extreme situations, such as where pedestrian crossings are essential (e.g., school children need to cross a six- lane arterial street), street crossing at-grade is not feasible for pedestrians, and no other measures are considered to be appropriate. Grade-separated crossmgs must also conform to Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. Figure 15. Grade-separated crossings are sometimes used when other measures are not feasible to provide safe ped crossings. Using various pedestrian warning signs, flashers, and other traffic control devices to supplement marked crosswalks (figure 16). However, the effects of supplemental signs and other devices at marked crosswalks are not well known under various roadway conditions. Accordmg to the MUTCD, pedestrian crossing signs should only be used at locations that are unusually hazardous or at locations where pedestrian crossing activity is not readily apparent.<2 l Figure 16. Pedestrian warning signs are sometimes used to supplement crosswalks. 23 Item 9.b. - Page 181 Building narrower streets m new communities to achieve desired vehicle speeds. Increasing the frequency of two-lane or three-lane arterials when designmg new street networks so that fewer multi-lane artenals are required. 10. Whenever a marked crosswalk is installed on an uncontrolled multi-lane road (i.e., three or more lanes), consideration of an advance stop line is recommended at a point up to approximately 30 ft (9 1 m) m advance of the crosswalk along with the sign STOP HERE FOR CROSSWALK. The distance for the stop lme and sign should be set based on vehicle speeds at each site, with lesser distances for lower speed approaches. This will encourage motonsts to stop farther back from the crosswalk, thereby improving sight distance and stoppmg distance for approachmg motorists in the adjacent lanes. Adding such advance stop lines with the STOP HERE FOR CROSSWALK sign has been found by Van Houten<18l to increase the percentage of vehicles that stop farther back from the crosswalk, which could reduce the likelihood of pedestrian multiple-threat collisions on multi-lane roads. Research is needed, however, to better quantify the effects of advance stop Imes on driver behavior and pedestnan crashes. 11. It is recommended that parkmg be eliminated on the approach to uncontrolled crosswalks to improve vision between pedestrians and motonsts. 12. Some agencies provide railings in the medians of multi-lane roads that direct pedestrians to the right and mcrease the likelihood of pede~tnans looking for vehicles coming from their right in the second half of the street (figure 17). Figure 17. Railings in the median direct pedestrians to the right and may reduce pedestrian crashes on the second half of the street. 13. Proper plannmg and land use practices should be applied to benefit pedestrians. For example, busy arterial streets should be used as a boundary for school attendance or school busing. Major pedestnan generators should not be separated from each other or from their parking facilities by a busy street. 24 Item 9.b. - Page 182 14. The current MUTCD pedestrian signal warrant should be reviewed to detenrune whether the warrant should be modified to more easily allow for instalhng a traffic signal at locations where pedestrians cannot safely cross the street (and where no alternative safe crossmgs exist nearby). Consideration must always mclude pedestnans with disabilities and proper accommodations .must be provided to meet ADA requirements. 15. There should be continued research, development, and testing/explanation of innovative traffic control and roadway design alternatives that could provide improved access and safety for pedestnans attempting to cross streets. For example, in-pavement warning hghts, variations m pedestnan warning and regulatory signs (mcluding signs placed in the centerline to reinforce motorists yieldmg to pedestrians), roadway narrowmg, traffic-calmmg measures, automated speed-monitoring techniques, etc. deserve further research and development to detern1ine their feasibility under vanous traffic and roadway conditions. More details about these and other pedestnan facilities are given in the Pedestrian Facilities User's Guide: Providing Safety and Mobzhty, recently developed for FHW A<19l and m the ITE pu~lication Design and Safety of Pedestrian Facilities,<20l and ITE's The Traffic Safety Toolbox (Chapter 19, "Desigmng for Pedestrians").'21 l 25 Item 9.b. - Page 183 PROPOSED RECOMMENDATIONS FOR INSTALLING MARKED CROSSWALKS Marked crosswalks serve two purposes: (1) they tell the pedestrian the best place to cross; and (2) they clarify that a legal crosswalk exists at a particular location. Marked crosswalks are one tool to get pedestrians safely across the street. When considering marked crosswalks at uncontrolled locations, the quest10n should not simply be: "Should I provide a marked crosswalk or not?" Instead, the question should be: "Is this an appropriate tool for getting pedestrians across the street?" Regardless of whether marked crosswalks are used, there remains the fundamental objective to get pedestrians safely across the street. In most cases, marked crosswalks are best used m combmation with other treatments. (e.g., curb extens10ns, raised crossing islands, traffic signals, roadway narrowmg, enhanced overhead lightmg, traffic- calming measures, etc.) Thmk of marked crosswalks as one of a progression of design treatments. If one treatment does not adequately accomplish the task, then move on to the next one. Failure of one particular treatment is not a license to give up and do nothing. In all cases, the fmal design must address the goal of gettmg pedestrians across the road safely. Marked pedestrian crosswalks may be used to delineate preferred pedestrian paths across roadways under the following condit10ns: ' 1. At locations with stop signs or traffic signals. Vehicular traffic might block pedestrian traffic when stopping for a stop sign or red hght; marking crosswalks may help to reduce this occurrence. 2. At non-signalized street crossing locations in designated school zones. Use of adult crossing guards, school signs and markings, and/or traffic signals with pedestrian signals (when warranted) should be used in conjunction with the marked crosswalk, as needed. 3. At non-signalized locations where engmeenng judgment dictates that the number of motor vehicle lanes, pedestrian exposure, average daily traffic (ADT), posted speed hmit, and geometry of the location would make the use of specially designated crosswalks desirable for traffic/pedestrian safety and mobility. This must consider the conditions listed below and also m table 1. Marked crosswalks alone are insufficient (i.e., without traffic-calming treatments, traffic signals and pedestrian signals when warranted, or other substantial crossing improvement) and should not be used under the following conditions: 1. Where the speed hmit exceeds 40 mi/h (64.4 km/h). 2. On a roadway with four or more lanes without a raised median or crossing island that has (or will soon have) an ADT of 12,000 or greater. 3. On a roadway with four or more lanes with a raised median or crossing island that has (or will soon have) an ADT of 15,000 or greater. Street crossmg locations should be routinely reviewed to consider the followmg available options: Opt10n 1 -No special provisions needed. 26 Item 9.b. - Page 184 Option 2 -Provide a marked crosswalk alone Option 3 -Install other crossing improvements (with or without a marked crosswalk) to reduce vehicle speeds, shorten crossing distance, or increase the likelihood of motonsts stoppmg and yieldmg. The intent of table 1 is to provide initial guidance on whether an uncontrolled location might be a candidate for a marked crosswalk alone and/or whether add1t10nal geometric and/or traffic control improvements are needed. As a part of the review process for pedestnan crossings, an engineering study should be used to analyze such other factors, mcluding (but not limited to), as gaps m traffic, approach speed, sight distances, illumination, the needs of special populat10ns, and the distance to the nearest traffic signal. The spacing of marked crosswalks should also be considered so that they are not placed too close together. Overuse of marked crosswalks may breed driver disrespect for them, and a more conservative use of crosswalks is generally preferred. Thus, it is recommended that in situations where marked crosswalks alone are acceptable (see table 1) a higher priority be placed on therr use at locations havmg a minimum of 20 pedestrian crossings per peak hour (or 15 or more elderly and/or child pedestrians per peak hour). In all cases, good engineering Judgment must be applied. OTHER FACTORS Distance of Marked Crosswalks From Signalized Intersections: Marked crosswalks should not be mstalled m close proximity to traffic signals, since pedestrians should be encouraged to cross at the signal m most situations. The mmimum distance from a signal for mstallmg a marked crosswalk should be determined by local traffic engineers based on pedestrian crossmg demand, type of roadway, traffic volume, and other factors. The objective of addmg a marked crosswalk is to channel pedestrians to safer crossmg points. It should be understood, however, that pedestrian crossmg behavior may be difficult to control merely by the addit10n of marked crosswalks. The new marked crosswalk should not unduly restnct platooned traffic, and should also be consistent with marked crosswalks at other unsignahzed locations m the area. Other Treatments: In addition to installing marked crosswalks (or in some cases, mstead of installmg marked crosswalks), there are other treatments that should be considered to provide safer and easier crossings for pedestrians at problem locat10ns. Examples of these pedestrian rmprovements include: Prov1dmg raised medians (or raised crossing islands) on multi-lane roads. Installing traffic signals and pedestnan signals where warranted, and where serious pedestrian crossmg problems exist. Reducing the exposure distance for pedestnans by: Providing curb extens10ns. Providmg pedestrian islands. Reducing four-lane undivided road sections to two through lanes with a left-tum bay (or a two-way left-tum lane), sidewalks, and bicycle lanes. When marked crosswalks are used on uncontrolled multi-lane roads, considerat10n should be given to installing advance stop lmes as much as 30 ft (9.1 m) pnor to the crosswalk (with a STOP HERE FOR CROSSWALK sign) m each direction to reduce the likelihood of a multiple-threat pedestrian colhs10n. 27 Item 9.b. - Page 185 Bus stops should be located on the far side of uncontrolled marked crosswalks. Installmg traffic-calming measures to slow vehicle speeds and/or reduce cut-through traffic. Such measures may include: Raised crossings (raised crosswalks, raised mtersections ). Street-narrowing measures (chicanes, slow points, "skinny street" designs). Intersection designs (traffic mini-circles, diagonal diverters). Others (see ITE Traffic-Calming Gmde for further details).C 17l Some of these traffic-calmmg measures are better smted to local or neighborhood streets than to arterial streets. Providmg adequate nighttIIDe street lighting for pedestrians m areas with nighttime pedestrian activity where illumination is madequate. Designmg safer intersections and driveways for pedestrians (e.g., crossmg islands, tighter tum radri), which take mto consideration the needs of pedesti·rnns. In developmg the proposed U.S. guidelines for marked crosswalks and other pedestrian measures, considerat10n was given not only to the research results m this study, but also to crosswalk guidelines and related pedestrian safety research in Sweden, Netherlands, Canada, Australia, England, Germany, Norway, and Hungary (see references 9-11 and 13-16). More details on these foreign guidelmes and studies are provided m the full FHW A report.C 4l More details on pedestrian facilities are given m the 1999 Pedestrian Facilities User's Guide. Providmg Safety and Mobility for FHW A, Ct 9l the ITE Design and Safety of Pedestrian Facilzties,C 20l the ITE Traffic Safety Toolbox,c 21 J and the City of Seattle guide Making Streets That Work,C 22l among others. REFERENCES 1. Uniform Velucle Code and Model Traffic Ordinance, National Committee on Uniform Traffic Laws and Ordinances, Evanston, Illinois, 1992. 2. Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways, Federal Highway Administration, Washmgton, DC, 1988. 3. Henns, B., "Pedestrian Crosswalk Study. Accidents in Painted and Unpainted Crosswalks," Record No. 406, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 1972. 4. Zegeer, C., Stewart, J., and Huang, H., Safety Effects of Marked vs. Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations, Report No. FHW A-RD-01-142, Federal Highway Admlillstrat1on, McLean, VA, May 2001. 5. Knoblauch, R.L., Nitzburg, M., and Seifert, R.F., Pedestrian Crosswalk Case Studies, Federal Highway Administration, Washmgton, DC, 1999. 6. Per Garder, Personal correspondence, Oct. 7, 1999 and March 2000. 28 Item 9.b. - Page 186 ' 7. Bowman, B. and Vecellio, R., Effects of Urban and Suburban Median Types on Both Vehicular and Pedestrian Safety, Record No. 1445, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 1994. 8. Garder, P., "Pedestrian Safety at Traffic Signals: A Study Carried Out With the Help of a Traffic Conflicts Technique," Accident Analysis & Prevention, Vol. 21, October 1989, pp. 435-444. 9. Safety of Vulnerable Road Users, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), August 1998. 10. Ekman, L., Pedestrian Safety in Sweden, Report No. FHWA-RD-99-091, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, December 1999. 11. Hummel, T., Dutch Pedestrian Safety Research Review, Report No. FHWA-RD-99-092, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, December, 1999. 12. Campbell, B.J., Zegeer, C.V., Cynecki, M.J., and Huang H., Pedestrian Safety Research in the US., Federal Highway Administrat10n, Washington, DC, 2001. 13. Pedestrian Safety: Analyses and Safety Measures, Danish Road Directorate, Division of Traffic Safety and Environment, Copenhagen, June 1998. 14. Van Houten, R., Canadian Research on Pedestrian Safety, Report No. FHW A-RD-99-090, Federal Highway Admllllstration, Washington, DC, December 1999. 15. Cairney, P., Pedestrian Safety m Australia, Report No. FHWA-RD-99-093, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, December 1999. 16. Davies, D., Research, Development, and Implementation of Pedestrian Safety Facilities in the United Kingdom, Report No. FHW A-RD-99-089, Federal Highway Adilllnistration, Washington, DC, December 1999. 17. Traffic Calm mg: State of the Practice, by the Institute of Transportat10n Engmeers for the Federal Highway Admmistration, Washington, DC, August 1999. 18. Van Houten, R., "The Effects of Advance Stop Lines and Sign Prompts on Pedestrian Safety in Crosswalks on a Multi-Lane Highway," Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1988. 19. Zegeer, C.V., Seiderman, C., Lagerwey, P., and Cynecki, M., Pedestrian Facilities User's Guide Providing Safety and Mobility, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, 1999. 20. Design and Safety of Pedestrian Facilities, Institute of Transportation Engineers, March 1998. 21. Zegeer, C. and Seiderman, C., Chapter 19, "Designing for Pedestrians," The Traffic Safety Toolbox, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1999. 22. Making Streets That Work-Neighborhood Planning Tool, City of Seattle, WA, May 1996. 29 Item 9.b. - Page 187 < .. ,:;;--;..,;~~-. ,:~::r::~~· i INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED 'NEGATIVE DECLARATION ATTACHMENT 9 '~;~:~:~::~?~ ~::~:t General Plan Amenetment 14-002~~Specific Plan Amendment 14-001, Conditional Use Permit 14-009 & '~1~~]~~::?.:... .J~~~ting Tentative Tract Map 14-001 Southw'€st~·c:;c)}l{~r of East Grand Avenue and South Courtland Street ~~~f:ij~~:~~- November 2014 Item 9.b. - Page 188 Item 9.b. - Page 189 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 November 2014 Project: General Plan Amendment 14-002, Specific Plan Amendment 14-001, Conditional Use Permit 14-009 & Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14-001 Lead Agency: City of Arroyo Grande Document Availability: City of Arroyo Grande Community Development Department 300 East Branch Street ,J~ r~~r:;· A Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 0~V,·""" Proj:ct :::~:;::·arroyogrande.org/ ,ef$l>•~!f)r(~,,'J;,, The proposed project involves amending Arroyc>"~~h:i:t1de General Plan Land'<l:J~_~,:Element and the Berry • .. ;;'>~\.,_~:, '"''';~/\P~' ',.. Gardens Specific Plan relating to development of'SgO:axea 3 (4.4~, acres). Th~:~~mendments 'allow for a•"'.f\."',~" 1/~~' •, ~~d(f.:1,,.~ " creation of Subarea 3a for commercial development wi~h,::appr.G!~.ir:tJately 11,000 sqJ.1?..r~-feet of building space and four (4) mixed-use residenti~!~~Rndominiums.'0.f.J~fipr8*'imately 1,000 sq~'ii:~i:..feet, as well as the creation of Subarea 3b for residentf~1~:l:i·~~yelo_pment wit~·m:p~,to a maximum of forty-one (41) 'single- ·::.-",'\.~ ~:r '\."-,"l(~"•"<'k• ')(~";. z,:,' family residential units. There is also a·1~·~r:iair:i~~fR>Q~itional ·@~1~;~~ermit (CUP 14-009) application for Subarea 3a and a Vesting Tentative Tract M~'p:_(VTIM~:JC4::0.Q1) applic~tion for Subarea 3b. Summary Document (Sf !~~~1f< •;;~~~'fpqfiJ)t:Z,j, Pursuant to Section 21082;~.of the California Enviri::irimental Quality Act, the City of Arroyo Grande (the City) has independently r:\fi~~~-~ a~,~J;~~~~J'(~ed th~0"lq!~).al Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposedef.ffroject{and fincfr:fliatti'lese·cfoouments "P.eflect the independent judgment of the City. The i '' 't'~,.,~, ,. ... ~-.. •.;,,: f' \>, ">"''\"'\.~,,r,..,,.~ ~w,~ ,.;; .. ~·~~-~ ,.'~~,.._- City, as !.~~~1a~e-ncV>'al~@.:,c;9,nfirnl':s~~ha,! the prcijec~Q:Jj~igatfon measures detailed in these documents are feasibl~;aWff will be impfei:\J~h~ed as~stated in the Mitfg:~ted Negative Declaration. '''\~(',~~,, '· {,,.,~%;~~ 12 November 2014 ==--'--'-'=--=--='-'-'-'-'~-=o.=..