The URL can be used to link to this page

CC 2015-08-25_09a East Grand_Courtland ProjectTO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: DATE: MEMORANDUM CITY COUNCIL TERESA MCCLISH, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MATTHEW DOWNING~OCIATE PLANNER CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14- 002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001, AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 15-002; SUBDIVISION OF TWO (2) COMMERCIAL PARCELS INTO THIRTY-EIGHT (38) RESIDENTIAL LOTS, ONE (1) COMMON AREA LOT, AND THREE (3) COMMERCIAL LOTS; LOCATION -SOUTHWEST CORNER OF EAST GRAND AVENUE AND SOUTH COURTLAND STREET; APPLICANT -NKT COMMERCIAL; REPRESENTATIVE-RRM DESIGN GROUP SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution denying General Plan Amendment 14-002, Specific Plan Amendment 14-001, Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14-001, Conditional Use Permit 14-009, and Development Agreement 15-002. 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 economic development consultant. However, this is speculative due to the lack of identified commercial uses as part of the project. Denial of the project would result in this tax revenue being unrealized as the project could not be constructed. This item is related to the City's Economic Development efforts, which are directly related to the Critical Needs Action Plan. Item 9.a. - Page 1 CITY COUNCIL CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001; AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 15- 002 SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 PAGE2 BACKGROUND: Location 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 specific plan amendmen t. A specific plan is a tool for the systematic implementation of the general p lan. 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 Item 9.a. - Page 2 CITY COUNCIL CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001; AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 15- 002_ SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 PAGE3 the design guidelines of a subdivision (California Environmental Resources Evaluation System [CERES], 1998). Project Description The proposed project (Attachment 1) would enable the build out of the remaining vacant area of the Berry Gardens Specific Plan with mixed-use and mixed housing types. When combined with Subarea 4, these housing types would include vertical mixed-use condominiums, small-lot single-family homes, and apartments. Subarea 3 will include two separate subareas. Subarea 3a would include the creation of three (3) parcels adjacent to East Grand Avenue with three (3) mixed-tenant commercial buildings totaling approximately 15,600 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 thirty-eight (38) parcels for construction of an equal number of high-density, 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 and two (2) homes with four bedrooms. The proposed project is largely similar to the proposal considered by the Planning Commission and City Council in 2014 (Attachments 2 through 6). However, the City Council took no formal action on that proposal. Instead, the City Council approved a Memorandum of Understanding with the developer to negotiate a development agreement for one of two development options including the previously considered _ project with an additional 5,000 square-feet of commercial space and a subsequent reduction in residential lots (Attachments 7 and 8). Pursuant to the Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU"), the developer has chosen to pursue this development option in the proposed Development Agreement (Attachment 9). Staff Advisory Committee The Staff Advisory Committee (SAC) reviewed the revised project description on July 22, 2015. At that time, the SAC discussed changes made to the project, which included grade differences and fencing options between the uses on the site, clarified fire apparatus access through the residential portion of the site and emergency services access to adjoining sites, modified previously identified Conditions of Approval as necessary, and remained in support of the project with the revised project description. Planning Commission The Planning Commission reviewed the revised project description on August 18, 2015 (Attachment 10). Commissioners discussed parking for both the commercial and residential components of the project, the design and density of the residential component, the on-site circulation particularly in light of constrained parking, design Item 9.a. - Page 3 CITY COUNCIL CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001; AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 15- 002 SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 PAGE4 issues related to refuse collection and storage, the design of project cross sections of dissimilar uses, and circulation on South Courtland Street from the project site. The Planning Commission's concerns regarding these items resulted in a tentative recommendation for denial, which was formalized by the adoption of a Resolution recommending the City Council deny the proposed project at their meeting of September 1, 2015. The findings for denial recommended by the Planning Commission are included in the prepared City Council Resolution. ANALYSIS OF ISSUES: Development Agreement The development agreement is a tool by which local agencies and property owners enter into a contractual agreement identifying the intensity, timing, and conditions of development of real property. Development agreements provide an enhanced degree of certainty in the development process for both the property owner and the local agency, as items such as phasing are negotiated as part of the contractual agreement. In this instance, pursuant to the approved MOU, the proposed Development Agreement provides for the construction of 15,600 square-feet of commercial floor area and thirty- eight (38) high-density, single-family detached residences, with extensive on and offsite improvement requirements and project phasing conditioned and secured. 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. As time passes from the original adoption date of the General Plan, it is important for the City to reassess included policies and ensure they reflect current trends and desired future for the City. 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: LU5-10.1 Promote development of a high intensity, mixed-use, pede$trian 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 exclusion of single-family style detached housing, regardless of density, from the definition of mixed-use. The following amendment is intended to address the definition 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 Item 9.a. - Page 4 CITY COUNCIL CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001; AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 15- 002 SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 PAGES 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. As the density is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element, the proposed modification will align City Policy with the needs of the site, would not create any inconsistencies with existing developments in the area or internally within the General Plan itself, and would limit the extent of replication, if any, of single-family detached housing along East Grand Avenue. Specific Plan Amendment The proposed amendment to the BGSP (Attachment 11) aims to set development standards for Subarea 3, is largely consistent with the previously considered amendment, and has been updated to account for the additional commercial building and reduction in residences. It is important to note that any project proposal would require an amendment due to Subarea 3 being designated as an unplanned Subarea of the BGSP. The amendment would define the boundaries of the two proposed phases of Subarea 3 for the commercial and residential developments (as generally shown above on the location map). Aside from the detached, small lot single-family homes, the proposed development standards for each subarea are equivalent to the development standards of the Gateway Mixed-Use (GMU) zoning district, which is the underlying zoning district for the property and is included for comparative purposes (Attachment 12). 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' 0-5' minimum Boundary Lots: 1 O' Interior Lots: 2-8' 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: 2' Item 9.a. - Page 5 CITY COUNCIL CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001; AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 15- 002 SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 PAGE6 Lot coverage Floor Area Ratio Building height 75% 1.5 35' 50% 65% 1.5 1.25 35' 35' The proposed specific plan amendment identifies that when future property owners desiring to modify individual residences after tract construction would require a Minor Use Permit-Plot Plan Review from the Community Development Department to ensure compliance with the specific plan. Standards that are not identified in the specific plan would be required to conform to the requirements of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code (AGMC). Vesting Tentative Tract Map The proposed tract map will subdivide Subarea 3 into forty-two ( 42) parcels, including three (3) commercial parcels of 25,521 square-feet, 18,047 square-feet, and 10,393 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 48,469 square-feet. The proposed lot sizes are consistent with the proposed specific plan amendment. The Map is additiona!ly reserving the ability for the four (4) mixed-use units to be condominiums and sold individually as well. Conditional Use Permit The proposed conditional use permit will allow development of Subarea 3a with three (3) commercial buildings ranging in size from approximately 3,600-6,500 square-feet. Commercial building area totals approximately 15,600 square-feet, pursuant to the MOU approved by the Council. No tenants are currently identified as part of the conditional use permit. Additionally, the conditional use permit will allow the development of four (4) second-floor condominium style units 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 Building 3 Front vard setback 0'-5' 0'-5' 0'-5' Rear yard setback 22' 24' 5' Interior side yard setback 70' 245' 5' Street side yard setback 224' 30' 30' Lot coverai:ie -22% -24% -35% Building height 31' 28' 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 Item 9.a. - Page 6 CITY COUNCIL CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001; AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 15- 002 SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 PAGE7 created. The Design Guidelines 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 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 accessible 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 Item 9.a. - Page 7 CITY COUNCIL CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001; AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 15- 002 SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 PAGES 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 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, including fewer driveways and enhancement of off-street parking areas. Item 9.a. - Page 8 CITY COUNCIL CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001; AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 15- 002 SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 PAGE9 The proposed project addresses several of the goals and objectives of both the Design Guidelines and Enhancement Plan. Specifically, the proposed project includes: • An 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 and onsite; • Landscape buffer along South Courtland Street and adjacent to the PSHH project; and • Enhanced ADA access from East Grand Avenue. Residential Density Municipal Code Subsection 16.36.030.C identifies residential density equivalents for residential projects located in the mixed-use zoning districts as follows: ~esid~l\tl~1Lpwem119r;~int:'.f:.ype~:):: :. ., .: .~ · ;., :" ~11ensity::E,qui~a1~nt;1!~·~·11() .· :;~:~!l~~; ' ·. '··:.:.'"~ ... ··~ .. '"•: ·• .. : ... 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: 1 \N~umbf''~.. fl:i~s .E>¥t~l!ing·fu111.t.::ryp~. ,;~~i:tsitf ; -,:.-:'.:~ii~:~:~ :::rqtat'WehsiJy~Egtjiva1·entf , " :~ ;~~-/ ~>": :" ".-" 1;~·~f~~~i~; ~ ~ -;j,t~~J~:AA · ~, ; 1 ~E7«UiV81egt~~~:~ ~,·~:~" , w",~~l;:1~i~i:~~~~~ :;~: ~ ~~ " tt,;~1~~~~::~,::' , '~~ '~:' ~~,:e 4 2-bedroom 1 4 36 3-bedroom 1.5 54 2 4-bedroom 2 4 Subarea3a: 4 Subarea 3b: 58 Density for the residential portion of the site is 18.53 dwelling units per acre. This is comparable to the multi-family residential densities identified in the General Plan and Municipal Code that range from ten (10) to twenty-five (25) dwelling units per acre. For comparison, it is approximately seven (7) units per acre more dense than Walnut Grove on Woodland Drive, which is an attached multi-family development. The Planning Commission expressed concern regarding the design and density of Subarea 3b, Item 9.a. - Page 9 CITY COUNCIL CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001; AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 15- 002 SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 PAGE10 indicating a preference for reduced density and increased area for guest parking. It is important to note that the intent of the Mixed-Use districts is to provide high density housing if housing is to be constructed. The reason why higher density is planned for in Mixed-Use districts is that downtown corridors will be more successful when supported by high density housing. If the residential density becomes too low, it would fall below the anticipated density prescribed by General Plan Policies for the Gateway Mixed-Use district. 