=--~~~~~~~ Matthew Downing Assistant Planner Date 12 November 2014 Date Page 3 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 190 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 Table of Contents: November 2014 lntroduction ................................................................................................................................................... 6 Introduction and Regulatory Guidance ..................................................................................................... 6 Lead Agency .............................................................................................................................................. 6 Purpose and Document Organization ....................................................................................................... 6 Summary of Findings ................................................................................................................................. 7 Project Description ........................................................................................................................................ 8 ~·t::. lntroduction ................................................................................. ;:(:·:·~:{: ................................................... 8 Location ............. ·················:·········································.4{#i~:· ............................................... 8 Background and Need for Pro1ect .................................... :·:.·:~::: ........ ;J:::::,::··················································8 Project Description ··:··········································;.~'ff f!J·~·-···········~*J~:·······································g Other Required Public Agency Approvals ......... :.:.r..(:t::: ................................. ·:·.::;:·:·~ ...................................... 9 En:~~::~~::~:::~~:::::::::::::::::::::::i~~~~~C:~:::::::::::~~~~~::::::::::::::::::::::~~ Environmental Factors Potentially Affected .. ::.t:".::::·:~;-·················""'"~·ti ....................................................... 12 ~~:~::ii:::::~~;~~,~1JiiMi~~·::::~'~\,>~~~~::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~~ Environmental Issues .: ..................... ::;.:: .................. ,, .... ,.· ............................................................................... 14 I. Aesthetics ............. ~:.':;~tf~\ .......... :f~~*················~~1~~t. ........................................................................... 14 . n'~--.~~v~~~~~ ~ ''.~$~:~~}-~~ •?t:.~~~~~~~~?},,-~ ·~~t~·~~ 11. Agrrcu ltur:erci n.O.J;orestry Resources·: >;:"x.:::;:;:;;:;~ •••.•.•.••• ,·,::, •.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•..••.•.•..•.••••.•...•.•.•.•.•.••••.•.•.••..•...•••. 14 111. A~f aW~O;''.,l(~"f~t;:~:~4 ;···-~'~}.li;~i,t:'~~: ...................................................................... 1s IV. B1olog1cal Resources .... ~·:::·:: .......... ~.;~:·: ................................................................................................. 19 V. Cult~;·~\~~~sources ........ ~~~{fb ........ ~'.::~~t?:., ......................................................................................... 20 VI. Geology:~~~~i:~\! •.............. ~:~~~~::··········~-~~·: ......................................................................................... 22 VII. Greenhouse Ga§~Emissions .2:·f~~: ........................................................................................................ 23 ·;1;;*}~~. /~~i~3;:;:·~ VIII Hazards and Hazarao"i.is Mate.rials .................................................................................................... 26 'Y~<~:~:~~:;;3~~~:)' IX Hydrology and Water Quality .............................................................................................................. 27 X. Land Use and Planning ........................................................................................................................ 30 XI. Mineral Resources .............................................................................................................................. 30 XII. Noise .................................................................................................................................................. 31 XIII. Population and Housing ................................................................................................................... 32 XIV. Public Services .................................................................................................................................. 33 XV. Recreation ......................................................................................................................................... 34 Page 4 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 191 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 November 2014 XVI. Transportation/Traffic ...................................................................................................................... 34 XVII. Utilities and Service Systems .......................................................................................................... 37 Mandatory Findings of Significance ............................................................................................................ 38 Summary of Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................................... 40 References ................................................................................................................................................... 48 Documents & Maps ................................................................................................................................. 48 Consultations ........................................................................................................................................... 48 Page 5 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 192 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009 & VTIM 14-001 Introduction Introduction and Regulatory Guidance September 2014 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. , . .. ~~:~;~~~:.,,. "1 <"y' ~ \ . .' An Initial Study is conducted by a lead agency to determine if a:;pfq)ect may have a significant effect on the environment [CEQA Guidelines §15063(a)]. If there is suqil~rit·i~J evidence that a project may have a ~.:; ,.~::;.,,,.~:¢,? ,. ,'/',,{"" significant effect on the environment, an Environme~taHffrfpact~~·~.~~ort (EIR) must be prepared, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines §15064(a). Howev.er;~)f the lead age"l)cy determines that revisions in the project plans or proposals made by or agreed tg~JJy}~~e applicant ~it1g·~~e the potentially significant effects to a less-than-significant level, a Mitigat~4~N~gative Declaration m"ay":fb~,prepared instead of an EIR [CEQA Guidelines §15070(b)]. The lead agen~~~f&r~pares a written state~~:6"f:,:aescribing the reasons «"'•' ~~" ',"' "--'•:¥.:Y:~r • a proposed project would not have a significant effet~~o11 the E;,nyjf.onment and;<.tti~r;efore, why an EIR .,..,, •-,.•,•, .;',","~\;,<,'',• "-,.< .. ·~~/ ' need not be prepared. This IS/MND.~f9Qforms to the··:c9nt~rif:requirements under~:~EQA Guidelines §15071. ;~~~~:t~:~t\:<>:;:; . '·:t:t~1~~~:;•::,.. •.v Lead Agency ··:;:1.::·· '""::<::::3;;;;"... ·.;;:~:::-:,<:,. .. :::,;-~~ l<j, ~ ',~e)~·~~;;~~, '•::t<~~:~;~~ The lead agency is the public agency with\primary appr:o'l(al authority:,_over the proposed project. In accordance with CEQA ... ~Ji~~:l{ti~? §15051(~fr~:), "the)~~·~'.f~g~rcy '·wu)-::normally be an agency with general governmenta!:::i{0:¥er~,"st~h~~s a city o~lfc94ntyjfathef::tha'.n:an -agency with a single or limited purpose." The lead ag~'Q'cy.Jor the J~~posed proJe~f:~i;:the City of'.Li.Proyo Grande. The contact person for "~· ; ,~ ">-,,.t, ~~·~~;ti' the lead agency is· ... :,,.~;>-;:::·::.. ~;::;;::: ~~""·:;:.~:;.~:;.:\~: .... . . ':::f~~fr~'.~>~-:/~=1~{-, ;l~·~:i':";~._ .,~;~~~}~ Matthew~Dowrnng Ass1stant:Planner: .. :-< ,:.;,. i..... "<:;;; ,..{ _}·"~;;:~>"{/' ' ~'-,.?',,",• :•;r?~ \~:t~~;"»~ '<,:.~;::~5~~:~~:;;, "'":~;/ .. £1ty of Arroyo Grande ·h·:·-".. _ ··"·X<·:'.w. t; ~,.'•/y "<[.•:<,~$> '. C,.'x ;"!::}-. ''',,>;";;,;::"' ·~300 E. Branch Street·.·.;~c..... "'.1::(::,.. · ...;'>(o'>~,.. ·~~0-~ :, ... ·,.:~"-...>": ArrdV:o:.Grande, CA 93420. '~:.(~'?·;: .. '"-'(:/"" ,:,,. "°>.<,::.;:..~ '>Y',:;.:"f'" (805)'47,3.-5420 '':;''·:~:. ·.-;1;::;: , <;;~.~.\:.. '::j:(t oV Purpose and D()qi_ment Organization The purpose of this ::c(~qument .i~::.Jb evaluate the potential environmental effects of the proposed '\ ;,.~}~·· Lj. ~1, '• project. Mitigation measqt,~s,.have"been identified and incorporated into the project to eliminate any potentially significant impa~t~_2:N~duce them to a less-than-significant level. This document is organized as follows: o Introduction This chapter provides an introduction to the project and describes the purpose and organization of this document. o Project Description This chapter describes the reasons for the project, scope of the project, and project objectives. Page 6of48 Item 9.b. - Page 193 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 ~ Environmental Setting, Potential Impacts and Mitigation Measures November 2014 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. Page 7 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 194 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009 & VTIM 14-001 Project Desc:rftpUon Introduction September 2014 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 project site is located along East Grand Avenue, between South Courtland Street and the western boundary of the City. The project site consists of two (2) parcels, totaling 4.47 acres. The site is surrounded on all sides by existing development: commercial to the east, north and west (City of Grover Beach) and single- family residential to the south. Location Background. and Need for Project The project site is part of the Berry Gardens Specific Plan (BGSP), which identifies the site as Subarea 3. Adopted in 1998, the BGSP contains four (4) subareas, totaling approximately forty-seven (47) acres. When the BGSP was adopted, it only addressed development of Subarea 1 (developed with both neo- traditional single-family homes and 'patio' homes) -the BGSP was to be amended to address the remaining three (3) subareas. In 2003, the BGSP was amended to allow the residential development of Subarea 2. In 2005, the BGSP was amended to allow the development of Subareas 3 and 4. This amendment set forth standards for the subareas to be developed with a commercial component on approximately the northernmost 2/3 of the project site, and affordable multi-family apartments on the Page 8of48 Item 9.b. - Page 195 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 November 2014 remainder of the project site. In 2011, the BGSP was amended to allow Subarea 4 to be developed with a maximum of 45 affordable multi-family apartments, while Subarea 3 was designated as an unplanned subarea requiring a future specific plan amendment for development. The development of Subarea 4 has been completed and now the applicant is seeking to develop Subarea 3 by amending the BGSP and securing entitlements to develop the site. Development of Subarea 3 will complete development of the Berry Gardens Specific Plan, refine the western gateway into the City, provide entry-level and workforce housing and increase sales tax revenue. Project Description GPA 14-002 The proposed General Plan Amendment will amend lmplementCJ~ftn::-Policy LUS-10.1 of the Land Use Element of the General Plan as it relates specifically to the :?.~bj~c:ct property. The Amendment will encourage the construction of high-quality commerci~,~d~i~~l9pment with pedestrian oriented horizontal mixed-use residential development and include:~nigh-de8~ity detached single-family housing ~.. ':?--"·" '{-.;:~;'.'.><~,.~ as part of a mixed-use development. ""t'}:=ic,. • ''~:~:::;;, SPA 14-001 '{*~~j~~~~v ·,~t{~~~~~r~:~'" The proposed Specific Plan Amendment will arff~r)d,_..the Berry Gardens Sp~~i~i.c Plan -specifically, ·,.~t' ;, \,:l\. -." -~"\":>~ <i'>-; Subarea 3. The Berry Gardens Specific Plan covers~1;i1'pproxim9(~ly forty-sever\~(4:ZJ acres along the western edge of Arroyo Grande. The P.lan,includes foun4!-.)=;Sub;~~~~s; Subarea 1 is Ciev~loped with a mix ~~":">->>,,...,.~\.. I\''.'',.*,~•"",/:,' ._-" of neo-traditional single-family and;{:~~pa):je'. homes, su'oa'.f~a 2 is developed with single-family -,.<,. ~.:~" "<<->"-]-.::~:' ",;;:;:'~»~\I,)-• townhouses, and Subarea 4 is develoj'.>"~,d; ·wi~.~~';;§!ffordable "l'r(u'l.!\-family apartments. The proposed amendment will establish allowed uses ·a-~<;1..,det~!~:rl'm~nt stan8~rtjs. for Subarea 3, consisting of the 1o11owing Asii%$o~~r~, '~i '':;ai~:'%?~0 • Commercial/office>·with ve(:ti~al mixedril.(~e,~orf=.the no'rthernmost 1.07 acres (Subarea 3a) - >;,~·~<·,.,.,>\,·,._ (~,,:.~;. \,>(...'~.,,~···:>X-~"~ • "\~·~.N approximately ''\~;J.:~;poo squ~t;e-feet coiijjh~rcial area and four (4) 1,000 square-foot • • <»1.:,·;~,.:">-<'..-.:::"~~ ":.>:<.,. condominiums; an'Cl;::;;,:, .~.;::;-, ··~·'l'-" <"/$>A~( }'7 ~··:X,V?>\"'> ·~~~ .. ~·· >''~">.'. ~{" a Resid7nti~!::u?~ on tt1·i~~R!-l!.~~~f:~:ffiQ°~t!.:~-~ acre<($\Jbarea 3b) -maximum of forty-one (41) single- ~,,x· .. .,~·~-,,~, .. .:;,.~ .. ~y,· , "~, .;r.~-. ·ff,?.~ • N '".~,.,.~,, ,,,.v."'~ family$resiaentiabtownh.6rffes. ···=~:::~~~~:;". :::~::::· CUP 1d~~~i;" ""'.i.;;~~&~b .. -\~?~t~t:~" ···:~:.::ft~J~; .. The propos'e·~~;~onditional Us~;,P:~:l:mit wiWA~V.elop Subarea 3a with two (2) commercial buildings totaling ;g,,..,.">.'!{,t• ••• '•"•' "'·~""-"*'- approximate ly'~;:1.,;:E)000 square-fe~·t:~:-of commercial area and four (4) second-story condominiums of '<" ">~ ,;:» 'i,'.1,.,,¥,::•>" approximately 1,00Q.i~_guare-feet ~~(¢.h, resulting in a vertical mixed-use development. ,,.::~1~11}. .B~~ VTTM 14-001 <·:~::efJ.~·. :"".-~:--','"~*}~,,.~ ,/•::·~.::::,~' :· The proposed Vesting Tenta_f~~W::Tract Map will subdivide Subarea 3b into forty-two (42) lots, including forty-one (41) single-family x-f~-~idential lots and one (1) common area lot, which would include a centrally located "neighborhood green". Other Required Public Agency Approvals No other public agency approvals are required for the proposed project. Related Projects The proposed project is related to the larger Berry Gardens Specific Plan (BGSP), which has been developed over the last twelve (12) years with a mix of neo-traditional single-family homes, 'patio' Page 9 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 196 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 November 2014 homes and townhomes on approximately forty-one (41) acres, generally bounded by Boysenberry Avenue, Strawberry Avenue, Oak Park Boulevard and Ash Street. Page 10 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 197 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009 & VTTM 14-001 Environmental Checklist Project Information Project Title: Lead Agency Name & Address: Contact Person & Telephone Number: Project Location: Project Sponsor Names & Addresses: General Plan September 2014 GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009 & VTTM 14-001 to page 9 The project site is surrounded by commercial development to the east, north and west and residential development to the south. The site itself is undeveloped. None Page 11 of48 Item 9.b. - Page 198 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected November 2014 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: D Aesthetics D B1olog1cal Resources D Agricultural Resources [gj Cultural Resources [gj Air Quality [gj Geology/Soils [gj Greenhouse Gas Emissions D Land Use/Planning D Hazards & Hazardous Materials D Mineral Resources D Hydrology/Water Quality [gj Noise D Population/Housing [gj Public Services D Recreation [gj Transportation/Traffic D Utilit1es/Serv1ce Systems [gj Mandatory Findings of Significance Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation: ·{~i{!~:" "~~~k .... D I find that the proposed project COULD NOT h(IV!=! a·>significa·n~~e.ffect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared .. {:•xy;*~· ··:q;~~s~ ~; . ·.;/ ··~::::l~;~~~ .. [gj I find that, although the original scope of~l~~·:proposed ~roject COUtP;m~ve had a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT b~~~J:~ignific~.Q:t:;~ffect becausetJre:~isions/mitigations to the project have been made,. by or agreed';·t~r;bY'..;.tf:l~:~~pplicant. A IVi1tf~ATED NEGATIVE . :.::?»):.~:~ ~ ··~:::::\.::;::;,:=:s::>~ '~~:-:· DECLARATION will be prepare~:~:~~:~[~~~:... ~:::~~~:[~;\ '~i~:~;~~~~ ~~"~}:~~:~:s., ·~":;~~t~;:\;,~, D I find that the proposed projecfiMAv"·liaxie;·a significi{r.lt:>effect on the environment and an • .. ,~~~ .. ~ \~,.0,,,~';-<;<~ ("~>'::..: ..... ~ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT"O'i:.:its func':tiQriat.equivalent:will be prepared. ;::4:~80%:~=<:·... '\?L. .;Att~~~:~:tf~~':~ '\;~}: D I find that th.e'~p"f:oposed<prqject MAY{h"ay~~;aGpot~"h'ti~lJy,.:,significant impact" or "potentially -~:~'0,),'" ~~·~;O~ ~~ .. ~~,.~",.)::~ .. ;--.;,:t ~", O," significant unless0mitigated"'irnpact" on 'tl'.le~fehvironment>;·However, at least one impact has .. ,~·C'&}v·. <-•:..::<, ""·£'"?".;!: been adequatel1/'an?Jyzed in.:i·~n earlier doG~l):lent, pursuant to applicable legal standards, and has be.e):i,flc\dresse~F@:~mitig'Wti95'.:measure~"{~~sed on the earlier analysis, as described in the .x." "<,,,"·:•,, ):;;~ .... ~;;\~~ > ,,;~;-'--:: •• "':"'''.'.'."' ,'','\~:.: ~ , '--~~)., re.pol'.t~s!~atta<::hments. An~'El'.\!VIRONMENl'AL llVJPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze .,,.-~',,~(,. -~,.~~~';&.»~· ,~ .. '»>•• -"'.>',','>'"F,'r> ·~·:;. i~.~lythe impa"CfS::riM sufficiemJy addresse:a~t~.:pre.vious documents. \it?t~\:, .. ~i:~~:b:.. '<*~l~&::::~. ;;, D I fii:ld·:;:,;Jhat, although~~~~:tbe propos~d project could have had a significant effect on the .. ¥,•:."-."ii' -.·.'" ' '\ .Q,';.' .. "o envirorl'l'Dent, because aJ.