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 shail promote infill housing opportunities through an attainable housing program. While the AGMC has not yet 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 market 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 the business fronts, 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) Item 9.a. - Page 10 CITY COUNCIL CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001; AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 15- 002 SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 PAGE11 square-feet. The proposed sign parameters of the specific plan amendment would likely exceed the total number of signs allowed per business per the Municipal Code, 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, as well as the Municipal Code 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 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. The architecture type is consistent with the previously considered project and will require final architectural review by the Architectural Review Committee. 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. Final review of the project's architecture will be made by the Architectural Review Committee for a recommendation to the Community Development Director. 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. Although the Enhancement Plan recommends design of fewer driveways in new developments, the proposed driveways are narrow, include decorative crosswalk treatment and aprons, and facilitate maneuverability of building space. The westernmost driveway would be designed to only allow vehicular egress in an Item 9.a. - Page 11 CITY COUNCIL CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001; AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 15- 002 SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 PAGE12 eastbound manner. The center driveway (see Attachment 18, Sheet EX1) would 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. 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 The proposed project eliminates pedestrian access between Subareas 3a and 3b. This does conflict with recommendations in the Design Guidelines that recommend connectivity between developments. The applicant has indicated this was necessary in order rearrange residential lots to accommodate the additional commercial square- footage prescribed in the MOU approved by the Council and providing additional parking in Subarea 3b. Pedestrian connection between the two Subareas, as well as the remainder of Berry Gardens, would be increased with the installation of curbs, gutters, and sidewalks along the project frontage. Removal of the pedestrian .connection also addresses a safety, maintenance, and liability issue previously identified by the applicant whereby members of the public could visit the commercial component of the project and make their way down to the neighborhood park maintained by a private Homeowner's Association. Traffic Additional traffic will be generated as a result of the proposed project and impacts associated with traffic are identified in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. The previously prepared traffic study was revised and finalized to include the modified project description (Attachment 13). While some of the peak hour trips changed as a result of the revised project description, no new impacts were identified and additional mitigation measures beyond those previously identified were not necessary. Therefore, impacts to the City's circulation system will be adequately mitigated as to not result in a significant impact. The Planning Commission expressed concern regarding available on-site parking and the validity of the traffic study regarding site circulation. The project's traffic study did review site circulation with respect to site access controls from both East Grand Avenue and Courtland Street. The traffic study did not assume that all onsite parking would be used and unavailable during peak hour traffic since the project is proposing to construct parking in compliance with City Standards. The traffic study has been completed in compliance with the City's draft guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis Reports and reviewed by the Traffic Commission in 2014. Item 9.a. - Page 12 CITY COUNCIL CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001; AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 15- 002 SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 PAGE13 During the processing of the previous project in 2014, the City Council directed staff to investigate existing traffic concerns voiced by the residents of Berry Gardens. Staff commissioned a report to look at current vehicle volumes in the Neighborhood and options available to address neighborhood concerns, namely speeding. The Draft study was completed by Omni-Means in April 2015. While there may be a perception that the neighborhood sees an unusually large number of vehicle trips and at relatively high speeds, the study concluded that the data does not support those claims and thus traffic calming measures are not warranted. 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 15,600 square-feet of commercial floor area results in a requirement for sixty-two {62) parking spaces. The four (4) two-bedroom condominiums in subarea 3a require two (2) spaces per unit, totaling eight (8) spaces. In total, seventy (70) parking spaces are required for Subarea 3a. The developer is providing seventy-seven (77) parking spaces in Subarea 3a to accommodate the additional 5,000 square-feet of commercial floor area. This includes four (4) spaces reserved solely for the condominiums (1 space per unit) and seventy- three (73) open, unassigned spaces to exceed 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 19 guest parking spaces. Each residence in Subarea 3b contains 2 spaces in their respective garages, meeting the requirement for the residences. The applicant has provided twenty-three (23) guest parking spaces spread throughout the site, with a grouping of these spaces 'in the southwest corner. Parking provided in Subarea 3b exceeds the requirements of theAGMC. Concerns had been raised previously that Subarea 3b has a lack of parking due to garages being used for storage instead of parking and families having more than two cars. It should be noted that there is nothing within the AGMC that would require additional parking beyond the base requirements. 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. Lastly, if residential projects are expected to require parking in front of garages, then the higher densities prescribed by the General Plan and mixed-use and Item 9.a. - Page 13 CITY COUNCIL CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001; AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 15- 002 SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 PAGE14 multifamily districts are further constrained and lower-density residential projects will result, thus limiting the potential for additional housing choices beyond the standard large-lot, single-family design, which is contrary to the General Plan for areas in the Mixed-Use land use category At the Planning Commission meeting of August 18, 2015, Commissioners expressed concern that due to the strong possibility that a restaurant would be located in Subarea 3a, the parking provided in the commercial component will not be adequate. Below is a comparison of parking requirements by City and use for the seven (7) incorporated cities in the County. [ --,,·---._ . -~G_r~yer :$an -J.:liis·: -_-Atascadero :ArrQyo_ -' --Pism9< 'Morro: R~s()·:~---. ''':~ ---.1,;1 .; ~~Beach '.Obispo,_-"iy:_i, • (;rariCie--, ·eeach': -~Bay;._ -_. --Rot>les ----' Requirements 2/Unit 2.5/3br unit 2.5/3br unit 2/Unit 2/Unit 2/Unit 2/Unit 1/Unit for 3/4br unit 3/4br unit 0.5/unit for 1/4 units 1/5 units 1/5 units guests 1/5 units for 1/5 units for guests for guests for guests for guests guests guests Subarea 3b Units:76 Units:96 Units:96 Units:76 Units:76 Units:76 Units:76 Guest:38 Guest:8 Guest:8 Guest:19 Guest:10 Guest:8 Guest:8 Total:114 Total:104 Total:104 Total:95 Total:86 Total:84 Total:84 --;Atroyo Grover --San -1::.lds-"1 : ~ta~c~derp: .Rismo. Morro;~CIY_ . _-p~S.Q};: _ . ~Grande· '· 1'Beac·11-· -'Obis-po : , . • : --~ -~ 1 ~Rot>les :; · _ -~~ .. _ --,;\{' 7~ ~-·-Beach_ ~ ---' -' ~ --''_ - Requirements General General General General General General General Commercial Commercial Commercial Commercial Commercial Commercial Commercial -- -1/250 sq ft -1/250 sq ft -1/300 sq -1/300 sq ft -1/300 sq -1/300 sq ft -3/1000 sq Restaurant Restaurant ft Restaurant ft Restaurant ft -1/100 sq ft -1/200 sq ft Restaurant · -1 /table for Restaurant -1/60 sq ft Restaurant accessible -1/60 sq ft customer, -1/75 sq ft accessible -5/1000 sq to public accessible 1/6 tables to public ft to public for staff, and 1/100 and 1/100 sq ft for sq ft for food prep food prep Subarea 3b Total: 63 Total: 63 Total: 52 Total: 52 Total: 52 Total: 52 Total 47 As illustrated in the first table, of the seven (7) cities in the County, Arroyo Grande requires the fourth most parking for Subarea 3b, with the Cities of Grover Beach, San Luis Obispo, and Atascadero requiring more parking. As illustrated in the second table, Arroyo Grande is tied with Grover Beach by requiring the most parking for general commercial development. The parking required for restaurants is provided for reference but was not calculated due to project specific restaurant sizes not being currently Item 9.a. - Page 14 CITY COUNCIL CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001; AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 15- 002 SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 PAGE15 known. Additionally, the parking requirements for the four (4) condominium units was not calculated for each jurisdiction due to the intricacies of each city's parking requirements, allowances, and reductions and a desire to not misrepresent that information. Landscaping/Open Space The proposed conceptual landscape plan includes both perimeter and interior trees and screening/ground cover plant material that 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. Municipal Code 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-two (42) residential units for both Subarea 3a and Subarea 3b require a total of 14,700 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 12,000 square-foot neighborhood green. Residential Private Patios Homes surrounding the neighborhood green, as well as Lots 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 considerations, 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 12,000 square- feet and includes a neighborhood pavilion, a playground feature and flex spaces, sitting areas, and a mailbox area in the green. 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 Item 9.a. - Page 15 CITY COUNCIL CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001; AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 15- 002 SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 PAGE16 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 and Phasing With the previously proposed project, staff included Conditions of Approval Nos. 39-43, aimed at providing significant incentive for the property owner to develop the commercial component of the project. This included phasing of the subdivision map, payment of fees, and deposits of funds to be drawn upon in the event the commercial component remained unconstructed. Although these requirements 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. An issue regarding Conditions of Approval Nos. 39-43 has been raised by the applicant. Although the applicant originally intended to construct the commercial phase of the project himself, the applicant is now intending to sell both the commercial and the residential portions of the project to two (2) separate buyers. Initially, the buyers will purchase the project as Tenants in Common, which means they would hold a shared ownership of the property. Subsequently, when the map is recorded, each buyer will own their portion of the property (residential phase or commercial phase) individually. If the phasing requirements remain as outlined and included in Conditions of Approval Nos. 39-43, the applicant indicated the buyer for the residential portion of the project would be unlikely to be able to acquire financing. This is due to the owner of the residential portion being dependent on an unrelated party (the commercial owner) performing their work before the residential owner could complete his/her project. Based on this premise, it is unlikely that a financial lender would advance money for the purchase of the residential property or the residential construction. Conditions of Approval Nos. 39-43 were included in order to provide an incentive for the applicant to develop the commercial component of the project. In an effort to address the applicant's concerns about Conditions of Approval Nos. 39-43 and still preserve Item 9.a. - Page 16 CITY COUNCIL CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001; AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 15- 002 SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 PAGE17 sufficient incentive for the construction of the commercial portion, staff and the applicant have discussed replacing Conditions of Approval Nos. 39-43 with an alternative method of encouraging the development of the commercial portion. Staff would support a revised Condition of Approval No. 39, which would include the construction of additional infrastructure prior to the development of the residential portion in exchange for the deletion of Conditions of Approval Nos. 40-43. Subsections (f) and (g) of Condition of Approval No. 39 would be revised to require the construction of all frontage improvements along South Courtland Street and East Grand Avenue prior to the recordation of the Final Map as follows in italics: Condition of Approval #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) Prior to Final Map recordation, all frontage improvements must be installed along South Courtland Street and East Grand Avenue, including: 1. Curb, gutter and sidewalk; 2. Street trees; 