(.:p.otentiall'{{:significant effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier Ei"Rior Negative Deqi~ration, p~rsuant to applicable standards, and have been avoided or -,>J'"•"I-·-:..-."·-::"" mitigated, j:Ji:.irsuant to ah·',;earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upo~{tie·,propot~d}project, all impacts have been avoided or mitigated to a less-than- significant level ~·h·~~no:fd~ther action is required. Matthew Downing Assistant Planner ~;:?:1~~~:~~ Date Page 12 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 199 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts November 2014 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 phy~l~al impact may occur, the checklist (:.·.,,,~~'-',• y answers must indicate whether that impact is potenti,ally)'significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially SigQifi~~'rl(ir;npact" is appropriate when there is sufficient evidence that a substantial or potentially[:~i!Bst~Mi~l.adverse change may occur in any of the physical conditions within the area af:f,e.c:t~d' by th~·~::~foj,ect that cannot be mitigated ~:..::;:~ .. ,;..:_:,.;..:-· ... ~~····"--bel~w a level of significance. If ther: are ~P;~~t}.more "Potentially.:~i~~-'.ficant Impact" entries, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) 1s reql:!!r~a: ·<.:).J:;, ".-....~.,,"~">~~-"""""~"~;/\' 4. A "Mitigated Negative Declaration" (NegafiX'fe:~Oeclaration: Less Than Sigq\ficant with Mitigation Incorporated) applies where the incorporat'iSW:'.:aJ mitigqtion measures,'~~fJi?r.to declaration of ,,~_ ..... ,_,.,,,.,. , .. .,,,. ~/::,,,,'} ~":~"» ~ project approval, has reducec);;~".l;~~ffect from "Rgt~~-ii~Jly Significant lmpact~,.'1~to a "Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigatfi:}h:t~J:be lead agency~.il;llist describe the mitigat'ion measures and ~~ .. :~:,, v,,, -·~v~'¢., ",: ·~z"~" briefly explain how they reduce tl}e.;¢ffe'.ct~t9. a less tha·n~:~ignificant level. ,.~ ~,,.~ "~".:; .. ~-.,,'\{," ~~ '~ •"• ' ~· 5. Earlier analyses may be used wh'e,r;e, pl'.fr~i:Jarit to the"'·t,i~f.i.ng, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect h;;is):~een adequ~t~l,y analyt~~~-.iJJ: .. an ea~fi~:hEIR (including a General Plan) or _<·.¥~;:1(~~).:•·.r·~·;" ~~:~;;.. (:;.. .... r:~--:r .. ~.~',,, ~>"~~· -~<· Negative Declaratfon:HJKR" Guidelines:;:for the·=~JmP.le'mentatierf of CEQA, § 15063(c){3)(D)]. ,it),}}':~(}~-Y ·~. -'.'"'; :>J.: • \,:~~ ._", ..$ "':.,;,•:>~~: v.._•,:..»\,,::i:<-'">;o References to.a·n:~e·arlier anal,vsis should:~.;:::::·· .. ,;;i~;::;~~·; >" "'<·::':::,::i,'f·'::.. »,.' ~)~'~' ~:~·}' .. ·.;,,>~:·?>,~~-:::~.-"'·»~~+~ a) Identify the<ear:lier analysis.:and state wner'e it is available for review. ' : >;s:·:t ;::::x:., .::~:~:;v. b) Indicate whiclt~:et.t:ects froi):i the envirohmental checklist were adequately analyzed in the ·~:,..; ,.~·->~ .t.t..,,,A)->r, '<<"'.:>-i-~, {; ~·»~~ e.~rli~J~,dpcumentf~P\.lr?~9.l:l't·i;f9J:applicable~1Jegal standards, and whether these effects were •in»}'""~~»~ ~ "~'~~~""'">_.,! ,. , "'-? » ~;:fa:8e(fi'Hitel\/,~addresse'8~1JY,:initigatlo~n'Jneasures:;included in that analysis . .. ~)·,,::;:»;<:,('.?" ""'"-.'.;..>:'~;~~_,", ~-::z ',,:'!:.. ·< ~>:-"-<_:;; : .. ~\' ., ,H:·))?Describe the:·rnitigatioh '.rnE;!asures in tnis··aocument that were incorporated or refined from ··::~t~;t:the earlier do~mri·ent and·!i~aicate to wh~t extent they address site-specific conditions for ""·:<t~i~ project. ··}~J:~,~ ··~w~\. ~~ &-, ~" 6. Lead 'ag·~ncies are enco'Ctr.aged to Incorporate references to information sources for potential impacts"'::fh'!g .. :,the checki'i~f:or appendix (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances, biological assessmentsf*~~~ference :~~9;~a previously prepared or outside document should include an indication of tne~p:~ge C?~'5R.ages where the statement is substantiated. 7. A source list shotifo,;IJJ::ia;ppended to this document. Sources used or individuals contacted should be listed in th~§~M~rce 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 significa nee. Page 13 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 200 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009 & VTIM 14-001 Environmental Issues I. Aesthetics Environmental Setting September 2014 The project site is located along the City's main commercial corridor (East Grand Avenue). Although the site is undeveloped, it is surrounded by commercial development to the east, north and west and residential development to the south, including a recently completed affordable multi-family apartment project. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse affect on a scenic b) Substantially damage scenic resources, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visu~I character or i«:{N};•' quality of the site and its surroundings?~~?~;::}~:-:·:·:·. "'~ v~· '~" .. ",'""•"•?"•' d) Create a new source of substantial~ligh'F7:d(t.glare jlM~!i.' N;,-l\. .. /.;•},.. which would adversely affect day or nighttime views:~in}'.-. th ? ~~ :~~::::. "~> .. ~~~~r::~:~::"~"~ e area . ' . "'"'k' v,z.:~··-.<·. Discussion ':{f~~t~i%~i~t\;~:. ·::(~{~.:.:_::~~ /".·.·.:··:.~ .. ·.,_~.:.:r_:.~.:.~j:~¥~:~1~~tt~.::;:·.·.)·· .. ··:: .. : .. :' .. ·:·· Less Than No Impact D D a-b: No impacts. '\I,,\;;, .,i °"' ·· · c: Develop~"'~:::':l.~··o~.!~ndard~~~~5>P.~7~ln~~l~~~!bJ~. the Sp~Sific Plan Amendment regulate building form through min'imU'rii~req'uir:ed setoac~s;:maxirii'l1m·:1ot covefrage and floor area ratio, and maximum allowed ~-?j.J<f,,,~ ,•;'y·~'" ~ k ~ n~ • .._,;~~::::§..">:/:, ".;:;{.).L ~ .::::~,. >>~,,· .. :;-;<:. buildingfs)ze;::-ensuring'--'lt.h~~t:. new ·d~:y~Jopment"i5~9C>WPatible with the existing visual character of the ~.,,?~~" .. "..!'-~ , .. ,,,,,, -..~ ... -~.'.'!>'.::,,., •"(\V-\,/~- area. Le·s·s~than significant'ini"pact >'.>:~~:;~:::: ·z~,· ·~<¥fa~, '".~:~~};:·, ·-~~,~~;;;. d: The proje~~we>uld create a--~~~ sourc~:::q'.f:~_nighttime lighting in the form of parking lot and building lights for Suba·f'g?i:~~.3a and 3b ~~@:.rnumina.ted signage on Subarea 3a. However, compliance with applicable Municip'~i§~pde standa~tl~in Section 16.48.090 will ensure that this new source of lighting will not adversely affect ~i'~1.t:S':lin the.a't·~t Less than significant impact References: 2, 3, 1s "·<tf~1~~ttfJ~'.~S-.. II. Agriculture and Forestry Resources Environmental Setting The project site was previously used for agricultural production (strawberries), but does not contain prime soils according to the California Department of Conservation's Important Farmland Map of San Luis Obispo County, nor is it currently designated or zoned for agricultural use. Page 14of48 Item 9.b. - Page 201 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001~ CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 Poteratially Significant Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? 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 zor"]e'~i:lfr Timberland Production (as defined by Gover11r;i~~fV Impact D Code section 51104(g))? ·,:: :;L d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversio~"~?~·f;~::. D /it'.:: forest land to non-forest use? ·;::~;~~···.-,., ::c:: ... :·- e) Involve other changes in the existi.@5;~-~~yironment ··~t~;j~:~f~~fi:~· which, due to their location or nature~~c0i:rnL:r:esult in "<[dj>- conversion of Farmland to non-agricultu~~Wu~J?::~>:::,, .o:,z~~~b$'. November 2014 Less Than Less Than Significant with Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact D D D D D D D D "\tk, ·;·<~?\\i~~~\-;.. .. :~~~j>,. * In determining whether tmpactsitd}qgncultural resouiCe?_.are significanf:f!nvtronmerital·effects, lead agencies may refer to the • ~~'>!';./,",.,~n"'f~-''">.'~ ''~"'..:,' ", •••',~~ -,•,,~ "~•''?',- Cailfornta Agricultural Land,-,E,i/gluatio~;:~and Stte Assessfnent Mo'.d.ef:.'.(19Q7-),. prepdied by the California Department of Conservation as an opt1ona~.:p:C,i:J~j for use·:;~;~~~esstng imp~fi:~:P!(Jg'fJ~~lturaf~niJ farmland. Discussion a-e: No impac_t~·""'"·"· 1dij~&~JMf:i~~~~~-:>~-. Referenr:;es: .. 1-, 3, 9 ·<7:~;;.:~-,. ·~~~11{~~~~ ~~::f~}~~: ·: III. Air Q#~!i_ty ·<;~;:.~;. =tt~~i::. ':::;~;x=::. 1:.:~~1~~~=::;.. Environmentat~,~~ing :;[~~' _.·::~· San Luis Obispo coµJ;it¥ is in non-att~inment status for ozone (03 ), respireable particulate matter (PMlO) r.~vx·~· ""-~'~-"" and vinyl chloride \fi:fder the California Air Resource Board (CARB) standards .. The County is in -~(\..,_~).,.~ ..,,t ":--< attainment status for alVi~ther 9ppJii::able CARB standards. The proposed project will construct forty-one ~,/ >. ..:> r,, -> ~ •'...:•"~'~' (41) single-family detached;;~qi'jles, 11,000 square-feet of commercial area for currently unidentified commercial uses, and four (4F~b.ndominium units. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of applicable air quality plan? the b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Potentially Significant Impact D D Less Than Less Than Significant with Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact D D D D Page 15 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 202 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in 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? D D D November 2014 D D D D D D ~d!:~(t~-· * Where avmlable, the significance cnteria established by the applicable air qua}1fy;management or mr pol/utton control dtstnct may be relied on to make these determinations. · -'·;~~$;):':~, . .; . _.. . ~~~J\:. San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control Dis~i:;icV(-APCDJ<~pe.~ific Comments ~~~t~(~Z*::~ ~{~t=J~~>~ APCD reviewed the proposed project and subn;htiea a letter datea·:'.:Q'.ctober 21, 2014 outlining recommended mitigation measures. These ·h):??.sures have been inc:O~PE!.rated into this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. APCD etlto'u:i:ages a bal~nce of resla}~!i_al and commercial infill within the existing County URL/VRLs, as thisT5:;~_9_nsistef.1t~'0ith the landvu~~,goals and policies of the APCD's Clean Air Plan. Iner.easing density''\:ah.~r:~Jill"ce trips and triv~i: distances and encourage the use of alternative for~~·E~f#a~sportation~-;~ti~i~{ -- ~<::~;~: ... !:~~:~~~f~~::)> ~ :r~~i~~f~~',. APCD specifically commended the applic~P,t oii'tl{e'.~fqllowing elem~nts of the project design: ·~J'~i:>; "',<;s~,;~.~:>:·.~~, <.. 1-~:::;:3'~~~ 1. The project prov:id~.s:~~tp.ixed use d-~~elopme~t~\fftl}~n the v2ify~:limits with, where people can '~'~'n";{" ~},'~;?~; >' •;-• '..::,. :·~?'.\ ·_._/~·~>·'.>~'>~',., ';r)J walk to nearb.)$);>.t1Jres~·pax~ and wor~;:?.> ,_l'}:;;.";;;;:·-y·::~i;:<:w ~<?t':~~(! ~<~~~~;~~~~~\ :.:~¥~~;_;;~~:~~:;~~~~ ~ "' .'~~~7i~5 ; · 2. The project pro~i.qes develq.pgient witliiij·;i;h·e URL where such development is planned for d t d. \.~=~:::-:"{ y~~~f'? ·~:~,)~::~ an expec e , -~· y,;.. ,.:>»<.,,,.,.. ·,;,.;.,,> ~~<: .:~~~.:-~:'~~< ~ ~· ~:;~~;r~:~~~ v ~ :;~~~~~§;~~~~~~~=~-, ~ v;:":~': •, 3. Th~·~Ilifi~i:l~lis.e ... devefopmint ·prO:{f.iaes.,,opp;o·r:tunity for reduced traffic, making transit -::;~¢~~f~es m~;~"Vi'~~~~ and'~ffi=~tive. ··-:;:(ft~»·: .,,. mscu;!il~tii:-:.. .,.~~~~~:t:. ·.::::~~~A·l., ···.::::·· a: No impacts:;~:< ··~;:f~:. ·-:~':;:;>, ···~~~:(~1:-:;:;•, ··\·~~~ '-:"- b-d: ConstructiorNihJpacts of th~;~proposed project were estimated using the most recent CalEEMod computer model by '/Xif;'.:p_ollutioni!tontrol District (APCD) staff. Based on the estimations, construction "'\'..'.>•>., ,-, ~ ~ .. ,.,:;:, ; phase impacts will likely'·$.b,~_,..,lesS:';1Jfan significant when typical mitigation measures are included in the project. The proposed "<WBJ:e~t will also generate short-term emissions during construction. Implementation of the follo~fn-g mitigation measures will reduce these impacts to a less than significant level. Less than significant with mitigation MM 111-1: On-road diesel vehicles shall comply with Section 2485 of Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations. This regulation limits idling from diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicles with gross vehicular weight ratings of more than 10,000 pounds and licensed for operation on highways. It applies to California and non-California based vehicles. In general the regulation specifies that drivers of said vehicles: Page 16 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 203 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 November 2014 Q Shall not idle the vehicle's primary diesel engine for greater than 5 minutes at any location. Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system (APS) to power a heater, air conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on that vehicle during sleeping or resting in a sleeper berth for greater that 5 minutes at any location when within 1,000 feet of a restricted area. MM 111-2: Off-road diesel equipment shall comply with the 5 minute idling restriction identified in Section 2449(d)(2) of the California Air Resources Board's In-Use Off-Road Diesel regulation. MM 111-3: Signs must be posted in the designated queu~~,(:f~as and job sites to remind drivers and operators of the State's 5 minute idling limit. ..·. · .. d(, ! 0{~:,:;». MM 111-4: The project applicant shall comply. iXj{ii" thes~'~[!m.ore restrictive requirements to minimize impacts to nearby sensitive recept~~f:(~pj~cent resid~~t.i~J development): ::i~~~~!i'" < :::~1~t:.,: Staging a queuing areas shall nor~:IJ~:;tocated within 1,000 feet::.p'f;;sensitive receptors; ..,,._,,,~/{~·:'~ ';.~./:· Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptor;s);hall not be·:p.$rrriitted; Use of alternative fueled equipment it~~ommend'l~; and '~:;~~~:t.-. 0 0 0 ;.-: ~x:;:X~x•~,:x•;·:Y/',i'~ r,.;;>:'"::> Signs that specify no 1dl11jg;areas must be pp$fea;:and enforced at the site. • ct '~=~~~;?$~fa~..... "·\t~L: .. MM 111-5: The project shall impl~'[:m=rit':tM~:;itollowing 'frii;~igation measures to manage fugitive dust emissions such that they do 'ri6l.exc~-~:d~~fne: .. APCD's. 1 2Q:%>opacity limit (APCD Rule 401) or • • :'1 ' ' • <>;:::-~\,.. ---.~~:;':<>:::: .,. "?~<::' >,,,. prompt nuisance Ym!~.tJ"!m. (APCD Rul~:fei:92): .:<~~~3'.~:~:-.. ·;:i\::- ,.f~~f}:if::>:~:::~:~.:;\§~;s:* ~{~L-i£~~!~:w~·-:;t~:~1=~~:"·-~~-·-,,. ·'.>' Reduce~the amount ofthe disturbea:a'tea where possible; Use of $~l:t-er:..trucks d}.~lprinkler s;If~~s in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust ',-:"' <~~ ~ <A",.,}>. ~:~~<<~' from leavirig;~the site·::<fod:Jrom exceetling the APCD's limit of 20% opacity for greater • ,;:f~f'.~~t~l'r;:::3.-.minuf~~~:iR~?;W·;60~,ri.Jinute p~fo-od. Increased watering frequency would be /.}:»;)~~~;;.,: .. y.·?,.'' ~~.:x~<,,'>-~·;·~~. -·~<>_,.y -:_, , .... ,,_".;.;.i.,. ~"y~~ ,..,;£ _{;<:;:~~":::::· requ"fre'l;Hwhen wfi\Cl}speeds exce~J::!'.;,15, mph. Reclaimed (non-potable) water should be .;..::;:.r._r:» ~» "~'·: ~·?·~. ',.~._ •'»-". ...,~~:&::;..:; ·:·=t:h used whehE!Y'.~X.POssilJle;-,.. ""~:< ·,~ ·>». '·~/":<":" ~ ~ ... ~c' a ·c:;~~'(,:;;"· All dirt stock···pile. areas ·;should be sprayed daily and covered with tarps or other dust ct • ·~;;::~~:'"';. • , : <· ~; <::r.:::~ "<r:.:bamers as neeaea;. =:.:'.;'(>'.';; "'<.:r;<:e->-\.},.·~· .;~, "';::~ 'Rer.manent dust to.titrol measures identified in the approved project revegetation and la·ri~~~a,pe plans st{~·1j; be implemented as soon as possible, following completion of any soil ci'i~l~tP.ing astl~{£ies; •:'.<·f-:.. .,;, -.·:·. . Exposed ·g~\)qrn;t~.~[eas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial.<g~~:~l~g should be shown with a fast germinating, non-invasive, grass seed and watered until vegetation is established; All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetat1on should be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD; All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed as soon as possible. In addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used; Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site; Page 17 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 204 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 November 2014 o All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with eve Section 23'114; Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site; Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers shall be used with reclaimed water should be used where feasible. Roads shall be pre-wetted prior to sweeping when feasible; o A listing of all required mitigation measures should be included on grading and building plans; and, ,~; .. The contractor or builder shall designate a per?,o~:~:r-persons to monitor the fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implemen_tat,i~H: of the measures as necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visibl~f~ffii~~:t~:q~, below the APCD's limit of 20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in ~my;~'O minut~~p~riod. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods wh~.r{~Work may n~t=:::~h.in progress. The name and telephone number of such persgn,f1~ff~ff be provided to'=t~~~~PCD Compliance Division \ '?''};.,, "" • ""~'-.,,'',." prior to the start of any grading, e~Wtwork or demolition. --:~~~[~::.:. --~1f \::,. A~. ·.·,~iu~:::., MM 111-6: Prior to the start of the project, tlleWpplica_tjt~~nall obtain all n~f~ssary permits for equipment to be used during cb"ns:tr:uction by co"i'.ff~ctJfi~hhe APCD Engineerigg::Division at (805) 7 81-5912 ''f t~:~\(f:lfoR,, "i/~'%1;~!(',, MM 111-7: Prior to any grading a\:.tivities/'<t~.~:-:p.roject sp_6))§9r shall ensure that a geologic evaluation is conductec:Lto determin-~Yfr.-:naturallWciecurring a._~6-&~tos (NOA) is present within the r,/,f,.~;..~~r,'"<•:-:-•, \;~v~ ,A~',~»,·"t'w.~,. •??,.. ~.,~'~"' area that will b<f aJsfl:iHfe&\~:1.f NOA is n"cftprestH'lt;~·~·n·:exemptiorf request must be filed with the APCD. If No.A:1W;~6und at 't'~~~~ite, the aW~J_i~'~}ifmust ~~~\ply with all requirements outlined in ./,/ lf."',,»,,",, ,•,,"~~» ?,,.,.