3. Traffic signal relocation; and 4. Final road sealing, striping and roadway signage. As revised, Condition of Approval No. 39 would require the applicant to complete all planned infrastructure, including the frontage improvements for both the residential and commercial portion prior to recordation of the Final Map. It is important to note that the Development Agreement stipulates a 5-year entitlement limitation. This means that both phases of the project are required to be constructed within that time frame. According to engineers' estimates and information provided by the applicant, the investment in the commercial phase of the project is $1.3 million. The infrastructure costs, associated with the commercial phase of the project, including the Item 9.a. - Page 17 CITY COUNCIL CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001; AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 15- 002 SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 PAGE18 frontage improvements are estimated at $445,000. Given the level of investment in the commercial phase of the project, it would be unlikely for the commercial developer to fail to construct the commercial portion within the five years, allowing the Development Agreement and project entitlements to expire, which would result in a significant loss in value of the project. The Planning Commission considered the financing issue but due to the Commission's recommendation for denial, a recommendation on this issue was not provided. Water Use Concerns have been raised about the ongoing drought and if it should be a basis for denying the project. First, it is important to note the analysis of the issue of water in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, and based on this analysis that there are sufficient water 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, and was revised to reflect the increased commercial square-footage and decreased residential use. 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. The applicant has provided an information sheet outlining the project's water conservation efforts (Attachment 14 ). These water conservation techniques include: Outdoor: • Drought tolerant plantings • No turf in yards • Minimized neighborhood common area turf • High efficiency irrigation; and • Amended soils for moisture retention Indoor: • Dual flush toilets; • Water saving dishwasher and faucet devices; and • Pre-plumbed for gray water systems On May 26, 2015, the City Council adopted a Resolution declaring a Stage 1 Water Shortage Emergency as well as adopting an Urgency Ordinance relating to penalties and enforcement of emergency water shortage restrictions and regulations. The Stage Item 9.a. - Page 18 CITY COUNCIL CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001; AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 15- 002 SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 PAGE19 1 Water Shortage Emergency was enacted in part due to Executive Order B-29-15, enacting statewide mandatory water conservation requirements, which included a 28% water use reduction on the City (as an aside, the City is currently seeing a reduction of approximately 41 % in water use from 2013, which is a tribute to the conservation efforts of the residents of the City). In addition to the project water demand being accounted for in the General Plan build out, it is not anticipated that the additional demand will impact the City's ability to continue to meet the 28% reduction requirements as the project totals 0.004% of supply. At the time the Stage 1 Emergency was enacted, the Council made the decision that while a moratorium on new development might be necessary in the future, it is not currently necessary, due to conservation efforts reducing consumption from 99% of water entitlements in 2008 to 73% of supply, and long term build out projections. The Council decided that a moratorium at this time would seriously jeopardize the goals of meeting housing needs and achieving economic sustainability through infill development prioritized in the recent updates to the General Plan Housing and Economic Development Elements. It is for these reasons that development projects can continue to be approved even in ·light of the current drought conditions. Disabled Access for Subarea 3b At the August 18, 2015 Planning Commission meeting, Commissioners had questions regarding ADA access for Subarea 3b. The City has adopted the 2013 California Building Code as referenced in Section 15.040.010 of the Municipal Code. The 2013 California Building Code is designed to comply with the requirements of the Federal Americans with Disabilities Act and State statutes. The California Building Code provides special consideration for privately funded and owned residential construction verses other types of construction. The California Building Code Section R320 provides guidance when ADA compliant facilities must be installed: Dwelling units in a building consisting of three or more dwellings units or four or more condominium units shall meet the requires of the California Building Code Chapter 11 A. Covered Multifamily Dwellings include but are not limited to dwelling units listed in Section 1.8.2.1.2. Dwelling units within a single structure separated by firewalls do not constitute separate buildings. California Building Code Chapter 11A provides housing accessibility guidance for multifamily structures. California Building Code Chapter 11 B provides guidance for Accessibility to Public Buildings, Public Accommodations, Commercial Buildings and Public Housing. This is again reiterated on the United States Access Boards web site in plain language as follows: Item 9.a. - Page 19 CITY COUNCIL CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001; AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 15- 002 SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 PAGE 20 Although private residential housing is not covered by the ADA, government- owned or operated housing and certain privately owned facilities that provide housing are subject to the ADA _and its accessibility requirements. Government owned or operated facilities may include public housing, student and faculty housing, employee housing, nursing homes, temporary housing provided in emergencies, and social service facilities, such as homeless shelters and halfway houses. In the private sector, the ADA 's coverage of housing is limited to places of public accommodation, such as social service establishments and housing provided on or behalf -a place of education. The ADA does not apply to individually owned or leased housing in the private sector not used as a public accommodation, including single family homes, condominiums, or apartments. (Many types of multi-family housing in the private and public sectors are subject to the design requirements of the Fair Housing Act.) Places of public accommodation located in residential buildings, such as rental and sales offices, commercial spaces, and hotel _accommodations, are covered by the ADA Standards. The proposed project must comply with the California Building Code. Subarea 3b must provide accessible access from the Public Right-of-Way of Courtland Street to the area known as the Neighborhood Green in the residential portion of the development. Assessable access to the privately owned residential structures is not required by the California Building Code, State Statutes or Federal ADA requirements. Refuse Collection The Planning-Commission also raised concerns regarding the collection of refuse on collection days. Due to the narrowness of the private street, Commissioners were concerned that with the addition of three (3) cans per household would constrict the travel way for emergency vehicles. Plan Modifications Following Planning Commission In response to concerns raised by the Planning Commission, the applicant has identified preliminary modifications for the Council's consideration. Modifications to the project description offered as alternatives by the applicant include the removal of three (3) additional three-bedroom residences in Subarea 3b for a total of thirty-five (35) residences, a reduction in density from 18.53 dwelling units per acre to 17.09 dwelling units per acre, and the expansion of guest parking from twenty-three (23) spaces to thirty-eight (38) spaces dispersed more evenly through the site. Item 9.a. - Page 20 CITY COUNCIL CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001., CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001; AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 15- 002 SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 PAGE 21 ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration: • Adopt the prepared Resolution denying General Plan Amendment 14-002, Specific Plan Amendment 14-001, Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14-001, Conditional Use Permit 14-009 and Development Agreement 15-002; • Modify and adopt the prepared Resolution denying General Plan Amendment 14- 002, Specific Plan Amendment 14-001, Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14-001, Conditional Use Permit 14-009 and Development Agreement 15-002; • Adopt a Resolution certifying the Draft 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 and introduce an Ordinance approving Development Agreement 15-002 (Attachment 15); • Modify and adopt a Resolution certifying the Draft 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 and introduce an Ordinance approving Development Agreement 15-002; or • Provide direction to staff. ADVANTAGES: Denying the proposed project would maintain the project site for a possible development consistent with the General Plan and Development Code, which could include multi-family residential development in an attached format, a full commercial development, or some combination thereof. DISADVANTAGES: Denying the proposed project would not allow the construction and would deprive the City of the generation of sales tax revenue, as well as not allowing the Berry Gardens Specific Plan to reach build out. 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 previously proposed project. Upon receiving a revised project description, staff revised the Draft MND and concluded that the revised project description does not create any new significant impacts nor require additional mitigation measures and therefore adequately evaluates the current project (Attachment 16). Project denial would not necessitate action to be taken on the Draft MND. Item 9.a. - Page 21 CITY COUNCIL CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002; SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001; AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 15- 002 SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 PAGE 22 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS: A notice of public hearing was mailed to all property owners within 300' of the project site, was published in The Tribune, and posted at City Hall and on the City's website on Friday, August 14, 2015. Additionally, staff mailed notices to the entirety of the Berry Gardens neighborhood to ensure the neighborhood was aware of the hearing. At the August 25, 2015 meeting, the City Council continued the public hearing to a date certain of September 8, 2015. A second notice of public hearing was mailed to all property owners within 300' of the project site, was published in The Tribune, posted at City Hall and on the City's website, and sent to the entirety of the Berry Gardens neighborhood on Friday, August 28, 2015. The agenda was posted at City Hall on September 3, 2015 and the staff report was posted on the City's website on September 4, 2015. Staff has spoken to several neighbors regarding the concerns over the density of the proposed project, lack of parking for the residences, traffic, water, and individual distaste for the project architecture. Staff additionally received correspondence from the public related to the project (Attachments 17 and 18). Attachments: 1. Project narrative provided by applicant 2. Minutes from the July 8, 2014 Council meeting 3. Minutes from the August 12, 2014 Council meeting 4. Minutes from the November 18, 2014 Planning Commission meeting 5. Minutes from the December 2, 2014 Planning Commission meeting 6. Minutes of the December 9, 2014 Council Meeting 7. Minutes from the January 13, 2015 Council meeting 8. Minutes from the February 10, 2015 Council meeting 9. Memorandum of Understanding with NKT Commercial 10. Minutes from the August 18, 2015 Planning Commission meeting - 11. Proposed Specific Plan Amendment 12.Municipal Code Table 16.36.030(A) -Uses Permitted Within Mixed Use and Commercial Districts 13. Final Traffic Impact Study 14. Project water conservation information 15.Alternate Resolution for project approval and Ordinance approving Development Agreement 16. Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 17. Correspondence from John Lovern 18. Correspondence from Frank Allen 19. Project plans Item 9.a. - Page 22 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DENYING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002, SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14- 001, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009, AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 15-002; LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF EAST GRAND AVENUE AND SOUTH COURTLAND STREET; APPLIED FOR BY 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 filed 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 filed 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 filed Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14-001 to subdivide Subarea 3 into forty-two (42) parcels, including three (3) commercial parcels, thirty-eight (38) residential parcels, and one (1) common area parcel.; and WHEREAS, the applicant has filed Conditional Use Permit 14-009 to develop three (3) commercial buildings of 3,600-6,500 square-feet, four (4) second-floor condominiums of approximately 1,000 square feet-each in a vertical