~,,""' "J the Air Resourc@::11aoard (AREn:0'Air Toxics ·cd_otrol Measure (ATCM) for Construction, Grading, Quarrying and Surf~t~~tylinin~~;QR~r?!tions. -~~:~~h- ·::~~:l~f £f itR~::::;;_'.'" ··~~?:~;~::1~}t1--~~:>::;,1~,:t;~%~~=~h-. '\t~}~ -. mr:s: B·u·rnii)g.;qf vegetati)(e materi~:i'lr9:r:i~the aevelopment site shall be prohibited. '":.: ···.;~~~~~~~;. '·:i~tl~:;. '•),:;::;f:;' '('}UJ:-9: Should hyHt~·carbon:::'~qqt_~minated soil be encountered during construction activities, the··~p~Q shall be nchtfie_d within~~forty-eight (48) hours of such contaminated soil being i?, .r.'">,. "' «,~ "'"" discove''f:ec}~to determine·i.f::~·n APCD p'ermit is required. In addition, the following measures shall be imple~i·B\ed immediat'.~IV: after contaminated soil is discovered: Q '•'{;;~~:tt::;:;., /,~JJ~f Covers cfnj·~tQrc;;ig~~;·piles shall be maintained in place at all times in areas not actively involved ir(·§~il::~:adition or removal. Contaminated.:::, soil shall be covered with at least six (6) inches of packed, uncontaminated soil or other TPH -non-permeable barrier such as plastic tarp. No headspace shall be allowed where vapors could accumulate. Covered piles shall be designed in such a way as to eliminate erosion due to wind or water. No openings in the covers are permitted. During soil excavation, odors shall not be evident to such a degree as to cause a public nuisance. e Clean soil must be segregated from contaminated soil. Page 18 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 205 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 November 2014 e: Operation of the commercial portion of the proposed project may create objectionable odors affecting adjacent residents. The Specific Plan Amendment prohibits commercial uses that may create objectionable odors, including nail salons, dry-cleaners, coffee roasters, gasoline stations, furniture refurbishing/refinishing, and any spray paint operation. Therefore, operation of the commercial portion of the proposed project will not constitute a significant impact. Less than significant with mitigation MM 111-10: Operation of any commercial building with a loading area shall include the establishment of a 'no idle' zone for diesel-powered delivery vehicles. Vehicle idling shall be minimized to the maximum extent feasible using the following techniques: 0 Each delivery vehicle's engine shall be shut off im~~:diately after arrival in the loading dock or loading area, unless the vehicle is actiY,.ef~riil·~:~euvering. ~·~'>~M~•.•,_•.'> ? The scheduling of deliveries shall be stagger;ecf(fo':£t:i·e maximum extent feasible. /'·:·· .. ::•\..•.;> ~·>::.<·., Vehicle operators shall be made awar~ cif.~~ne 'no:i.iq.I~-~ zone, including notification by letter to all delivery companies. ,,.~:;{j@:: .. '·s::;:~1\ .. Prominently lettered signs shall b.e/~Mfed in the receiving~[~ock area to remind drivers .":•?:u::v:··~• :.: ~< .. ~~~· to shut off their engines. · '::~:~:~r '·~·;:;;;~::·. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of si~~itjye receptorsJs not per~1if=~d. '·-:~:-;~ .. ~. < ,·)).;-">.'.;.';. ~· Use of alternative-fueled vehicles is recori)rnendepWhenever possiol,e::_:·-. ,.":">~. ':·:·~·:·. ~~ .. •'": ~',~:.:,~..:' ~-·,··--~~( " Staging and queuing ar:(~.~~;~.Q~.11 not be locat,~~;Within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors. :::::::~::::::;~f,iLJ~~t~,~:;~1Jt~~~ly~, The site is devoid of flora~artd fauna wi.th the excepJi0n'of invasive grasses/weeds that are mowed twice a year in accordance witWWheGty'~~w;~ed Abate~{~t. Program. Existing development on all four (4) sides of the predu~~.~.!~~j~:~~%~A~.ildlife y2s.~~.idor. '{W'i'1~~~~,,,w ·.;::.~~~>- Page 19 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 206 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modification, on any species identified as a sensitive, candidate, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified Potentially Significant Impact D Less Than Less Than Significant with Significant Mitigation Impact D D in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by D D the California Department of Fish and Game or the,,.-,: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? . <:~;~%j;;. c) Have a substantial adverse effect on fed~[i:l}l~t· .::.:~ <;;!>~· protected wetlands, as defined by §404 of the "Gle~ri Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, veri'l~I}.. D .:,;::: .. pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, fillingr=:f\... ,,;:f~~::: hydrological interruption, or other meaiKp.·-;.. (;~;r::;:{~,:~:>J/ ~x~;~,:.;"' >, ~ v;::,;~;;;.·> d) Interfere substantially with the movement"· of any ·<;~~:::-:·, native resident or migratory fish or wildWf~;s~:~-~1$~rnr ·:'~W;:~:.h. with established native resident or migr~to~y wildlif~~J;:;;·,,. D .. ,:,::~~::;::;. D D corridors, or impede the ,us~~(lf·n~tive wildlif~~Qwsery'"·:@~t;:,;. ''(fa> sites? ·:::.~i~l~~t~;f'::·::.~:::~~~:;.. ':'$} . .,:d·;~g/·:'· ?~(1'.;;~:~~->. <'" e) Conflict with any~·=~:Jqcal polieies~: ... or ordin'ante$·./ .. ~,:;:/ protecting biological '<f~:~~:~.rces, ~M~h as a "·~qfr, D D D . 1· d' .,.,, 7 "•'"' "''"" preservation po icy or or ma·pee,. .·'"·:~f)'.;:~~(:?"c.:~-":N:·:: • .~··~«;:•:-.~4.._;;~--,. • • ',,;.~:\:;•, <:(~:X);:':'X~·>>:<":• . :"'~Y»- f) Conflict .w1tl:htn!='.·~r:>rov1s1ons::of:·a11" adoptect~Hab1taf::;.~: . .. ~~~\;./\ -• ~·;:~--.:-:~.-·>;:,-v;.,,.,. ~;·,=~<~~, ~~~~~>1~1>v, "·,.,~~." Conserva·fian';"·Plan, 'Natur..al Community Cons·er:vat1on ··: Plan, d~Wth'~r approvedTS~~bregio·ri~!f~qr state ha"'f~W~r D D D ~.>~:::~, ·.:,,/»,,..· "<Z··>~> .... conservat1ornplan? ''.;;.;~::·:. ··~:::;::'.:·:.;. <~?:~~~~: ;.. ~:~~~~~~~' "•:;~:~~fa::>.'• Discussion ·-:::~K-· · ::;~;·: ··~:{:: a-f: No impacts'.'~1.~#<. ,,t~ References: 15, 16, 19 .,<:_:9~:.. /:.f·:;;:.~:; "<~~~~~~~::~~},.~:~ V. Cultural Resources ·'.::::.f:/ Environmental Setting November 2014 No Impact No archeological sites have been recorded within one-half mile of the project site; however, two (2) archeological sites have been recorded within two-thirds of a mile of the project site. A phase one archeological surface survey was conducted in 1997 for the BGSP properties. No intact historic or prehistoric cultural sites were noted during the survey; however, isolated pieces of prehistoric shell and modern or historic shell and burnt bone and glass were noted in a total of five (5) separate locations within the entire forty-seven (47) acre Berry Gardens project area, including the project site. Two (2) of these locations contained Pismo clam shell fragments with either glass or domestic animal bone and are Page 20 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 207 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 November 2014 probably historic in origin. The remaining three (3) locations contained isolated shell fragments that are probably prehistoric in origin. A substantial amount of fill material has been stored on the project site for the past several years. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? Potentially Significant Impact D c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique .. :·. paleontological resource or site or unique geologi~~t~~i·· feature? .·'.~~~).;~· d) Disturb any human remains, including ·::fU@~!> in'.erred ~utside of formal cemeteries? .,.,~~~\~, ~"ii-''· Less Than Less Than Significant with Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact ~ D D D D D D D D1scuss1on ,~.z~;:," ·-.;-;.;;;:;~::··-::·::::;:: a-d: The presence of isolated prehisto'fj~;:~ultural material~·i=;:Mi~~tes the potential for significant impacts ",,.~;~~ '~>-~·· ·~·~ ·~x'·'}i',, to cultural resources should more intac(ior':tsfibs~antial depcfsits:..be present within the project site. Implementation of the following mitigatio:~)n.ea~D'f~t\C.'!11:.reduce·~~~s.~)mpacts to a less than significant level. Less than significant with;mitigation ·.:,~~~~*" · ·~-t~(:\:;:;~.,.. ···~~{:!t;;:: .:·J~if,:~~~:::i;sft:~~;,.:,r, ·~·lt. "'/~}:J~t;~i~~;t~:.,. ··~;;?· MM V-1: A~,Yif~feas whe·r:e,\native (n'~l:l:-stqgkjJiled) "sofl:\yvill be disturbed by construction activities (gradf~g;:fcfpotings, ··S,t]'jities, etcf~~yl· first be inspected by a qualified archeologist to determine if any ?bftural res·8IT~ces are pre'~~ht. Prior to construction activities and if cultural ,z:.;-~»~,.._.. A'--~:'~,.'>;:-;~ ;i«~ .. ~"_,,-, ·"~>;>'.>'"- reSp!J~~~S~;a_fEL prese nt{:~-~p.!:!flS'e'.::~t\(JQ:;?~a_rchedl~gical study shall be conducted .by a qualified ,, J,•.",,><,,-,~J-4r,~ .'~'<""""~4~~,,.• ~~" ,.",'~>J."/> \" ~» .. ~~"... ,'..l'{-..- ari:h'e'd'logisfancHfurthe('ITJitigation measures identified and implemented. ~~~(' "<'';{t~~J;:~, . .·,:::~:~fti~~. -<~~w/;:!~,· M!\?k~V-2: If a pote.~j,ially sig"1\ifi.cant cultural resource is encountered during subsurface '•,~!~",'\," ... ~~ '-,', -)'~/:.~ ~ earthwork activities, c:i'll,~construetid.rl:;activities within a 100-foot radius of the find shall cease until '~\~h:ialified archa~8T.~fgist det;~ri;ines whether the uncovered resource requires further study. 'K:i~~~dard inadi,.~ttent discovery clause shall be included in every grading and construction'·'cpr:itract to jt\f(>rm contractors of this requirement. Any previously undiscovered resources fou~d~'i{br!ng_.cbnstruction shall be recorded on appropriate California Department of <" ,\«:< -'>-,. ,'~·;< "~~" ' Parks and Recreati.O:i:fa:::(BPR) forms and evaluated for significance in terms of California Environmental Quallti/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. Page 21of48 Item 9.b. - Page 208 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 November 2014 MM V-3: If human remains are encountered during earth-distu_rbing 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: 15, 16, 19 VI. Geology and Soils Environmental Setting ,;:::;:~~~'.:, In general, the project site slopes to the south with an average .~:!~~~fi"Bn of approximately ninety {90) feet above mean sea level. The south side of the site is gene,r,.9:Uv;t~n (10) feet below the north side in elevation. Near surface soils generally consist of silty sands:;i~:fa"ta·~'tin.of 4-5 feet in a slightly moist to ..,.;: .... <~.;;:· -~:..;.~.;.,~~. moist state and in a loose to medium-dense '{~:=-':·<.~:::~::,. :~::::@.\:: .. Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to pot~ntiO:I substantial adverse effects, including the risk of~;t(~~t:.~.iQjury, or '.;\·* ' ~ .. ~,:,>AV>¢·~ death involving: '$).;.: -.:.:;;~:=;~:;:~~ ~~v:r:-.. ' ,.",J:·V:~~'~'"~ i) Rupture of a known earthquai<~;::Jaultf~;:a~·:'· . ........ " ., nr•""·"'·· delineated on the most-. recent Alq"~j~t-Priol0'·'{~~:1~::::·.:-. /is:::.," J,z, ->'.:-~::_8:: / :<~::·: ~,,};;.~~ Earthquake Fault Zoriibg?Ma.r:i~~;issued by the; State ~::~i;'.·~i~i~;~;::1; ... ,.,,.·~z-~,,,,,;~, ~ ~ ~ .. : ~ '~:,.::~ ~·»<•: ! :::<,,-~nx~<_..... ,_»,~·;,'\>"><;;\.'.'.,: ~.... • Geologist for ttJ~>~!area, or:~~:'!Jased on "::~o~b¢"r%?'" ·.·;~~::}~<::,: ·~/::. v.~~,~ }~, ~J'?n~,...~X· D '\.",,~,,'\. substantial eviden"c<t~~9J a know·1~1?ult? (Rete[;!:~,&:.· ·.· Division of Mines and",$~plogy Spi!'cial Publicatiq]1~ ~2 .) .·<·,,.~7~~~%tw+~:.,~ "·:::~~}~tf. ~{~~~:::=~·;"" ''0;~1~[~: .. 11) Stqsii:ig·;~e1sm1c,grn!:Jnd shak_r!)g-? · '~::S::~:::~~<:.. 'i.*~:c iii).:;jsMrrnic-relatea:eygr;qund·.,·\f~.ilure, in~i~~'(f;ig.· o \yV<::r o v,.f~:~ H Hr:)1~;:,,, ~ ~~' l1quef:act1on? ···<~·::;: .. , .,.,,:;;.,.. v-;;:,»J-~·" -• ,;~~";·<">-\~<..:'..:•:". iv) Lan'asllaes? ·;,;fo:; ·:1;;:~::.: .. v .,,_, '« X.-. ~·,'"" b) Result in ··:5~_§;~,tantial soil e"f:qgion or t~~: .. loss of I? 4'",!'J'> ~:':»:=~: topsoi . ··~,~§::~'c "<<·:»: "..:'.(;:"':';... k~>v~ c) Be located on a g'eq,lggic unit or:,;s'Q"JI that is unstable, ~"-::/'~~ "". ,,,, -~>' or that would becom~~yr:istabl§}i,as a result of the ~»}<'.'\?.~ ~~ .. ,",, ,.~ ~ ~ project and potentially ·:::r:@2~1~::~!:'in on-or off-site landslide, lateral spreading/;s'uiJsidence, 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 disposal systems, where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? D D D D Less'Tlian. • • • ""'!.<;::-,;;~ Less Than S1gmf1cant;;;:" . 'f' . '';>f§:;:}S1gm 1cant No Impact with ""·~" ;.. . . . ''°{1:::::.1mpact M1t1gat1on :,:~.-;'.,» •• "<t~}~ .. D D D D D D D D D D Page 22 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 209 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 Discussion November 2014 a: A geotechnical investigation of the project site was performed by GSI Soils Inc. (2006). This investigation concluded that the project site is suitable for the proposed project if the recommendations contained in the investigation are incorporated into the project plans and specifications. Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce any potential impacts to a less than significant level. Less than significant with mitigation MM Vl-1: Prior to grading permit issuance, the project proponent shall submit a revised geotechnical study or addendum to the original study that either states that all conclusions and recommendations in the original report are valid or,~ . .if the original conclusions and recommendations are not valid, includes updated con,c:t4~J6ns and recommendations where necessary. ~~*~~$:~~ >;.~Y ~-::'.;~!'<~$".:>" /.#~~i{e:~J~::,,. MM Vl-2: All construction plans shall incorpo.f~tE!"' th'e"ir:ecommendations of an updated geotechnical study based on the study prep51J~.i:I for the p?6j~'£t,by GSI Soils Inc. dated April 2006 .;,z':',;;;~;'.;';Y '···;:;...:;> •• • <;: ~<<· ~':;i,_V' ~y~~*;:,. b-e: No impacts. ~·~;'~~~2~:~ :~~,~=:~:use Gas Emissions f {tJ~~~'. Environmental Settmg ·:~>;;:; ·• •.• ,;;.1::·::::.,. <·•.:::;.·;: .• 9(~.:«7?~·" -~;}:~~. #,,~::::.:{';..~·>~ ~;o:~).~:~r.' The project site is located1aajac.ent..to existing?tommerct~fahi:t:r,esidentia!;development, along the City's • • • ,'.»~>!?,,? .,,.~~.)'! ~i.;;:>~ .. ~6<,,:$;A. ·~::..::~~~",., ,~<",if~;-;.:;::-""~<";:;::~:v~ "'n",~ ma in commerc1a I corncjci~vfEast Gr.;t,1;ttj;.Aven ue) :::;'~:~=.. ,,~,::;:c;,.}(-.'.~" "':::;)~~»;>"' Less Than '~,\ · . . lt,~ ''1':' •me.nti•:~~· ~~;,::~, ,,,, ...... ·.~. ;.w :· ,,r::.:~~:g-<·:: ;.,-:;z ''·~·::-. S1gmf1cant Significant No Impact ¥>?i:~:;~~;~:~;~;:::?~:~::-::;~,._,. "~~~:fv:~~;~"?S.~{:~" {vj.~~,:~~~~~~~!~~""" <;?~~:~: Im act with Impact Would the nro1·ecf"O,:·''·~}:···>"··.t'·. ·-.~~V·"•" ',<-:·.•"?:•), >.;.z.; p Mitigation ;:,~~'_,~,7 :~· .~ u -... ~"~~:::<~~, • .. ¥ .. ~~>{:~·-~,.:t::~~,.:Z~v~ i~:~\ a) Gen~i\i~~.,.greenhouse·~g~}:·.emissioh~, either dire~fly:: "~> ,,•,!~ ~··· ,,'n';»,,).. .,,. ?'>;;.~.. ~," • or indirec~l,Y, that may haver·:: .ignificar:lbeffect on tlie D 0 ~,,r~7~~~=,.",, <' \, ~~~ "r~~:,,::~>-e nv1 ro nm e nt..,:A" ·. s:· -,;x.k:., b) Conflict wif~~~!:! .. ?PPlicable pi~:~~eolicy ~~:;~¥'gulation adopted for th;apatpose of reduciog the emissions of :,:~?~~fo,, ~t~:::· greenhouse gases? '·-:::::--.\'.;:·. .~:~'x D D D D D Discussion ··~.:;~~~tft;i4jfJ}: a-b: Greenhouse Gas (GHG)R~missions are said to result in an increase in the earth's average surface temperature. This is commo'nly referred to as global warming. The rise in global temperature is associated with long-term changes in precipitation, temperature, wind patterns, and other elements of the earth's climate system. This is also known as climate change. These changes are now thought to be broadly attributed to GHG emissions, particularly those emissions that result from the human production and use of fossil fuels. The passage of AB32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act (2006), recognized the need to reduce GHG emissions and set the greenhouse gas emissions reduction goal for the State of California into law. The law required that by 2020, State emissions must be reduced to 1990 levels. This is to be Page 23 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 210 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 November 2014 accomplished by reducing greenhouse gas emissions from significant sources via regulation, market mechanisms, and other actions. Subsequent legislation (e.g., SB97-Greenhouse Gas Emissions bill) directed the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to develop statewide thresholds. In March 2012, the San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (APCD) approved thresholds for GHG emission impacts, and these thresholds have been incorporated in the APCD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook. APCD determined that a tiered process for residential/commercial land use projects was the most appropriate and effective approach for assessing the GHG emission impacts. The tiered approach includes three methods, any of which can be used for any given project: ,.,J'}~:"~ o Qualitative GHG Reduction Strategies (e.g. Climate Acti5>.,.g~.~!~·ns): A qualitative threshold that is consistent with AB 32 Scoping Plan measures and goal~;{cl1fji~/' A~Ji~rttf;f,~, 11 Bright-Line Threshold: Numerical value to dete~f!iiQ:ij:tfhe sig1\fj£~nce of a project's annual GHG emissions; or, ···: ·-~;~~~:::'(:, .. "<{tf~%~:~} c Efficiency-Based Threshold: Assesses the ~ impacts of a projecf5~'ihan emissions per capita basis. ... ":~\\; A. ·~~ -~ .. For most ~rojects the Bright-Line Thrt~:~~Ja,.?f 1,150 Met{l~~*tjns C02/year (MT coz..e/yr) will be the most applicable threshold. In addition tq~th~~£,~.s,L~ential/com·w~r:,~ial threshold options proposed above, a bright-line numerical value threshold~fo:(i6;i;)~Q:;,MT C02e}~:r;?i'!jas adopted for stationary source (. d t . I) . t ·:?;.;;, "'>::·:?:,,,,::·. .:.:·:~;:v. in us na proJec s. ·,,~·:;:-"·:Z~\:'i,:);:--. ''>:·:·:~~. ,@~~~=~~;~!;;::_. \f~~~;.. · ··::=;:~~~tt>~,;. ·.;~~tr~~:~ It should be noted tt'Jaf~projects;~\hat gener~tl;. less;;=:t~an''th~(.:?b,ove'mentioned thresholds will also participate in emissio~~~~~:~ctions "bic<~}1se air ~'~~~9=~~r includ'lti'g'.{GHGs, are under the purview of the California Air Resources'.is:~cir~ (or ot,tti;r regulat6fy(;?.~gencies) and will be "regulated" either by CARB, the Federal Government, ({f~9~her ~!N"t.i.e~}» .For exarrff!Je, new vehicles will be subject to increased fuel economy;:::?ff~fndards and '€nfiss't&:a~:'?~d·~;d"tions, l~?g~:,.and small appliances will be subject to more strict emJsfit~~::::,:1d~~~);d~, a~ifa':tf~nergy·<,,~·~J~J'i';Jerel~~~-o consumers will increasingly come from y...,;i~...,>:;)\:ii'V '-:>;y~ "~ .. ~ ,_.;.>~.:.·~<·. ".:;.,~.:'bf~:;~~ renewa9J~~ources. Other.:pr:9.~ram's~~hi3.1.are intenae"d<to reduce the overall GHG emissions include Low ;r-1",.1).""' ~ f'"-"~ v•_,.