mixed-use arrangement; and WHEREAS, the applicant and the City entered into a Memorandum of Understanding on February 10, 2015 for the negotiation of a development agreement for the subject property; and WHEREAS, the applicant has filed Development Agreement 15-002 in accordance with the executed Memorandum of Understanding; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Arroyo Grande reviewed the project at a duly noticed public hearing on August 18, 2015, recommending the City Council deny the project-; 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 Rules and Procedures for Implementation of CEQA and has reviewed the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration; and Item 9.a. - Page 23 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE2 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande has reviewed the project at a duly noticed public hearing on September 8, 2015; 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 is not consistent with the goals, objectives, policies, and programs of the General Plan as it would allow single-family detached housing on a commercial parcel at a density and design that is incompatible with the nearby residential neighborhood and potential deterioration of the commercial corridor. 2. The proposed amendment will not adversely affect the public health, safety and welfare; The proposed General Plan Amendment would allow single-family detached housing with a design as to create issues with open space and support facilities. 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, which was revised in July 2015, 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. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment would permit single-family detached housing in a commercial district which is not consistent with Land Use Element implementation policy LU5-10.1, which calls to promote development of a, high intensity, mixed-use, pedestrian activity node centered on the Courtland Street/East Grand Avenue intersections as a priority example of revitalization of this corridor segment known as Gateway. Item 9.a. - Page 24 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE3 2. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment will not adversely affect the public health, safety and welfare or result in an illogical land use pattern; The proposed Specific Plan Amendment would permit single-family detached housing between commercial and multi-family residential development and would result in parking and circulation deficiencies due to the density of the detached housing style. 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 will not implement the provisions of the General Plan, including Land Use Element implementation policy LU5-10.1, which calls to promote development of a high intensity, mixed-use, pedestrian activity node centered on the Courtland Street/East Grand Avenue intersections as a priority example of revitalization of this corridor segment known as Gateway. 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 in the proposed Specific Plan Amendment would result in a project lacking sufficient parking for anticipated demand due to the density of single-family detached residential development. 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. 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-two (42) lots consistent, including thirty-eight (38) for the development of single-family detached housing that is inconsistent with the General Plan, including Land Use Element implementation policy LU5-10.1, which calls to promote development Item 9.a. - Page 25 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE4 of a high intensity, mixed-use, pedestrian activity. node centered on the Courtland Street/East Grand Avenue intersections as a priority example of revitalization of this corridor segment known as Gateway. 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 not physically suitable for the density of residential development proposed. 3. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. The site is 4.47 acres of vacant land adjacent to one of the City's main commercial corridors and is not physically suitable for the design and density of single-family detached residential development proposed. 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 substantial environmental damage due to the implementation of mitigation measures identified in the draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project and revised in July 2015, 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. The design of the subdivision results in a development overly dense for the subject property as there is insufficient space to provide facilities to support the development, including resident, guest, and customer parking. 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 Item 9.a. - Page 26 RESOLUTION NO. PAGES as prescribed in Division 7 (commencing with Section 13000) of the California Water Code. The proposed development will retain the 95th percentile of water discharge on site and excess discharge will be directed to an existing infiltration basin across South Courtland 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 City. The proposed development for single-family detached housing on the subject property is inconsistent with the General Plan, including Land Use Element implementation policy LU5-10.1, which calls to promote development of a high intensity, mixed-use, pedestrian activity node centered on the Courtland Street/East Grand Avenue intersections as a priority example of revitalization of this corridor segment known as Gateway. 2. The proposed use would not impair the integrity and character of the district in which it is to be established or located. The proposed single-family detached residential development is at too great a density to include adequate support facilities, which will impair the integrity and character of the surrounding area by resulting in increased overflow street parking demand. 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 adjacent to one of the City's main commercial corridors, is not physically suitable for the design and density of residential development proposed, and is not consistent with the East Grand Avenue Enhancement Plan. 4. There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities and services to ensure public health and safety. Item 9.a. - Page 27 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE6 The provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities were examined during development and revision 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 substantially 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 single-family detached housing is at such high densities as to create issues with open space and facilities necessary to support the development, including parking facilities. Development Agreement Findings: 1 . The development agreement is consistent with the goals, objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs of the General Plan and any applicable specific plan. The proposed Development Agreement would facilitate development of single-family detached housing in a commercial district which is not consistent with Land Use Element implementation policy LU5- 10.1, which calls to promote development of a high intensity, mixed- use, pedestrian activity node centered on the Courtland Street/East Grand Avenue intersections as a priority example of revitalization of this corridor segment known as Gateway. 