~./ • Carbon Fue):~~tandards, Renewa.ble Por'f{o!i9 standards and the Clean Car standards. As a result, even the emissi~ri~~~bat result fro~SWojects t,h~f1f:>:r;oduce fewer emissions than the threshold will be subject ~~~",,"J~~•:x, ~..v-;~-,>< "';;,~1Jo:~ • to emission reductions. <:;:p/·: ·'·~· '{'~~\:::;. 'l@r~ .. Under CEQA, an indl~ii~Ji,~,lprojec~i~.GHG emissions will generally not result in direct significant impacts. This is because the clirri~J~b::h,?.~g:~}lssue is global in nature. However, an individual project could be found to contribute to a ~6t~si:ltigily significant cumulative impact. Projects that have GHG emissions "'~·<,,-~ above the noted thresholds may be considered cumulatively considerable and require mitigation. The Air Pollution Control Board (APCD) has established mitigation measures to reduce project-level GHG emissions. Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Less than significant with mitigation M!\fl Vll-1: All construction plans shall reflect the following GHG-reducing measures where applicable. Prior to issuance of building permits, the project sponsor shall submit impact reduction calculations based on these measures to the APCD for review and approval, incorporating the following measures: Page 24 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 211 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 November 2014 o Incorporate outdoor electrical outlets to encourage the use of electric appliances and tools. 0 0 0 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. 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 cj~sjgned to handle dead weight loads of standard solar-heated water and photovoltalt~j:fanels. Roof design shall include • .,('~~~'~'Y • , sufficient south-facing roof surface, based on-:.~ruGtures size and use, to accommodate adequate solar panels. For south facing r<?g:d~ittW~~, the closest standard roof pitch to the ideal average solar exposure shall b~"J~"t(' "~~~~k-: Increase the building energy rating bi'.2'q% above Title":2·~~t~quirements. Measures used to reach the 20% rating cannot be_<.a'b'Htil~ counted. ·'-~;~;fr~}. b,f.~ "~"1:~-· .!'..::::"-.-~ "-,.\... Plant drought tolerant, native ~h'~a.e, trees along southern')~~posures of buildings to ··"<>'>"," ,..,..,, ,,.<:;r, reduce energy used to cool buildings·ip},s..ummer .. Ah ""<':~~?:-:·:· Utilize green building 111aterials (mat~?i~·1~< whi~ht~te resource ~f:f'{9i~n,t, recycled, and 0 0 11'!<) >M:_, 0 O ·~:-:~'1'.:::j:•/};:<<M»~ ' j>~~;.:z.,·. sustainable) available tq·cc;iUy.1f possible. ·~·~::~-'§;;~<~:> ·s: '-{ :~;Z--~ ,,' ·}~>... ~"':·;;;~~'v-" Install high efficiency heating:and,cooling systenrs. Design building to includ1~%);fg;~~tbangs that~1~~?ufficient to block the high summer sun, but not the lower wint~~·s.un, ffb'r@~en,etrating:sq:\,!th facing windows (passive solar design ) • ,~ !t.~§J~,f~:~:~-::~ ~~. ,:~~~~~', • * ~:;{~f :~~~::~::~V~ Vn ~i~~:~~~' Utilize,~~r~B·~~ffl~i~:fi}:V~:gas or s;l~'r~~.~t~r:F~~t~fs:%'i?:::; . '»' ,/'· . . ·~'' ,, "~",,;;'""""~·~ , . .,,.~,, Utilize~.l:)~il.t-in energy~~fficient appji~·ffGes (i.e. Energy Star®). •,,,.,;,, ,' '}'::'' \'",< " Utilize dc>tible;paned)i.iindows. ·~s·:.::;, "',,:;..,,~>"»: ~«{4;-" M~> '~"'~>.-~ o ,,,.,, •. ,Utili.ze low e·ne:fgy !!tfe~r,ljght;;,,(i.e. sdai:tim) . .,,~'~,1.",/'·~·,·~,.'",~ ~~':iV .~,., •,•,,r,,,,~.•.bjrx•.',,,,~,,~~.~,. "•"_.',."'.;, e ;(:l:;''.::i~t8iiilze~energy effici'en"i: interioi)ighting.:·~~~\ .-"'",..>\'!'~~;:~<}" r :;,~?,;J>{<:-. -.... ~,\: '\.•, ~~~>\ :• :·~=..:~ > -/ ,_ff>;:~;*[» Install eh¢:~gy-reduciDg.,programnfaqJ~~thermostats. ·.·.·, ~ ~, "X· -,')... ,,' .~,.,,,. ." .. ~ ··~:~~h Use roofing~material WitJ3,.a solar reflectance values meeting the EPA/DOE Energy Star® "vV¢•";{;°"' "}·>N. .,,;~>>.: 0 "<~if~:.,. rating to reduc~:s1:Jmmer'=cqpling needs . . ~,..~,,,.;;.. --..~ ..... ·, .......... " . ·:::s_~i:Ur:ninate high ~.a'ter consumption landscape (e.g., plants and lawns) in residential 'd"Wlg,n. Use native2i?"i~rnts that do not require watering and are low ROG emitting. -~··. j>:.~ ::..:.,zk: Provi9i;!,,:,.on-site bi§Y,cle parking both short term (racks) and long term (lockers, or a locked:~~B~rn ~i.t,~;~standard racks and access limited to bicyclist only) to meet peak , ,,,,,,, .,,,;,,¥,.,,.,, season m·axi.nNm:>aemand. One bike rack space per 10 vehicle/employee space is "~<~' ... ' ~Y recommendect<·· 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. References: 10, 11, B Page 25 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 212 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 VHI Hazards and Hazardous Materials Environmental Setting November 2014 The project site is not known to contain hazards or hazardous materials, nor are these located in the immediate vicinity of the project site. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Potentially Significant Impact b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and/or accident conditions involving the release of~::~:;:. hazardous materials, substances, or waste into-:~tfi~.~r'" ,;i;~.y"~";r.:· environment? i.,~J;::: c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardou·~;~bi:.:·. ·'· ', ·~}~"~';',. ~<0t~~,, a~ut:ly hazardous m~terials, sub~t~~.:es, or waste::;?%~, o{:J~:f· within one-quarter mile of an ex1st!ng:;~or proposed '·:~c=::i~x:·:1.;:.0.1::·· school? \~~l?iffiK::... . '·::~ti~:;_, d) Be located on a site which is include{ii~9ff·'atJ.i~!;;.of <.y;~~i=;,., Less Than Significant with Mitigation D D ..,,., > • ,,;., ~· • 0,'. ~.-.-. hazardous materials sites, compiled pt'.(~;.~ant~·>;;tR?~::-:=:~· D ·,:q~:k~ .. --D Government Code §65962.Si·~and, as a result;::create a ··;;:.~"::::: .. ·.. ':$:·:::~. significant hazard to ther:~fr8fici[6·~~~~nvironment?k. i·;!,;!ffi~:U~;-~:;;;-·::.'.:::?' ,.q;,\~F!<,.,.,.." .... ,vr;z,,. ~~:. ~ ,,;.,,;:>;.~:::~· -~,:.-~.,;', ""'><~ e) Be located within a'[l)ifrport lancf.;i;i:s~ plan or, '-o/l:iei~r.~· -.;., ::~;:.: .. " -"..'(_ '."-!'i;,. ~,~ ",' •.;:,; ''"' ~· such a plan has not been·:~·dopted, wiJliin two mil'eS-'.of ':(!'·,,,~ '~ "1'.•:-.~. "•>'.i;>, a public airport or public Lise:;;airpo~fWf;-~g., would tl'.@:- project rest,JJt;;iR:i'a}s.af.~N haz~~~)c{r~pfd~i~~·~r~?\ding a·~\~:i,· .. • • ~}X::'<:})·_,,,9;~~::-.:-:.;)~,.;X>.:,. "~;:::~\;;::;~<' ,,.~<<~;:'~~~:~.,.... ;,,,:.;:~x·: workmg,m7the·pro1ecti:ar:ea.? '::~.:·~" ·:.-,.;;:;::::~·~·?. <-~;-- f) Be IQE1i~~d in the vi~.i~'f~~iQJ a p~)zy~~~;.airstrip?it~:~;r Y.:;y·· "'' • ''""'" would the~i,prpject result in'a':s·afety hai~·~c! for people residing or wci'rking in the proj'~'~fiarea? '"(:f.:;J~.\. N < ,....,;:::,.. "' ·~, •.;.;,.~ ~;::,y.' ~ g) Impair impleJ'D~['ltat1on of o(:~hysically .;:interfere ... ~~-.:--~,', "t,.,:;.,, with an adopteCl:;~~~E;!mergency iie'sponse plan or emergency evacuat .. i6i;~lan? -~~J~:; ~,",";)~\, ~>-1::<1;: h) Expose people or stn:J'~N~~-~}R-~a· significant risk of loss, injury, or death fronrn-.WHClland fires, including areas where wildlands are ad)~t'ent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Discussion a, c-h: No impacts. D D D D D D D D Less Than Significant Impact D D D D D D D b: The potential for naturally occurring asbestos (NOA) is addressed in Section Ill Air Quality. References: 16, 22 No Impact Page 26 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 213 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 IX Hydrology and Water Quality Environmental Setting November 2014 The project site is located within the incorporated City Limits of Arroyo Grande. The City provides water service, which consists of water from groundwater and Lopez Lake. The site itself is undeveloped, which results in a minimal amount of stormwater runoff; however, the adjacent Poplar Ponding Basin was designed and constructed to accommodate the increased stormwater runoff the proposed project would generate. The project site is not located within a flood zone. Less Than Potentially .• . .. S. "f' ,a:c~.':,,,S1gmf1cant 1gm 1cant ·v.:,,····· . h I ct.~;::'.:;s.z:V" Wit mpa '""''"!;· . . . Would the project: .~J'~'J: .jY,· M1t1gat1on a) Violate any water quality standards or waste ~/[§}:q~:~>.-. D discharge requirements? ·0~~t:~,. · '~~::~~~:. • ~'£.~-,. ~-.,:' ~:~r=~:i;~\'> b) Substantially deplete groundwater supp hes qr::;~;~·:;~ ':::;~:~L ~",,?':t·~ ~~' ~.;~~~·~-.." ;c interfere substantially with groundwater rech.sii'g~j~~::c::-'<:1'~n~. such that there would be a net deficit in a~:~'ffe:~ {~¥~· ... ·., :;:•?},> "<,,~~ • "•, volume or a lowering of the local groundwater tab'l,e;:,, •: level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing neari}~~~\:::. D3 ·" r D wells would drop to a level that woula.s,:;ryot support ··::;~~~1~h:1~~~~{· existing land uses or planned uses f~-~f.Whfth",permits ·-:~.;~MK "::~::~. '.."f:~~,,{><~·, ""'<$«";'" have been granted)? ~'.:~·:· '>>?;.x:·:.;f;:: ·;;;::;;1:,::-. . . . . ~,;::~~<~. ~, .. ~~·~~:~~;:::; ·..,.~~:~;:~, c) Substantially alter the existing dramage,~:patternr~of~:·~~.. .,~~~=~~> "·. ~~:i~.. ~,".· ~'\'f,..,,:v._ "{::~~: :~~·. the site or area, includit)g~~tl:1r,0._ugh alteratior;i;:pf the"''·:~:~=~~'.n ·-::::i:f.ITl /'. ,.._r ·~·•._·¥~· ··• ~~~,»"'"t:::::J" •X"""L.:..J course of a stream or .. ~iv~~:.:ini"a{ffi_~rrner whic~:~~oulc;t{#~:=~·:~.-.;[i~~;::1x·. ···:0:· result in substantial o~~~f~foff-site ~~~~.!pn or silt~~\1lfJ:}<' 9"';;::~~;j~~:~ d) Substantially alter tffe~*'existing drainage pattern0of ,»~:<;$~··». :."<~·~: \·::>>;,, the site or area, includin'g::?.through{alteration of tb:e". "-,<:>\."y'.,V (Jf'n~;*,."; :"":~:r2'~·, \»\,"\';$,'~ course of a<stre"am:e.r: river,.''cfr~;sutfata'iH:iallW~increas'e-\:R D ,,.,.~ :;:;e~;~:~~x:;.;.-·;:;·z;,if,' )>. ·~::;-;,:~~ .. <··~ ""~~,,__...,:;:~~~;: .. : ~ ~»;;<~:".(·~ the rate."'0r'"':"amb'u'nf;:::·c).f1,surface'~runoff in a·'~m·a·nner -~~.>-' ?::::$;;:>;<" "<,~~::~:-:>»:» -~>:", ":·. ,(.!}>?,\;"'::<·. which w,1:Sl:1IO result in on~o'e:off-site'floe.dmg? "·~:!:::~'' -,..;·;.~!(')>' <''~"~"!<..;· '·~>>>,'; '~ e) Create:{6r:., contribute r·uiJ.6:-ff wate'1WWhich would exceed th~-~:~~pacity of existing:?~(;planne\:ifoormwater drainage sysf~if]~:;-,or provide '%°f:tb?tantiai'{~~a'ditional -~~,.,",'\,:)'• .. ;\ <»";. sources of polluted::i:unoff? ::t.;.':,, f) Substantially deg~~B:~~~ater quaf{l~:? g) Place housing withi~'~:~'.fapo-,v,~~]./flood hazard area, <K"~~», »»'»,".>~,c-'" as mapped on a federal HQ'.6.9[, Raza rd Boundary or '"~-:.~> .. :.- Flood Insurance Rate Map,'·'or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place structures that would impede or redirect flood flows within a 100-year flood hazard area? 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? D D D D D D D D D D D D Less Than Significant Impact D D D D D No Impact D D D D D D _ Page 27 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 214 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 Discussion November 2014 a, c-e: The project is required to comply with the City's Post Construction Stormwater Requirements, which require the site to retain the 95th percentile of a 24 hour storm event for projects adding more than 15,000 square-feet of impervious surfaces. As part of the Berry Gardens Specific Plan (BGSP) area, the project site will direct the remaining 5th percentile of a 24 hour storm event to the Poplar Ponding Basin, which is an infiltration basin located directly across South Courtland Street from the project site. The basin was designed and built to accommodate all additional runoff generated by development of the project site and will have adequate capacity to accommodate the additional runoff. Less than significant impact b: The proposed project is not anticipated to deplete gr2,.u~~'.~ater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge since the project will comply with t~~:~:~ity's Post Construction Stormwater Requirements. Discussion of water supply is covered in Se.c;:t(q~J~~IJ Utilities and Service Systems. Less . . . . ~~~:·v·x~:;.."* ,~ ~ .... ~:-than s1gnif1cant impact '·.t··>:5::· ·'<:x:·;:-. .. ~d~!!;. ';:~>" ''·~:;~~~h::, f: The State Water Quality Control Board requiresfoj:t1hicipalities, via tfie1t¥ational Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit, to mini~:f~~ts· negative impacts ~Wi~~aquatic ecosystems and degradation of water quality to the maximum ~~g~·!"l!. practicabJ~. Permitt-e~{rn.ust implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) that reduce pollutan:t:S);frJ:..~torrT).:.\Al~ter runoff t~~"l6.e·,technology-based standard of Maximum Extent. Practicable':(MEP) to prot~~tNv:at~'.6t~r~~lity. The goals ·atH>ost-construction \>»~u~>-~~.~ '"•.:;.!'-;.!/»» :" BMPs are to prevent and control ero:Sf0:B·~;~i'1~,d sedimenfa~.9.b, provide source control of potential ,,z,'~:r -\ .. ~», ... ~~ ,·. """ ......... /,;, pollutants, control and treat runoff, a·na. 'pf0'tect wetlands~2~fr1d water quality resources. Post- ~;:<.::: ~»~~~~ =:>?~" v ~,,::;':',, ~~> construction BMPs are required to aclii_~:v.e stc>"~fliwa.ter quali~Y~.:.standards through site-planning measures. Vegetative SW.C;ll@S~·.Qf. other bioflft~fS are"'·f~2ornmende·d~.?,s.;·~he preferred choice for post-<,,,·, ,~,. .. ~~.-~-V-v... ~,.,.-,..}'" ,..,..~, -~_ .. ;,.,"~,, • .,," .. ~.~,-,_". , construction BMPs for aJIU>to]e'cfs:;.~.i~h suitable:~l,andscaP.~.al'e.a~;.becat.ise these measures are relatively economical and req~lr.~;~~fimitect'%!~:intenanc~~:~??1::Fpr~?:~1~jectr~\rvnere landscape based treatment is impracticable, or insutfi"bf~pJ to me~:rJ~quired dt~j~·;f;~riteria, oth~~ post-construction BMPs should be incorporated. All post-c~-~'§{[uction.f~B~_must be""fii~Jritained to operate effectively. Implementation "'""'"'·~;: > j>J,\,',~J.0-·t.'"'A,\.~,;, t\ f~;.~ of the BMPs:;lisfec;l:sbelow will·fr'edu¢e.iflie'~~)i!·otential imj::i_acts to water quality to a less thain significant ..... ~,~,~·~·~--:;::<·' ;}'" .,<.J'9: ~. "·~~~ .·,. .y ':",~ ~i~·~>>/.~~,-. },{.{~ .. ·.,. level. Less::tliari'"sr·mficant with iiiitr ation ;,::;,~~~:t::: ._ ~-:::r> '~~~~IX-1: The·=.f~f!qwint~~Ps shal; :·;~~orporated into the project: ~~~~~~:.~ .. ;. <~!»,.~':"h ~::-';<-,>·~ ~·~:;::~~::;~. '{r~~-~~~:::, ~~~;~~:~~~:~ G ··=~Roof Downspout~System. Direct roof drains to pervious areas to allow infiltration prior t.6ftj)~c;:harging to 0?J~r bodies or the municipal storm drain system. "}~~t;B:;hA j~l~ <) Run-off Gontrol·)jf:0aintain post-development peak runoff rate and average volume of runoff at le\f~l~;t·h~t are similar to pre-development levels. -~.~~:~;:::.·,. o Labeling and Maintenance of Storm Drain Facilities. Label new 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. Vehicle/Equipment Cleaning. Commercial/industrial facilities or multi-family residential developments of 50 units or greater should either provide a covered, bermed area for washing activities or discourage vehicle/equipment washing by removing hose bibs and installing signs prohibiting such uses. Vehicle/equipment washing areas shall be paved Page 28 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 215 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 November 2014 designed to prevent run-on or run off from the area, and plumbed to drain to the sanitary sewer. • Car Washing. Commercial car wash facilities shall be designed and operated such that no runoff from the facility is discharged to the storm drain system. Wastewater from the facility shall discharge to the sanitary sewer or wastewater reclamation system. o Common Area Litter Control. Implement trash management and litter control for commercial and industrial projects or large-scale residential developments to prevent litter and debris from being carried to water bodies pr the storm drain system. -<~~~!tf:> a Food Service Facilities. Design food service facilities (including restaurants and grocery stores) to have a sink or other area for cle.arj}~'gfr!~qrmats, containers, and equipments that is connected to a grease interceP.teW{SVior tb°f&ischarging to the sanitary sewer '~~w '• ", )-:;;•; ~'~ system. The cleaning area should be;:J~rge enough to··,cl~an the largest mat or piece of >.= .. =:=:~:~:::' ,·.y~=.>~A; > equipment to be cleaned. f::~;:;:~:·· .,.;~.?;~;,. -:::~~~~jt:. '\::~~tb: .. " Refuse Areas. Trash compactors, e"i1c!0sures and._dumpster are·a~~·s.hall be covered and ··~~ .. ·.·.·:v: 't·~r~'.i-''-'1\..•L• ~.-. > protected from roof and surface drainag~e·:)nst~l11a·:·self-contained·::a~ainage system that ,•-".. ·-:~: }' ~" ... ~->~·· ;z:i-~' :;.'\'• ·:--- discharges to the sanit.a:rY:.~ewer if water cafi[1~t::pe diverted from the··areas. \~~~{H\~~/::::,'. '··\~~{~~=~~=-- Cl Outdoor Storage Controls'.~~9ils;~~'.f~:~.~~t. solvent5;:~£lwlants, and other chemicals stored outdoors shall be in contain.~,rs ancf~~fr5$Je_c;ted from::.a'rainage by secondary containment ~}''"~··,/' '•'•'"'·~~.. "'"~~ .. :,.. ... structures;.,sffcb.\a,S berms, lineYS',;.vaults cfdf.0'of}~overs···afiq{.or drain to the sanitary sewer (~'~'\~,~ > {•, :.;i,L .. :0~ • < ,y,,1~":"', <>~--.~,:·=·~ ~·;o,.•"' <, ~ '':.v. ~ systerns·::;)B.ulk··mater:ials stored;::-outdoo.rs:-Sha'll~.also be protected from drainage with .. -:.:•, ;~;-•-,•. • ;>(.; .'.',, /'I· .. ~-:~. .•:"·;:,.,.. -;-:•,' v::i< >~·~~·~ - berms::"aqq covers. ·d~_focess eqLiiµ,aj~[.it, .. stored O'Litpoors shall be inspected for proper ~· ........ ..,,.~, ;•,, "' ... ·--i.;: '•'•' '.~,. ...... function 'ani:l,.leaks, sto}:ed on impefijleable surfaces and covered. Implement a regular ..... ~>~;-::--:~~ ;~ Mh~;::; -~x·.;: program of.<5\fl/t?.epit)g~ia,i;i,g,...Jitter con·~r;~I and develop a spill cleanup plan for storage Af i~~~;·Jllft~{%k .'''t~~,~~\~f1i%'ft~:f,J ';;:~~;;;(. Cleaning,····21\i'laintenahce.;.-.and Proce·ssihg Controls. Areas used for washing, steam '~i.;~;fJ:; .. cleaning, ma·i~w.nanc~';{(~~,air or processing shall have impermeable surfaces and v~W:GOntainment l:ief'.i'ns, roof'cO:vers, recycled water wash facility, and discharge to the ''..::,~~'?hi.tary sewer. ·~·qlscharges·l~ the sanitary sewer may require pretreatment systems '~ .!f~, -~~-;. ;-.._-_.,". and/tj'r .. approval of.;a"n industrial waste discharge permit. "-:~=i~:~~'.;=~-·. ::~n@= ~ Loading '[}o'ck .Co'iifrols. Design loading docks to be covered, surrounded by berms or curbs, or C:o'iisfructed to prevent drainage onto or from the area. Position roof downspouts t6. direct stormwater away from the loading area. Water from loading dock areas shall be drained to the sanitary sewer, or diverted and collected for ultimate discharge to the sanitary sewer. Door skirts between the trailers and the building shall be installed to prevent exposure of loading activities to rain. e 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 Page 29 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 216 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 November 2014 the storm drain system. Wash water containing any cleaning agent or degreaser shall be collected and discharged to the sanitary sewer. g-j: No impacts. References: 6, 7, 15 X. Land Use and Planning Environmental Setting The project site is designated as Mixed-Use Specific Plan (MU-SPJ:,fQ .. the City's Land Use Element and ·)'.'>""···· zoned Gateway Mixed-Use Specific Plan (GMU-SP). The propose,.~JY:pe and scale of development will be consistent with both the MU-SP land use category and GMU.~$J~;~~fling district with the adoption of the . . ·.i"~=· "·::<~ :.-:~>;~:..,:· ·~.;,,. General Plan Amendment and Spec1f1c Plan Amendment. ,,~::;~:~:::·:{:" ···".'.'A·::..: ,,::/~l.::<:::=::y· "~~~f J~~;:rhan ... :~~,:.:;:·:.;;-· Potentially ..... ": ,.;·(.::::.<::-:::· S1gnif1cant .-:';'.·Y;~;;~::Y Significant ...... : .·>. S1gnif1cant ::;:;::;.::;:·: with:::.~:~::·:· -. .. I;.. Impact ·-:·'-"·" Impact Would the project: ":::::~·;:;.:.. Mit1gation-i;::.:z· .... a) Physically divide an established community? ·-"<~hf:.:... D ./~\;. D ":.f:t:>::D ~-.·:<:-i:. /.; •. ·.~ .... ,,'° .. ~.,.. ••• ~. b) Conflict with the applicable land us~/P,lan, policy, or "::;/::";~:~ii{:~Y ·:.:.k .. regulation of any agency with jurisdr~ti&n::-9ver the "·::~ffi:/;{· .... project (including, but not limited to, ~{~.~'.~~~~h:BI·~~, ·a:j~fa~:"· D ~ specific plan, local coastal program, "r:or io~i0g::.... ·-~~:"~>:::-. ·~· -~~ -\;~\ .. ~.· .~}.·. ·-.':!-,";,,~ ordinance) adopted for the.,,purpose of a~¢>iding or=<:~~;;:;::;:;... ·:::~:~;::."' 0 0 0 0 .A,: ,.::;;~ff •, 0. ? ~}>··~ ./·:~~--= .. ~·;·:·:; " ~~~~..::~~:-:,:;. m1t1gatmg an env1ronmer;lta :·~-" e_ct.. -:~ .. ';,.;:,. .:~-:·:·."?~('.·:~:.-.:·., ~~'? · c) Conflict with any ... ~§~fftable ~h~:~~!~t conse~~~.i.p~\(/ ~-~;~:f~i;~t:. D plan or natural communi~y~conservatigji plan? '';,;/:f·.. .,. Less Than No Impact D D ~i~~~;~1~~1;~2;{~'V~~~;~il;;i:tf wz~~~k;<(;::~t b: The ·P-~Ri:iosed project in'i::l.Lld.es ame·M!:!f'!lents to both the General Plan and Berry Gardens Specific Plan J)? ~ ,~""~ '~·.· ·~·~ ' '" ~,.';~ .-~ to ensure tl\e;'pevelopment o'f:tfle subjeet~1?'rqperty is consistent with all applicable land use plans, policies, anlt~~~.[;:itions. Less tti'~n"signifid~:t:impact ~:;?A.... \\~\ .. References: 1, 2, 4, 15)}17, 18 .;::~:~:. '"'.::;,::fa\.. ...t?. XI. Mineral Resources'.':::. _.-.::: .;·;:.-·~ -~\/~;[~t~:'. ·. Environmental Setting The project site does not contain any known mineral resources. 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? Potentially Sign iflca nt Impact D Less Than Less Than Significant with S1gnif1cant No Impact M1t1gation Impact D D Page 30 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 217 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 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 impacts. References: 5 D Xii. Noise .j~~~~'.b· Environmental Setting <~6$~~~~):·· November 2014 D D ,,;.., '>'{"~' ~ ~ The project site is surrounded by commercial uses to the:+~~~tf·:WqA~~ .. and west, and residential uses to the south. The proposed project includes new residential~us:es or?fb'~::southern portion of the project site, with mixed-use commercial space and residentii]}c0ndominiun:;J~blJ:· the northern portion of the • • , ,, '.">>''~~/ ~"~;::~:~~ ', project site. · ",~:~2:$;:.. • .~~~~~;:~0:'\• Would the project: ·.If-":':: :::;:'x, a) Generate or expose people to noise ·1~-y:~r{i~:;~~~ess of standards established in a local ge~~~'.~1·'·~1~:0~~~%~-D noise ordinance, or in other applicable locaJ;{?tate,'of.~~;:::i:~::-.. federal standards? .• ~::~{~;~,;:;~h:~. \t\:.. ~·~~~~:~~b::,, b) Generate or exP.6~f· ... :~P~·fiBk to ~·~.,2~ssive:;fe:,.·D.;:~~:·:~:);·3. <·" ', ¥\/~ •, , .. } .~:.: ~ '..;-{ ,' ~ ">>. ~<.~ .; '~ < ~'~">~· ~ ·~ ground borne vibrations~ori'groundbor!:\e noise leve:ls,"?~:;}:'" ?:r· ~.;11.,,,~ .. h ·~~.;.>' ',,_' .;;;:.~,· c) Create a substantial pef;rhanent inci:ease in ambient. • ... .:.:,.~ ¥ ."x ~ '<<rA· noise levels iri ~h.e_yicinity df.~~h~ prqj_e~t~(cibpve leve1$h:. D . h . /X"~: . .:::;.:~,..,.,).> ·/'•.,, ~<:z;,.~·,\~:,~';::<-:',r.l'"/'»;v~··:·.-!;:~~~ < ;,~::;.r without t ff•gro1ect ?·:'·'·:. '·::;l'.'~<,:~> ··"';:::.:-: .. ;;:;.;. '":''"°" ,<..;;'<:>~~:::-,--" ...-.,, :•>\i\X<»t'~,> '»{:\~\:)'\_ N;;)':~..Z~0:•>, '<~' d) Createi;,a;,~substantial'temJJoral)''o·r:·periodic incr:ease ·· "'.?!>-.. ">~>>"'· "·~?~.Z~ .. ,.,. , ",'>"'Y,~'\ ·-,,..,·,,;,~)". ', in ambiei}.~1:i:ioise levels in "€t:le:\1_icinity:qt~the project,'' in' excess of'hdise levels existing~~{'i~bout t~~i:prnject? , 'rf''\':, ....,~.·. •"J ', 't','<i e) Be located:·~J;.~_in an airport ni~i)'sl.use plan(or, where such a plan has'·n~t-.been adopteli!Wwithin tw·a· miles of a public airport o?pJqlic use airp'g~? If so, would the proj~ct expose peo'~:i~';r,.esiding,:f~6y: working in the project area to excessivE/g~,i~~::l~~els? f) Be in the vicinity of a prl~?~te:'airstrip? If so, would ~:-. the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Discussion D D D -";.',<»'.><),,~ "%~t~~:;, Less Than ·;~:;,·tess Than S1grnf1ca nt '< · · · h S1grnf,1cant Wit · -·~ Impact D D D D D D D D No Impact D D D D a: Residential uses are considered to be noise sensitive, and any store loading dock will expose both existing and proposed residential uses to elevated noise levels. An acoustic report was prepared by David Dubbink Associates (2010) to analyze acoustical issues related to a previous project on the site. The report concludes that without mitigation, the previously proposed project will exceed City standards for noise exposure to residential uses. The current project proposal includes significantly reduced commercial intensity and it is reasonable to conclude that implementation of recommended mitigation Page 31of48 Item 9.b. - Page 218 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 November 2014 measures from the previous study will reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Less than significant with mitigation MM Xll-1: All store deliveries shall be restricted to between the hours of 7:00 AM to 10:00 PM, and the current parking limitations on either side of South Courtland Street shall be maintained. MM Xll-2: Any residential structures that would have a direct line of sight to store delivery areas shall include acoustical treatment to reduce exterior noise levels by thirty (30) decibels, the cost of which shall be borne by the developers. .·;;,:·. MM Xll-3: Delivery truck drivers shall be instructed to .t~1tiJJ9ff diesel engines when trucks are parked or being unloaded. · ·· · ~,(.(!~ b & d: Construction of the proposed project will gene:~ff~· erl1·t~t(3_ry groundborne vibrations and increase ambient noise levels; however, the days and"tffu·es·'~f const;8~{ibn activities shall be limited per <":~>»»,.... '..'';-h ~ .. :~ ... >·,.; City standards. Therefore, this temporary increas.~{is;;:not anticipated to e>(C:e1ed the City's thresholds for noise. Less than significant impact {~*;~~j/' ··<.;~;;~~/'.:;; .. ··,:%~{i;:,;~'.;._ 1''"· \~1·~~~~> ... c: Operation of the proposed project will create a perm~·:~e.nt ir:i.cr~·~.se in ambient"nqis~ levels; however, this permanent increase is not anticiR_€{t~~tJ.o exceed ttl~~~,i~j~~j'.f~resholds for noise"'·~h:'Municipal Code Ch 9 16 L h • 'f' t • '"·ct"VN~},,. •'-'"•)<? apter . . ess t an s1gn1 1can 1mpa ::~~v;;:::: :::::,,.. ···:~-::"·"' e-f: No impacts. c~=2~~*J~~~~-= ~ References: 1 2 3 15 2:1;0 ?:::$3::x.::;: .• :;:;·;-::,, I I I :;;J;:~i:~F "':;;:~~~:~:. XIII. Population arid~M·~_using 'f:i:: "";»");:·~·» ~*?:: Environmental Settmg ;,c.y,.·4'-•• ::.:~·"·"'-' ·-?,;..... ~·/ ":·. / ~h>"":~~*X•,>?.·n~, "'"~~::::.::~):[~~~·~;2.,,~ .. :,::;:t~~;~ .. :~-~?2·~ ",,:i.:~:\;~. The project:·site?.;i?"~v~cant. The··,pattef to th'e:i:Sbuth of'tt:ie project site had been identified in the City's ,~: ... ,.,,;~" :"· /"· ,.,. -..::~>>:~',"'7.t -.;x ... ~.:::~» • ..,,~: ~·>r~7'-""»'• "~:Y~ Housing~~J~ment as aii:~',0:'PR.Prturiifi~?tte' to provi(;IJ~~~dditional housing to the City's housing stock and '•1,_~.• ~»~~'V ~}~ •" ,/\.", -."', ." "~ ~ ~ i:.,'»,»,,,,,-11' has beerl:ebnstructed witff'a~S36:-unit affordable multi'.:'.family apartment complex. ~»''~ ~, ~,~ ~~.~~;~~: ~.~:~:~. Would the project: ·.::::;·:::::-,:_:;.>.::;:: M1t1gat1on a) Induce substantial,,'f;Jp.ulatio.n:\~"fowth in an area, either directly (for exampf,~si?~~-~~oposing new homes and businesses) or indirectiy~f(for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? D D D D D D Less Than Significant Impact D D No Impact D Page 32 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 219 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 Discussion November 2014 a: The proposed project is anticipated to house approximately 108 persons. The proposed density and anticipated population growth are consistent with the City's General Plan (Land Use and Housing Elements) and the residential type will be consistent with the City's General Plan and the BGSP due to amendments to these documents being proposed in the project description. Less than significant impact b-c: No impacts. References: 1, 4, 15 XIV. Public Services Environmental Setting Public services to the project site are readily School District {LMSD). Would the project: ,;~;:; .. ;.;.;..~,~<--;> .. a) Result in significant environmentai:~ilripacts from construction associated with the provi~i6~··~6tJ}1·ew or 'J. I?'. ~,.,, ..... ~,.~ .. .,,,,,;,,, physically altered governmental facilities;·f:·~)r,.,the::::n~~d,i .. "' .. ,. '•'·'~ ~ .... ~·~>>;-~ .. ·»' for new or physically altered .. goyernmental fa~iJities, to::;i;;~fa:::.D • • .~,· ',..,.;_~,·; )-~X""A.-, '\ •';:,:,~ ::..>~{:.\.""\;:;•,.'),, maintain acceptable se~19.er:~Ei.t1,2.~;\response t1m.es, or.~:;:-{~i::~;~·==~~~:i::~:-.. »,?\')..~~ 1"».J' ""-~ "•j<"· -";";<,•,~, ~"}"~•,•?,I,:, •,.,",/'•an~~'V',· other performance o!:)j!='!'.;tives for.~:ar:iy of the ·~pJ;1bJ,it:,,;:~' ··::?>~t:'.:::::-serv:~fr:~::~:i~~~n: ~k~\, lfi#$q~,l;.:.:.:.: ... '.~:':'·:·.f·,,"','..··.;., .•.•. :.":.~·.~:.:.: .. ·.·.~.~-} B '"C" ~~~~~.:f.?.:~.fr~iii;§f~W#J:.~.:".~·. ···, .;..; ·<c:.:~::::.:.: o Othi.ii)iu bl ic facilities?"'$\,, ."l\~.~.::.·_:: .. :. D • • v {~t~\-. '">;;{@~;,"'"' -~ •. :.~:~:; .. Discussion ·~;::::,. -:);::}. ···1*7>::. D D lg] D D No Impact D D D D D D '~;~,,{-.!'":,. r,rv,?;:~ -:<J~ a: The constructio;i}::.()f forty-one (?.J.;'.!,i) single-family residences is expected to add approximately twenty- ~~~~~r~".~~ , /,:-,,," nine (29) school-age'q?,children to t!h~~Lucia Mar Unified School District based on a student yield factor of 0.7. As allowed by ··gt~"'.f:e::.Law, .t"h~Lucia Mar Unified School District has a development impact fee '\JV'~~.,. ,t~ -~~,;,"• "~ ~"- established by the schociUgi.~:t{~.~;tfcfr new residential and commercial construction to finance any new classrooms. Less than signifi'&a"i:N:\vith mitigation MM XIV-1: The applicant shall pay the mandated Lucia Mar Unified School District impact fee. References: 5, 15, A Page 33 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 220 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 XV. Recreation Environmental Setting November 2014 The project site is located less than one half mile (considered to be a comfortable walking distance) to both a small neighborhood park and the Soto Sports Complex. The residential component of the project will also include a centrally located neighborhood open space. 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 Sign if1ca nt Impact b) Include recreational facilities or require tg_~fm~;. construction or expansion of recreational facilitie,~:~iJB:>· D might have an adverse physical effect ori:::·;:t15e ~~~~~ ... :Z~;?~ environment? '~·:·>:·. ):::,._ Less Than Significant with Less Than Significant Impact No Impact D D Discussion ,:;~J~:::~?.·. '"~~~1~~~~;~s~)]t~~t?· a: The proposed project would increase~the use of neigl'H:'Jo~hood and regional increase in use would not cause subst-;Hti~i~ife.terioration :-gf~;the facilities based ~<.,~~:.;" ·~~<:~:=:~<f,i(,, "\,{§:f-tf?K however, the on the anticipated increase of approximately 108 persons. Less·;than"sig'riificant impact:~;~~" ~~:;::~~·,_ '"', ':::{'::::· .. ~~, ~~~~.~~;: ~ b: The proposed projec~~:~~J~;S~F.~te a cen~·;1~hr.igh~;~~~;d1~~~e~p s~~~~.tarea similar to a pocket park. Due to the limited size;::it·\is'not antiCipated tharft:le,neigl:ioorho'c)d'.:cfpen space would have a significant ,,__,'v"i' ,~.,<.r .,.,.~,i:;,,t:..::"'f}''"'""'~· v-,;;•i.;;,.~.~ impact on the environm·e)·\~,. and coulp;iEi!ven be vieW:¢'cf as having a b'eneficial result when compared to the existing vacant propeHy,~Less thar;:{~ignificant ir1l'pact Refere:flJ~ . ~'\1'.~~{t~~~~ XVI. Tf.ansportation/Tu::C\ffic .,:~:~;::;,, ·""~·· ··:::~f ~; '.'r·.. ·.:;~~It~-··:::~t\~, EnvironmentaLSetting '<<~S~:: ":::~::~::: ",.; . ..;· '}>~ :-:~>::,•. ~~:~~~} + The project site·.:i_~~lg_cated at the ~8~thwest corner of East Grand Avenue and Courtland Street, which is .r? .... ~,.~,f,' ... ~ ~~;; ~ a signalized inters·e~H~R and appr_i~~Jllately 250 feet from East Grand Avenue and Oak Park Boulevard, which is also a signalizecl:iintersecti6f.r: ··~:~~~~;~;:~~f ~!1?:·· ~~n· Would the project: a) Cause a substantial increase in traffic, in relation to existing traffic and the capacity of the street system (i.e., a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? Potentially S1gnif1cant Impact D Less Than S1gnif1cant with M1t1gat1on Less Than S1gnif1cant Impact D No Impact D Page 34 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 221 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 b) Exceed, individually or cumulatively, the level of service standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Cause 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) Contain a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or a dangerous intersection) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment) that would substantially increase hazards? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., turnouts, bicycle racks)? D D D D D ~·>. lJl, D ,c:::[i~~l:,.·f~: .. tt.:.. D '~~j?:· ¢<:\f \::. D .,,.;"'D ~~i\:>t, D D D November 2014 D D D D Discussion "::;::~f:':· < "~~~~~h a-b: The traffic study prepared by Omni-Means:0(;2Q14}, ~'1(-at!Jated the 6p~,t13Jion of seven (7) ·~ ~~.~~")'.! .,/~.r' .:,c:_,"~ ~ 'oY.~""~·~ intersections in the vicinity of the project. Existing AM a'r(q :P:.JYl.;p~a·i<-hour traffic volafD:es were collected ~y ;.:'>¢_: •' • .... ~'.;..; .. :'"':<"" •">:, ·.:i'> by Omni-Means specifically for this stuay?:;::i~pe existing JX~~:a.nd PM peak-hour intersection levels of •"'-"·'~" ~ "1-l'.'.'~<;~1 1./,•r,' ~ service and delays currently operate wit~i1;ta·~c~1?t.able limits".(.t::q~ C or better). The analysis includes signalized intersections in the City of Grov~f:Bea'2"if%:;} •. ::.. "::.:':'..~i~b: .. . /('.: ~:';;,:, ;·, \~~~···. . ·::.~:::;:j~~:~t:;:::•, ·. "<~:~)~ ~.'· The study util.ized the )(.~if~ge:rj~-~.~:t~.~.n rate. dat.~?j:.~e.riv;:~.iff§~it.~.~ ... 1.nstitl:Jfe ~f Transportation E~gin_eers (ITE) Generation Manual~:9th Ed1tte(l;·~i:;ons1stent:::W1t!J;'.c:the Clty's::;Qraft Traffic Impact Study Gwdehnes. "'\, .. ~ •,:~.·· ~ .. /!'~" '""\r~<· '~·v.·~"'>-~ Applying the ITE trip ge~:er~tion rate~:::fo the proje?,t!:Ja'nd uses, the'·project is anticipated to generate 86 ':: .:;•,>-_ ,' ~·:· '•"!>;":>,' new AM peak hour trips ahq?152 nevy\l?.M peak houf;,tf:!ps. ,·::::~~~w:~·: ... ~·~~~)~t~{~~~~%1t:?:~~::;.;.. ~:{>) To evalua.te~tn:e:pot~i:ffial,,proje-ct~ifu.R'acts, tne~"i?.i:~J~.~t fr~ffic volumes were distr.ibuted to the study area -.'>~,,_,'?<'·"-""~~ ~.&~X~ "-, » '»'\ ".,;';"~,j'~i('_~,{M~"' "- intersections and the iritef:section levels of servicel:Were recalculated. Based on this analysis, the traffic '\:• ~."~},."', ..-:; 'I. ... ;,, ~ ,,' ,4 " '~~"'_.-~·~ study shoM't~.d that the additic?.n. of proj~'c::,t traffic did not significantly change the existing intersection levels of s'~lVlce and does nd~~esult in<:.\~·:;~ignificant increase in peak-hour delays. No project specific significant im~-~1t?, were identifi~~'.'.fpr the exl~ting plus project analysis conditions. ·-.. \~~~~h; ':~{:,ft A cumulative analysiS;;V.Vas conduct.~~'. for this project to determine the potential future impacts that the project may have wh0e~i19Jher .. a·p:p_roved and pending projects are assumed to be constructed. The traffic study utilized a lisf'6'.t5!PP:~0ved and pending projects and formed the baseline for the cumulative traffic analysis. The cumula'tKi~ AM and PM peak-hour intersection levels of service were calculated and all of the study area and two intersections were projected to operate at unacceptable LOS D in the PM peak hour, including the Two Way Stop Control intersection of Brisco Road and East Grand Avenue and the signalized intersection of Oak Park Boulevard and El Camino Real. The traffic study showed that the project traffic, when added to the cumulative traffic volumes, continues to operate the two deficient intersections at unacceptable levels. The traffic study identified mitigation measures, including striping .and signal phasing, that would reduce these impacts to less than significant. Less than significant with mitigation Page 35 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 222 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 November 2014 MM XVl-1: For the intersection of Brisco Road and East Grand Avenue, the applicant shall restripe the westbound approach to include a dedicated westbound right turn lane, which will require two 11' travel lanes and a 10' turn lane. MM XVl-2: For the intersection of Oak Park Boulevard and El Camino Real, the applicant shall: fol Restripe the westbound left turn lane as a shared left/through lane; e Restripe the westbound shared through-right lane to a dedicated right turn lane; o Provide overlap phasing for the westbound right turn movement; and o Provide overlap phasing for the eastbound right turQ)'T!Ovement. c: No impacts. ,,J;,(( d: The traffic study evaluated the proposed site pl<!fl f6)':~site ac~e~s alternatives from East Grand Avenue and Courtland Street. Option "A" includeqy;;i;:!:iriveways o'n;~~a:~t. Grand Avenue: a right turn only one-way ingress and a separate right turn onfy~~·~·e-way egress ;~i.f;:pf the ingress. Option "B" would allow both ingress and egress and would~ti~~f~stricted to right turni:~~:~I¥: Under either Option, two full-access driveways would be provided off ·50;uth Courtland.Street; on~:f~~·r:ving Subarea 3a and A~>Y ~·--,;,!~;,:<::, ''·4,.:,''.)~"'~·~· one serving Subarea 3b. There would be no vehicular i:fccess between Subarea 3a ar'l'd·Subarea 3b. ~1~;~~>.:;.:... "'::{~}M~~J·' · '==t~~:: The traffic study indicated that either:{,;;jte:f~·i;;s::!=ss option \.Vfi:l.!1.d be acceptable from an intersection ..,:rr.·~, ),,~-,,~"""'" .... : ..... ~"~-_,. ' operations standpoint, but that drivers rTI'ay. be<e~hfµsed under::Qi:ition "A" once onsite, as they would -~· ,•, ._.,,_~~'\"if,V:'>" --,~· r' ,,• not be able to leave the site via the entran&e .. theY:·e·ntered. Howevcir,. this potential confusion is not a significant impact that \(llQO!i:J::?.u.bstantially'::i[hcrease'·.;~~t~rtjs anc/\j:~~i~e pavement treatments and signage is anticipated ~o.:~:a~re·~;;t~is,impact. Le~~ than'si8~fticinf:impa2C ~~li~~;~~::· .;~:~1~?; v,<;fo::~p·t. ' , : ~;:/~- e: Complete emergency~~$~~ss for~~'~barea 3a a-D~:; Subarea 3b is provided. The proposed project includes emergency access:::O:$~ween~::SJ'.1bar:E;a 3b ancf:a.djacent Subarea 4 (Peoples' Self Help Housing ~,.,,,_.,,._ ... ,,--·~,,~~ ,·,.,~~..;"~,.,j'"' ~........ ~,,,.,,~ ...... project) ... qn:.3;g~l§~~~!r.~ existingi~etf1·ergensY:;:~s.cess\fa'. Subarea 4 from a prepared hammerhead turnar~y~M~~dn'·'aii"'U"'n·B~~~l~Ped si!~:J? a thrcJLig,~~-~:~se'ss·: through Subarea 3b will impact the existing operati~"[[Squt the complet@=:ic;cess to:fs~\Jth CourtlancfStreet will not be a significant change. Less than significari%1Wnpact ''\~:»::.. "'i;>W:~~·: '''<~%%::, ":{~h; ., ~::~~k f: Parking requir~n1ents by land u~·e are identified in Municipal Code Section 16.56.060. The proposed development req.~ir~s} fifty-two (si). spaces in Subarea 3a and 103 spaces on Subarea 3b, including twenty-one (21} gu~~ci'.~'cir~ing spa~:~s. Subarea 3a is proposed to include sixty-one (61} spaces to meet the requirement. Subaf~·a;::~l:?.;;c'<!i'Mains 102 parking spaces, with eighty-two (82} of those spaces in ·,,,~<<,,.-·-,><;_,' enclosed, two-car garages ··apf:l.;~twenty (20} open guest parking spaces. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment includes the reqti'~st for a guest parking reduction on Subarea 3b of one (1) space, which translates into a 1% parking reduction. Municipal Code Section 16.56.050.1 allows for a discretionary parking reduction up to 20%. Due to the request being well below the amount allowed, the requested parking reduction is not anticipated to be a significant impact. Less than significant impact g: No impacts. References: 1, 13, 15, 25, A, C Page 36 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 223 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 XVII. Utilities and Service Systems Environmental Setting November 2014 The project site is located within the incorporated City Limits of Arroyo Grande. Utilities will be served by both the City and other regional entities. 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 significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new water drainage facilities or expansion of facilities? h~~;:.;:.;.. d) Have sufficient water supplies avail~Bf~:i·f>\:se_rve the project from existing entitlements anJ:i~:~~~i&~¥~~~:PT Potentially Significant Impact "~""" ~ . ...,.,.,.,,,,,_ are new or expanded entitlements needed?.;:;?;._. ·':'.~Y,~~:;::::: ... ·,,~!' •• ·,,. "'.;•..,:":,".·,-._ e) Result in a determination,. by the wastewater·:::::;,;'.·~':"·· ~"":•:»:~:>:;..:_,~·=-,.,,,.,:). <' .7,~-;,_.,» ,..<J.i.~'?.~~:~7f.;",:<~.,.,~ treatment provider that~:sefrves'i;r·b.r may setve. theA::r::::::-=:·-::~l;:!w~,., Less Than Srgn ifica nt with Mit1gat1on D D ,-.,(. ·;.;:,,•, »'v.~,."t". ,.,,_,..,, ·~,r •• '>~."-~ -Vf<i:"',"·~ project, that it has a·de~l.late cap:ai3ffy to servl{:':e~~th~::S}·-D"'<::':;>;;). D '•,{A~»,{< ., i',d;~ ,'. ~-~" .. :;,.~&»'»"µ; {-,,. project's anticipated <ci~.fmmd, in ';jadition to'·.:~tfi'~- provider's existing commitiil'e'nts? "':;~~.~--" -:~~~;'.-. '\).';.,:,.'-.~, /J:H>"•!•f»:,,:: ";~{1;;.-~ °'\">5J>,, f) Be se~~t~;PW~~tl.~~.dfill wi\?d.u.ffitier:ff:~fP.:n{11itted:~~~::.;. capacitY,,;tq:~:ac:'ccifomeaa.t~ the '~·pfo]ect's solii::l~~w.a?te ·~;~:;.-D . /~>=~~:;·:~"· ""<"'~;,,f,~;'.N; .,,..,. ·~::;:,;;»:~:" '--~<~:~~;\~~~:~ .. -d 1 s posa l?n e eds? 'v:"..':·.-.· ··<···:.:-. ~'"""}-.. ::..;;:-:x:-_ • "»:~~:~.:I~;-:: ~;::~~-'-,'-<>- g) Comply'.'.~i,th federal, state;;:;and loc~l;:?tatutes and -. ' yJ "~~-~-~'... ~:<·,,,··~>-,,· regulations 'as§tbey relate to soli.cLyvaste? ·~,,~:f:c:-. . . ·<::~r~k. ·:w:\. --:r;~-'. D D D Less Than Srgnrfrcant No Impact Impact !gj D D D D D D D D D1scuss10n "'-~ >3:· -~:.,-.:· a & e: Wastewat~rf~r;ierated by.~1H~ proposed project will be treated by the South County Sanitation ·~~>"<~~' ,{ } ~, District, which has adeql;iate cap".l'Citf to accommodate the increase. Less than significant impact ''$;t~~%~~~~Jf ::· b: The BGSP area is served oy~Sewer Lift Station No. 7, which was sized and constructed in anticipation of full commercial construction on the project site. Due to the proposed inclusion of single-family residential housing in place of full commercial development, the project will be required to evaluate station's capacity compared to the proposed project and increase capacity of the lift station if necessary. Inclusion of these requirements in the project description will not result in a significant impact to wastewater facilities or equipment. Less than significant impact c: The Poplar Ponding Basin, which is adjacent to the project site, was designed and constructed to accommodate the additional stormwater discharge from development of the project site as part of the original approval of the Berry Gardens Specific Plan (BGSP). The development of affordable multi-family Page 37 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 224 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 November 2014 apartments on Subarea 4 of the BGSP area resulted in some modifications to the sources of stormwater entering the Basin, but these modifications were implemented on a one-to-one ratio. Therefore, it is anticipated that the Basin will continue to have adequate capacity for the proposed project. Less than significant impact d: The 2012 Water System Master Plan provides water demand factors based on land use. The project site is located in the Mixed-Use Land Use category, which has a demand factor of 1,788 gallons per day per acre (gpd/acre). The project site is 4.47 acres, which results in water demand of 7,992.36 gpd. This amount of demand is covered by existing resources in the projected build-out population of 20,000 residents. Subarea 3b contains small-lot, single-family residences ~t a higher density than the Single- Family Medium Density (MD). Therefore, using the correspondin.g<::f~~Jer demand factor would provide a •".".·:-)•·n conservative water demand. The water demand factor for .. ~~!.9,gle-Family Medium Density Land Use Category is 1,672 gpd/acre, which totals 5,551.04 gpd of "'!.~~-~:r;;:i~T.?.nd for the 3.32 acres of residential development on Subarea 3b. The remaining 1.15 acres of:°rt,i\*:~d-U"s'e~~~velopment on Subarea 3a would .. ~.~~ '"" v ~·.-.... · result in a water demand of 2,056.2 gpd. The two S.1,1o:areas combine'i:Hwould have a water demand of .·~·:··~~~~~:~.-· .... ::::-,. :.-. ~ 7,607.24 gpd, less than that anticipated under the_.G_eneral Plan build out-:s(;enario. Additionally, all new ...... ~··:·:<,~·~~;-· ·-~= .. ·~· .. development in the City is required to either imp:i_e:r'.il'ent a water neutralization.~program or pay a water neutralization fee to offset increased water dem~W~fae_nerated by the develcl;priJ·i:!nt. Therefore, there ....... ~ . . .,."':; ~·· ....... ~.~ .... ·.' are sufficient water supplies available to serve the proje,ct, ever")'.:·in:::light of curre'il'Hd~ought conditions. Less than significant impact "'··· ·::::\~k::::::{~~t¥·· ··\n~ ~~tJb:~::. "\·tv~ · · f-g: The proposed project will be se~~~:~~~:~f~~:i.~9\d Cany~#~~D.~fill, which has adequate permitted '\.~~~'\'~' •• ~?.· .. ·.~;r.,;.,. ,,, .~,"~;:.~,. capacity to serve the project. Less than signifkant impaat." ·~:~ti;::,~ References: 1, 3, 6, B, 1R,.f1·'·'·:~.·.=_:~ ..... ~:i~:~-tn~:!~t\: .. ,;_.··:·.-'i!g~-:~·=~·_::':···.:_.::·.·::·.··:·_:·_ .. · ... :_.:·:·: .. :=.·.=:··· .. ::.·· .. =;_·,_:.·;_$._lt.t{q,~,~ •. ~.:-'_ .•. '.~-t :::r1:~r~;::. -.. :.~:~~;;*{ . :.· . .. v Mandatory Findirigs)>f Sigµ:~f!f.ance ... ~fl;< Less Than S1gnif1cant with eft~l1iWz~~~~;(':~~t~;tg~~;~~~~: Would the prqJ~<;t: <;>;)·:·i~'.=~·. ·:1.;:;:::;:;... M1t1gat1on -.!',?',,' ~,_-' '"" n'•~~~,,. '' ~..:v•~,,·~ a) Substant:i.a}!_x:;,, degrade t~t .. qualitYf"t'..'.:of the environment, suostantially reduce~·:the habitat of a fish or wildlife speci~r{fause a fish ~Ft.rildlife population to drop below se!'f~t~staining A~:~~ls; threaten to eliminate a plant or a~l~~l\C.QJi{Qi'~nity; substantially reduce the number or '}E;'§th2t the range of an endangered, rare or threate~~d species; or eliminate examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals? D D D D Less Than S1gnif1ca nt No Impact Impact D D Page 38 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 225 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 c) Have possible environmental effects that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable? "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of possible future projects. d) Cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? D D • • ,-<z::·~ November 2014 D D D D D1scuss10n ,-~;f~{::~:~~ a: Although undeveloped, the project site does not contain anit;"~ig'f;lificant flora or fauna, and because it is surrounded by urban development, the site does not hav~Jf:i'.v~pgt_ential to serve as a wildlife corridor. Isolated prehistoric materials may be present on the projetHfite;··~~~eyer, the site does not serve as an ,,, .. ;:..;;~.~ ~:..?/,x; .. ,, ... example of a major period of California history or pre~,~~tf!.rv:' ""::'~~fa: ... . ~li.i~~~r· "\f:~~lh: .. b: There are no short-term environmental goc:!l~&either in the project ··a~·sq:Jption or the identified ·.;-;'H"•/).: 'c:>:;;<)O~, - mitigation measures, that will be achieved to the dis~);l_yantage of long-term eri~.it:C?.r:i.mental goals. "·:::::1;~j~\>.. . ::d\. '<::~@\:. c: The proposed project is consistent wJtl'] the City's GeW~-r~Lt?f~ff:a·s it relates to fut'Cii:~;growth, both in ,:~z,k°',."1 "'h~ ··-~:-~··:·:·:~~>>"'',.' v,.•Y general terms and specifically as it ·=~el.~tes: . .to the projeGt-.~site. While the proposed project will '>•;>?-:,,'.:··:····:<).-.,.~<·:·~ '•;.:.: • ~ •• cumulatively increase traffic and deman(l.~.for:::RQ8ttc services"=a:9:Q;::utilities, with implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, it will 'Kgt:". r~~t:'it~i.[h ,any cu~?(tl~tjvely considerable environmental impacts. #1£~"' '\~¢~ ~'~~$- d: With implementaJi9n':f6f the':'.pr'.dposed mitlga~iC?J'.(fn"east.i"r~srn;tbe proposed project will not cause ».•}~··~,.·· "'-.·i'·~· ~.~':.·~~/"/'.' .. ~ "'A'.><,'>"~" substantial adverse effed~:on humah;oeings, eithe:r:mJfectly or indirectly . . ~'.~t~i~:;: Page 39 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 226 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 Summary of Mitigation Measures November 2014 MM 111-1: On-road diesel vehicles shall comply with Section 2485 of Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations. This regulation limits idling from diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicles with gross vehicular weight ratings of more than 10,000 pounds and licensed for operation on highways. It applies to California and non-California based vehicles. In general the regulation specifies that drivers of said vehicles: ., Shall not idle the vehicle's primary diesel engine for greater than 5 minutes at any location. ~~~~::~ 0 Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary PO""!,~fJ~~X'.kiem (APS) to power a heater, air conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on that:~V~hicle during sleeping or resting in a slee~er berth for greater that 5 minute\{~~r~$:~ti~~~~-i.on when within 1,000 feet of a restricted area • ·.:.-·:~' ··"··:.:·:·. 0 .:i%t~~f :; ~. v:~;;;~~l:t~:;;., ' MM 111-2: Off-road diesel equipment shall:'.col:nply with the 5 minut~·~idling restriction identified in Section 2449(d)(2) of the California Ai8i:@}~urces Board's In-Use Off~~~~d Diesel regulation. ·~:,W{~.:::. ..:8\. ·~}.~W~~:o:. MM 111-3: Signs must be postetj_in the designafe:ctg.ue,y)[lg~«freas and job sit~-~::~9 remind drivers and operators of the State's 5 ·rflifH:it~ idling limit.· ::i:::J&;w-:::· ·:~(:;:· . ~~;~~~~;=~i:f :;:;·'.:... ''.;'.;~~#~~;-. MM 111-4: The project applicanf~:sha'll~'.~o·iJ;iply with tn~se. more restrictive requirements to minimize impacts to nearby sensitiS~~:~ecepf&°f~tr~~jacent ·;;r~\~_~ntial development): .··~4~t~~%t.-· '~~{\o ~it~~~~b;::.·., ''·~(~;;~~;; o Staging:a·:~qtie'uing:~r~as shall notlbe lo.di(~d\fi..iit~in»~,,000 feet of sensitive receptors; ~'.·:.' .».,-"'• "•:,.·~:•~,• ~ ~.;~,-A~"."t;.'\: .•:•" ..,-:'>~-: >~', • DieseFi-f!Hng within 1;9Q.O feet of s~.Q~!~)ve receptofs"shall not be permitted; I} Use of a'it:~f;bative fu~f~d equipme~"t::iS;recommended; and o ..... .?.igris that ~;~~Qify no{(~\fiig:·areas muWh~. posted and enforced at the site . .. ·A~~~~1~i~~%%k~::::.. .,\{~iT~ :y·' :o. ::::::::.::i~~:~~~~~\;... ·\~~} ~s~,iy,i:3111-~: :he··~r:&J?.ct shall:~,iRJplement·~t~~l~}lowing mitigation m~as~re.s to manage fugitive ··:qJ.:1.st em1ss1ons suclic..~)1at they.jqR_, not exceecf,the APCD's 20% opacity 1Jm1t (APCD Rule 401) or -,.,•,•'!).' ... .,._.,, •j, .·,. prD'QiJ~.t nuisance violaff8.r:ts (APCIQ~~g~e 402): "'=·~t~~-:$.. ··=-g;\. ~-:<k Q 'R'e'Quce the amoui:ifof the disturbed area where possible; 1t u;~;:~f:water truck~·:;rjr sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from ·w~tJng the::;~ite and from exceeding the APCD's limit of 20% opacity for greater than 3 'fi:ti~·4~e{~;iW~·any 60 minute period. Increased watering frequency would be required w~-e·r:~~lnd speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed (non-potable) water should be used whenever possible; o All dirt stock pile areas should be sprayed daily and covered with tarps or other dust barriers as needed; " 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; o Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading should be shown with a fast germinating, non-invasive, grass seed and watered until vegetation is established; Page 40 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 227 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 November 2014 • All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation should be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD; • All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed as soon as possible. In addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used; • Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site; \) All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials 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 Section 23;'.:114; p>"$;$..><i:;", o Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and ~~n~u.n"paved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site; .<:'-~:i:;;;;~Y"' :t'!~:l!;.~I'-: '~/~":,,: ~ • Sweep streets at the end of each day if .visil5l~:.5oil_material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers shall be us~;~f~tRth r~:ernimed water should be used where feasible. Roads shall be pre-wetted p~i~~~to .sweeping-.Wh~~i;iJeasible; & A listing of all required mitigatiol}:.h)'.~~·~~res should be i~tl:~¥ed on grading and building I . d ·:::;:3::~~" ~<:jv~:~~'· pans, an , ·>.;;;·~ ·· ··'1'·.v>, ·~ ~ .~ ,< :r: " "< ;>:?'.;::>>.. e The contractor or builder shall designa;te a person. or persons·):t:o_~~monitor the fugitive \,,,~>(N•}, ,,","Z.f,/" :.. ~:;n,,<·~;;;%>·- d ust emissions and e9.r.ance the imp*~.t .. ni.eW:>rr· of the measifr~~~~s necessary to minimize dust complaiiifs~:--~reduce visib"ig:~:~~rnlS~ions below the APCD's limit of 20% ~%:'..;;;,;"',.<'~'A'·~ .. ,. ~'\~; >:':;~( opacity for greater tha'li~3:'riiii:illles in any 6(J::r:ninute period. Their duties shall include ":$~"> ~~-:.-~;r\.~''.,"J."\.?~ "'{<~A;.;:- ho Ii days and weekend p~~!,('.ldss;v • .m~,~,,.work ma'J'.§rgt-be in progress. The name and telephone number of such''-P:ersons~~tllfl)(:.be providemto the APCD Compliance Division .,, .r,,~. --? ~>,• ~~:.>~:':~A~~· .. , ~J;a-• }~"~> prior to the:~star:r:qf any gradirig;~earthwdi:l(cfi;:;demolit16ri'::~ .;:dtl~f··;::·~~t{~~:;.... -.:;t.As ... ::::{~1~w·· :::·:::(~¥~/·"·· ~.:""' MM 111-6: Prio~*W'<~he starf:g;f~;the projec~{~~,~··applicanf:stiall obtain all necessary permits for equipment to b[:.:8:S:e.d during;"construction".;t;>y,~contacting the APCD Engineering Division at (805} 1 :taiw,tw~~ · %;i1'&'41)t*c"" ~\ ;oJVll\/Flil-7: Prfofr::Pto any "grading activitiest::.t.he{'project sponsor shall ensure that a geologic , .. >1;_"1'y'}%., -~y,_J;.1 '~'~"~ ~,U,/ ~", ""~{..V<•:<'• ·,<~valuation is cond'ucted to det~1"r.nine if naturi:Jlly occurring asbestos (NOA} is present within the ·\X<<:-.. ~ {.:·~:-"' ~~~?/:, areef.itpat will be disti;ir,b'E;!,d. If Kl0~r.js not present, an exemption request must be filed with the ~~'<'.,<<~ ''~-')'~, "'i'.:~,v ~~ .. APcm;;;(!f:,NOA is found al . .;tbe site,'"tbe.applicant must comply with all requirements outlined in the Ai'?~R:~s0urce Board 'tilfRB) Air Tdxics Control Measure (ATCM} for Construction, Grading, Quarrying;;~~~~~urface Mi~,i~'g Operations. '·~:~1b~";·, . .:i3t MM 111-8: Burnirig.~of;vegetative material on the development site shall be prohibited. \~~i=~=~~~;~~~::~: ',>;>,•,••,,'\) MM 111-9: Should hyd~'~carbon-contaminated soil be encountered during construction activities, the APCD shall be notified within forty-eight (48) hours of such contaminated soil being discovered to determine if an APCD permit is required. In addition, the following measures shall be implemented immediately after contaminated soil is discovered: \) Covers on storage piles shall be maintained in place at all times in areas not actively involved in soil addition or removal. Page 41of48 Item 9.b. - Page 228 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 November 2014 • Contaminated soil shall be covered with at least six (6) inches of. packed, uncontaminated soil or other TPH -non-permeable barrier such as plastic tarp. No headspace shall be allowed where vapors could accumulate. • Covered piles shall be designed in such a way as to eliminate erosion due to wind or water. No openings in the covers are permitted. • During soil excavation, odors shall not be evident to such a degree as to cause a public nuisance. ~ Clean soil must be segregated from contaminated soil. MM 111-10: Operation of any commercial building witt;i.:-.. a loading area shall include the establishment of a 'no idle' zone for diesel-powered d~Ji~~:i~"vehicles. Vehicle idling shall be minimized to the maximum extent feasible using the ~oJJf,:)~ing techniques: <{:~;*;>~'~" ". ; .• , ~:~~~~=~~»,,{ ?:;-. s Each delivery vehicle's engine shall be,~.~tit¥6ff imni~£U~~ely after arrival in the loading dock or loading area, unless the vehicl~;15~:·actively man·~n'v'ering. 1t The scheduling of deliveries shaU;.8:~~!~;~~ered to the m~~~~i;g:.:xtent feasible. • Vehicle operators shall be made~'iiY.l"are of the 'no idle' zone;~ihcluding notification by letter to all delivery companies. ·-:;~{~h:·. ,.c(:·.. -;:::~it~:c.. ~~;,;;'I. ~,~,,.,..,,» ... ,,~~·"~ • Prominently lettered si ns shall be po~t~~g~!,t1 ,t.~:~titeiving dock c{~~~]~tp remind drivers • • "' '\, *•~~·,. •r'-"-'.',.",."{;,>r~j' ~~"~">."'""•' to shut off their engines ·-;,. ·-::::::;:::~;~:;»' v,~· '.?',," " ... ;:.... !j;~;;:_.,.,..,..,;,, x e Diesel idling within 1,000~fe=@t~:(i)tsensitive retg·Rtors is not permitted. s Use of alternative-fueled';~~hia~~tf~ttecommen~i€d1whenever possible. '"~"~"Y·~ 'V-.rt:· !',,",",,¥• ~~:ri~•:;:t..,_ ~ Staging and queuing areas snalJ not b'e~Jpca.ted witliir'.!:l:WOO feet of sensitive receptors . . ... /~rm~t%)k::.. ·>:~~lt'r .~~tlitt~~[);~.. ·.:~=f§~~ Respons1ole ·party:~::s::::.. Developer., /:~:·,~:;:;:Y . .,,<~:·i .;:~. ',.,~?-.<<.,,. "Y•::v·~» "<<,;~;,..,, »";<'<<.::,~ "'<"~'~.;.~~" Monifo.flng Agency:'·~~i~City of Af-rP,~o;Grande -Pl.Jolie Works Dept., Building Division, ~;~~>:" ·~'"!({ • . '..::=:~<~:"'. • • '<~:;~::;, ~~~;<·Engmeenngt81v1s1on :~:*"" •?, ,,"<;.'( ~ "rX~"r " ._Timing: "·:::~::'.~::,, .,,:;::~t'~~P.11i0r: .. to issua'nce.,of Grading Permit and during construction .. drf wmH~1~~~~:;;:... ..:<~~ii~~1~t;*·~O:~~:~,:·~{t~k;~, .. · ;ft~J;: ':{~Jy,ii'!V-1: Any~~~.~~s wn·~t~·?"·~ative (Mti~.[~~5=1<'piled) soil will be disturbed by construction ·:~~·~tjyities (grading>~<i'S>~ings, ·utJHt}.,es, etc) shall first be inspected by a qualified archeologist to ciE?mi:mine if any cu~\}raLresouYf~·s .are present. Prior to construction activities and if cultural res~t:~des are present~;{~{~:phase "·tWci';.,archeological study shall be conducted by a qualified archeoT~~l~.h~nd further f.~fi\!gation ~·~·asures identified and implemented. ··~?~&:~:.. ii'.ff$. Responsible PartY,:~~::'~ Monito~"iW~~~g~~~vr ".;;~:~p··· Timing: Developer City of Arroyo Grande -Engineering Division; Public Works Department Prior to issuance of a grading permit MM V-2: 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 Page 42 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 229 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 November 2014 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 . .{':::~~ MM V-3: If human remains are encountered during e~.~~t:(iW,sturbing activities, all work in the adjacent area shall stop immediately and the San Luts~~IJ"l§po County Coroner's office shall be notified immediately. If the remains are determined~'.t~~j~~)Native American in origin, the Native American Heritage Commission shall be notified ~:~~fi~ilt~~~htify the Most Likely Descendent, who will be consulted for recommendations fQt~'f,e~t-~ent ofif~~19Jscovered remains. ~}'{;,~':!}~· '"':;.Z:~~=~~ .,-:f ~~ '"<::~~~~ Developef;~~Z1-' ";J;;s: Responsible Party: 0"·"•-"''\2-' City of ArtbJf<c .. Grande -:; .,Engineering., ;Jy,!sion; Public Works Department '·~~~f*}:::.. ,~~{~~~:~ ~{iit~:i: .. Monitoring Agency: Timing: . -~~=Br::ior to issuandt~~~J~~W~'.?grading permit a'ncV during grading ·,,~;;:;:~=::"{:"~(:;~ • "-~~~=*&"~"<\." ~-acrt1l!1t1es · --:~;;.% .. \~~~~.;.;..;.,,;,,-~/· "f,~,x,i;,,;~~-~:=$. ·-~~;~;::;,,;~;«"~' °''P/!-/ r,,~~ MM Vl-1: Prior to grading perMihd~;Jfiff~·;:::~tJ:ie pr~~~hproponent shall submit a revised 1".>.{"~, ·";,'V'}>\,.!'-·~r-., ¥'~"'~"'°»; ..;,, geotechnical stud~ · r ddendum to t:tfo,originaJ:!study,that eitf.ier .. states that all conclusions and , >!~·>~-~~~'.:x~':.-. .k,~':::f...,:~·.~,;,.,.,,$,,," ~,;s.:::~:: recommendatio. "' h·~&:::original re·port ar:e;~~valiJ:l~:::;:qr, if ''the original conclusions and .-/>;C· "-"'.~<,,·~ .. ; ... ~ ~<"'ffi.'.j; :?,r;;:.,,.;,z~:~.r "~,,_;y:,,,>:<"~'"" recommendati.~ij,s are not:;:" · 1_id, includ"e~~~,gpg_~ted concl~§}ens and recommendations where '_,. '' {ff" ~·-,//'",'\t''",/\"'' ' necessary. '··:'~.:?;:;., ··~;:-:::;:t;-· '~~f:t~.'-,;~J~. ~N;-'-~~~~;. M~~M~:~~:~~f:fat:Jl con~t~~~J:~~~~~Wl~1Wt~.Q~.l!_., inc5:_~~~~[ate the recommendations of and updated g~QWcfimcal~~tui:I~ basea~\G):i. the stffaY,J~~fr:eRarea, for the project by GSI Soils Inc. dated April ~i~~l:: ''·{~~~~%~~*~ .. ~~~~~h... ·-.;~;-tt? "v;/;;(;-'-;:.; :·:-_, -.:;:.;;;:.~~-:~~~~~~~esponsi b I e P~lffir:. De'.veJ9per .. ,, ~ ~"'" ~ ..... ..,~ • ..,. '\, " ... µ ''%~f\ilcmitoring Age~ly:. CitY'::Ol Arroyo Grande -Engineering Division; Public Works "::is:~\~1~:h .,:~&l Department Timin'g•'.:-1· (;:f.~ Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit < ~~~]~~t .. At1~~w MM Vll-1: All corisfrudic>n plans shall reflect the following GHG-reducing measures where applicable. Prior t~'~n~uance of building permits, the project sponsor 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. • No residential wood burning appliances. Page 43 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 230 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 November 2014 • 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 ,;(v~:~~:~- red UCe energy used to cool buildings in summer ::::'~~~~W'' Utilize green building materials (materials ~b:I¢ti;;i:fre resource efficient, recycled, and sustainable) available locally if possible. J·':i: ··~~J!~~~~- lnstall high efficiency heating and cooling sys ems. ··~~~~~» Design building to include roof overh~t@~· that are s~Wizient to block the high summer sun, but not the lower winter SUI) '-~~!Jr·penetrating soutfit~~~iQg windows (passive solar design). Utilize high efficiency gas or solar wate,i?.:heaters ... ,;;:;, '\:~ .... ,.~·~">-. f'~if',,".+'~" ·~ Utilize built-in energy efficient applianC:e~f~.i~~ ... ~.~}~~g~lstar®) . • • .(~,:;;.,. ...j:;V,.;::;::f::~:i:>0' Utilize double-paned 111(1,~Q.<?W,S. ··::~:;;:>.~~:;:~·" Utilize low energy stre~l~@~t@i}.~ .. sodium).·<=::: Utilize energy efficient int~1io/lffi{tiag .. , •,,::: ~"<· +.,<_,,~:,, .. /{', ":":":(..,, Install energy~reducing progf:~!nmable':th.~i::ll)ostats. . "· Use roofir:fWW~t~rial with a ;g/1·r. reflectlif~~:~~alues rif@Miing the EPA/DOE Energy Star® ~·" .;:._,.·,,;.,.~ ~':;>~":";~~' .;;*;~;:~ ,.(.~"-1;.~::::~~~·/'·~:.:f.;;$~;:,·~:.," ·-· rating.-:t uce summer cooling.:needs::~::~' "··<:~;:;~:::~,,. . .. , "\»";·~ ~:· "~ ,,,, • ...., t 't • ..;:::: .. ~"·":'.X:tt"~<<,.~"" ~ ~,,; ;" ,_" .::~:..: Elimina·(~~~.igh watel~t~onsumptf~~)1'.fandscape (e:g~;· plants and lawns) in residential design. U~Qqtive pleff:i%s that do ndt:·fo!'.Juire watering and are low ROG emitting. ~"1"">>:~}.. ,.; ~,,. > ·~,,:> -'<,.;";~$',;- • ,.·:!'::~J:?:(':.9.:Y:J.Pe on-sitf~~-ts.V:. ·~if:Ki.!:!& boH1~~~gprt term (racks) and long term (lockers, or a £',~@~~ibai<~t{~:r:o.om witfi)~tan a·~8·:S:ta'~R!i~.;,rnd'{~ccess limited to bicyclist only} to meet peak <J~x:;;-:.:y• "-<::Xt';,"iV~ ,>--,, "'<v'-">\:»:X ')(,yl'});5>>' .._,~» 4~t:~*'" season"""'"rnai,<imum·:::ae~rnand. onif-·..:oit<e. rack space per 10 vehicle/employee space is ·~;:~:::» ~'<:::!»~:::~ , -~i~>)~~:&,, ~·Y,V" ···->;:~*~~ recommenae1h. ';'..:1:=?:'1( •• o·'~1~t~;:-.~equire the ·f~~I~!latio~';i:_ft~1.~ctrical hookups at loading docks and the connection of ·~~~tf:!-J.cks equippel!~~;with electtlcal hookups to eliminate the need to operate diesel- -;.~~"» ..... ~ ,,.,, .. ,,~ .. p&'w:ered TR Us at 'toe: loading docks. '";•}•>-,,;> >» ""},/ Provi·~·h:storage {Jf~:¢e in garage for bicycle and bicycle trailers, or covered racks I locke~~~~~1}~~£.~):~~!~~· residential units. , ~;~~~s~=r~~:~7 Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Developer City of Arroyo Grande -COD; Building Division; APCD Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit or Building Permit MM IX-1: The following BMPs shall be incorporated into the project: 1:1 Roof Downspout System. Direct roof drains to pervious areas to allow infiltration prior to discharging to water bodies or the municipal storm drain system. Page 44 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 231 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 November 2014 • 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 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. • Vehicle/Equipment Cleaning. Commercial/industrial facilities or multi-family residential developments of SO units or greater should either provide a covered, bermed area for washing activities or discourage vehicle/equipment,,~ashing by removing hose bibs and installing signs prohibiting such uses. Vehicle/e.J:i4JP.Ei"ent washing areas shall be paved / "~""<·' designed to prevent run-on or run off from.ltlie"'.:'.area, and plumbed to drain to the . &.~:::;~~ir:::~~, sanitary sewer. ,,::.~::::.:-::~···~.::;~ .. ·>'"t''.'Y§: "»····>· ·;;. t~#J" ·::;{&):- • Car Washing. Commercial car wash.;:t,i9~)ties shall be::::d~~j~~ed and operated such that no runoff from the facility is disch.5'1ig~J~~to the storm draiW~y~t~m. Wastewater from the 01·?:f!!<,r;-,1(" "",.,, ... '• facility shall discharge to the sanitefr;Y;\~ewer or wastewater reGJ.~f:T:lation system. •i;$.;l@~;> ,,,;~~;!:. ··~qih ... Cl Common Area Litter Control. lmpleif.r~Qt:" tra.~jl~;;n·anagement ah'.9~.litter control for •"< '> "~ ",h~ ~-~-"~»/,J'v,"_",.'/' ".!'~;,/'»if').:;. commercial and indusfriah·Rrojects or lar'g"e:;scale residential develo!Wnents to prevent •Y'»'\i,.';.~X~ ~>··.. ,,,; .. ;:..: .. :>(">~" litter and debris from IJ~tr:fg::C-~tpJ~d to water"l:i"Q:gjes or the storm drain system. ~r~~t~~. ·~-<«t1~~:~ ~~;~;:~»~~ ::y.z., •· .;.~f:Z,~ .. ., >:::;0)1 •• ;.;., () Food Service Facilities. De~·ig'f:i .. foo.d"<s'[&i,c;~ facilitle~~lir:i_cluding restaurants and grocery ..... ,/\/\,"-,, I'»\,,• '.·.~.~,, "~· ... ~.~,, ~ ~ stores) t~:.;n~{~?:~J~?:.!i~k or othe~1~~a for Jt~:~QJ.~.~Jloor"~~~.s, containers, and equipments that i,~;~~g9net'fed.~~J~l} grease'~!.r!~r~~iwr•'p'ri!:?.t~w~ .. ?ischarging to the sanitary sewer systemN;:i:he cleanirig::"area shoula:;['.l": arge enough~fO clean the largest mat or piece of equip~~·~t;JR be cle~H~d. ~'.: .· .;.:;-;.,.. "'i':=~r@~:::., .);.~w{~':;'.::.,. ..~-~:s.. , efLlse~Areas. "Fr;~·~n/~cimp~IGt:9);~;::;,E!nclo~Vr;es and dumpster areas should be covered and ." "~ '-',.'•'~~<~Q-~,y,,. ",.' ';,~~'~">< ,' ._ ~~a~",.~>t r),7'.1'.""1" ~~~~'"• }' .<~~;-}:;:-prote"ct~8;~t~?m rbqf5i~4!.d surface·.;~f:::~·i,!:1.~g·e. Install a self-contained drainage system that ~:~~':f' discharges~t0~;the sanit:a'r;y sewer if water cannot be diverted from the areas. »~\~~\, •:;~~f ~. »;;%~1~tt~~: .. o •·:~~~~Outdoor StorageJGontro1s·:::;9),ls, fuels, solvents, coolants, and other chemicals stored '':J'~"", -·~·.. ..,...... ,x" -.;;~~,.,· ·ootdoors must be::in:~containers and protected from drainage by secondary containment ~·~~,.>Z<· .::~t:t>:.• stru~\1,;1.~,es such as~~~[ms, liners, vaults or roof covers and/or drain to the sanitary sewer systeffi~~~~(?ulk IT).~.!~nials stored outdoors must also be protected from drainage with berm~ ahq~W~~t~;f'Process e~uipment stored outdoors must be inspected for proper function ano~t~.c;!l<s, stored on impermeable surfaces and covered. Implement a regular program of s"W~eping 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. Page 45 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 232 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 November 2014 • Loading Dock Controls. Design loading docks to be tovered, surrounded by berms or curbs, or constructed to prevent drainage onto or from the area. Position roof downspouts to direct stormwater away from the loading area. Water from loading dock areas shall be drained to the sanitary sewer, or diverted and collected for ultimate discharge to the sanitary sewer. Door skirts between the trailers and the building should be installed to prevent exposure of loading activities to rain. • 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 tg,,prevent entry into the storm drain system. Wash water containing any cleaning ~ ~~~for degreaser should be collected and discharged to the sanitary sewer. ··· Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: ~ .. .;-:-~~ ' t: .. ,. MM Xll-1: All store deliveries shall be restricte .. 0 betw~~W:·the hours of-3~IDQ.AM to 10:00 PM, " ..::..~,.~'-.,;"\..,,;'A ,;x;,,,,:;/»',»~·:." ... ..,.~~r,.s. .. , and the current parking limitations .. on either side~fui·yJ~1,tt)3C:ourtland Street snaffbe maintained. N Developer City of Arroyo Grande -Building Division Prior to issuance of a Building Permit MM XVl-1: For the intersection of Brisco Road and East Grand Avenue, the applicant shall restripe the westbound approach to include a dedicated westbound right turn lane, which will require two 11' travel lanes and a 10' turn lane. MM XVl-2: For the intersection of Oak Park Boulevard and El Camino Real, the applicant shall: • Restripe the westbound left turn lane as a shared left/through lane; <t Restripe the westbound shared through-right lane to a dedicated right turn lane; • Provide overlap phasing for the westbound right turn movement; and Page 46 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 233 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTIM 14-001 • Provide overlap phasing for the eastbound right turn movement. Responsible Party: Developer November 2014 Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande -CDD; Engineering Division; Public Works Department Timing: Prior to issuance of a Building Permit Page 47 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 234 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009 & VTTM 14-001 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 September 2014 5. Arroyo Grande Existing Settings Report & Draft Arroyo Granc~.~ Existing Settings Report {2010) 6. Arroyo Grande Urban Water Management Plan ~~:t[M}, ... «\~..;: ,,,:.v 7. Arroyo Grande Water System Master Plan {2012) :·~;;~::::~:c·· / ~:v..~:~j;:( 8. Arroyo Grande Wastewater Master Plan {2012) .. :~~ ·· ·. 9. San Luis Obispo Important Farmland Map {Californi.~f · ~nt of Conservation, 2006) 10. CEQA & Climate Change White Paper {CAPCO~~~iffi.DSJ ··::"f{~h~. 11. Air Quality Handbook {SLO APCD, 2012) ,...-::::::;:::~::~} ··::~.;~~::=::: .. /.;P:>~~:~::::~·· ~-:-:-:·=<~} 12. Arroyo Grande Multi-Jurisdictional Local ~~~i~'ra Mitigation Plan {20l!4~t:::: . .... ·.=-~i'11". ~.-..: ........ :--._ 13. Arroyo Grande Bicycle & Trails Master Plan·l?.9.J..2) "::tt\.. 14. Arroyo Grande Climate Action Plan (2013) ~;:@\.. ..$:/~}~ ··\p~:: .. 15. P_roject Plan_s ·~f.['.tt:.:·. "<:;~;t}Jk~t~f p::> ·::~~~@:· 16. Site Inspection ;;s:z.·.:··-:·:·:·:~-:-. ·:N~..-.. \_J}':r":.>f~">.·-.,.:-;;::x=·~~ .. ~~ ~-=_,~:=~:M,,,, 17. Design Guidelines for Mixed-Use~~J?.~rici~~~~:::~···, ·~;~ti.J;:~. 18. East Grand Avenue Enhancement P,l~)J -=~~i~~~~~·.·. :~~: <,,;; .,.. ,,'\, >!»J' ..... ~ ~ ... .j - 19. Final Berry Gardens,~p.~c;:ific Plan -Tf:aY:t 2260 EnSii~qnmentaF rn·pact Report (FIRMA, 1998) ""'~~~<~"' -::~:,>:·~·:;. -;~~..--:.~~ ~~;.;.:*:-~:.~. ~~·=·~<~:·: .... 20. Geotechnical lnvestiga~iorj::(GSI Soils 2006) A~:~:::~~~%~:;;:.... :.:~~:=· ·"'•~·~·'~·X ~· ·-:..;.~ ... -. !;;.~» I ~:::; .. ~·:·~·~ :·:~·!""~.·>;·· -~:.; .... ~ .. ~::-:"~" • 21. Acoustic Repqrf.t(E>avid DLio\:i:(l'.\k Associate:$}.7.QJ;OF' .... :~::::,~m:::: ·~·.:"·>'·~ '. •..;;.· .. · ... =--·.·~···=-~o;;1:-,.• ... ,... ''•"<>}~,. ... 22. Phase I Environir;JJ~mal Site A~s~e~sment Re.po:~t:'(Buena Resat.frees, Inc., 2007) ·~:-:-}:·~·. ~:~~:>\... ";:.:-:,.,· .. j 23. Drainage and Wafe·~g:~._yality ~~P.Rrt {RRM De"$!gr:i Group, 2014) .......... "• -~ ·~·,,,.,,,~}:,,'",;o.',.".C·"" 4 '".-.·~···· 24. Diesehe.M~Screening'rlealtMRisl<=:~ssessment (IVlar:ine Research Specialists, 2010) ~":i;(':-P~":,:;;;.;::::~~:::_..::-:~:,: ··;·::;:f:,.,.:;:::':;:.·y··.. • •,.:-;~~:.:::::_:;:-;;~ .. ~ ~ • ~~~.:::,:.~. 25. I~~:p~portatib.!tt'JJ~~ct Ar:i.~N~1s Report((@ffiw.-ME?,~ns, 2014) f~{f~;.~ .. ~::~t~t~:-. x.:;~~f. . .. ~i;~\~:: Consult~J10ns ·~~~:~(~~:~::. · . · ",,"~J$-:>t~· k,."J'""""'"" '~ A. GeoJestraw, San Luis"01Ji~po Re .~111;11 Transit Authority (SLORTA) ~~~··~;;, ~-" """ ·~,. B. Gary~:IXl~~!Ilont, San Lui~~:~h!~PO Ai?Rg)lution Control Board (SLO APCD) c. Marty lno~~Y.<;!, Omni-Meahs;:3LTD . . ,~~\JP Page 48 of 48 Item 9.b. - Page 235 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Item 9.b. - Page 236