2. The development agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for, the land use district in which the real property is located; The proposed Development Agreement would facilitate development of single-family detached housing in a commercial corridor segment known as Gateway, which is not consistent "with Land Use Element implementation policy LU5-10.1·. 3. The development agreement is in conformity with public convenience, general welfare, and good land use practice; The proposed Development Agreement would facilitate development of single-family detached housing between commercial and multi- family residential development and would result in parking and circulation deficiencies due to the density of the detached housing style, therefore failing to conform to good land use practice. 4. The development agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare; The proposed Development Agreement would facilitate construction Item 9.a. - Page 28 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE7 of single-family detached housing is at such high densities as to create issues with open space and facilities necessary to support the development, including parking facilities. 5. The development agreement will not, in respect to the subject property or any other property, adversely affect the orderly development thereof or the preservation of property values; The proposed Development Agreement would facilitate development of single-family detached housing between commercial and multi- family residential development and without concurrent approval of a General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Amendment would result in parking and circulation deficiencies due to the density of the detached housing style, therefore failing to result in orderly development of the property. 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 and was subsequently revised to include Development Agreement 15-002. 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 Planning Commission recommends the City Council not take action on the Mitigated Negative Declaration due to recommendation for the denial of the proposed project studied under the Initial Study. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande hereby denies General Plan Amendment 14-002, Specific Plan Amendment 14- 001, Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14-001, Conditional Use Permit 14-009, and Development Agreement 15-002. 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 ath day of September, 2015. Item 9.a. - Page 29 RESOLUTION NO. PAGES JIM HILL, MAYOR ATTEST: KELLY WETMORE, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: DIANNE THOMPSON, CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: HEATHER K. WHITHAM, CITY ATTORNEY Item 9.a. - Page 30 JulylS,2015 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 Development Agreement Submittal Dear Mr. Downing, On behalf of our Client, NKT Commercial, RRM Design Group submits this Development Agreement and accompanying application materials for the Courtland and Grand Mixed-Use Commercial and Residential project for Alternativ·e Two as outlined within the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) entered into between the City of Arroyo Grande and NKT Commercial on February I 0, 2015. Background The Courtland and Grand Mixed-Use Commercial and Residential project last appeared before the City Council on December 9th, 2014. At that time, a number of potential issues with the project were identified, and ultimately, the project was not approved by the City Council. Before you is a revised project containing a number of changes that evolved out of comments and feedback taken from the December City Council meeting and those outlined within the above referenced MOU. Project Revisions The revised Mixed-Use Commercial portion of the project contains a total of 15,600 square feet of commercial/retail and/or office space, representing a 5,000 square foot increase over the project previously reviewed by the City Council. The additional 5,000 square feet has been incorporated within a new commercial/retail and/or office building along South Courtland Street and within the two buildings fronting onto East Grand Avenue. Parking spaces for the Mixed- Use Commercial area have been increased by 11 parking spaces, over the required 66 parking spaces, for a total of 77 parking spaces provided. In order to accommodate the expanded Mixed-Use Commercial square footage and the additional parking spaces, the stairway connection between the two project areas has been eliminated but both areas remain connected through pedestrian and bicycle improvements along South Courtland Street. Furthermore, the expansion of the Mixed-Use Commercial square footage and additional 3765 s Higuera SI., Ste. 102. San LUIS Obispo, CA 93401 p (805) 543-179 4 • f {805) 543-4609 www.rrmdesign.com a Cahfomla corporaf1on • Lenny Grant, Architect C26973 • Jerry M1chael, PE 36895 LS 6276 • Jeff Ferber LA 28/.4 Item 9.a. - Page 31 Courtland and Grand Mixed-Use Project Development Agreement Submittal Proposed Scope of Services July 14, 2015 Page 2 of 2 parking spaces also corresponds with a reduction in the total area and number of single-family, workforce housing units contained within the Residential portion of the project. This letter and attached package of materials represents the Courtland and Grand Mixed-Use Commercial and Residential project submittal for review and use by the Staff Advisory Committee, Planning Commission, and City Council. A more detailed submittal with updated landscape plans, building elevations, and other required materials will be provided at the time of submittal to the Architectural Review Committee. In addition to this letter, this package contains the following information: • Draft Development Agreement • Revised Specific Plan Amendment (SPA) • Revised Architectural Site Plan; • Site Sections • Revised Vesting Tentative Map Package (VTM) o Grading and Drainage Plan o Site Plan o Vesting Tentative Map o Utility Plan • Revised Commercial Perspective/Grand Avenue Elevation • _Revised Commercial Perspective (Perspective View of building one -Mixed-use) • Courtland Perspective; • Commercial Perspective of Building 3 We appreciate your careful consideration of this request and look forward to continuing to work with you on this project. Please feel free to contact me directly with any questions you may have regarding this revised Development Agreement submittal at (805) 543-1794, Ext. 222. Sincerely, Principal cc: Nick Tompkins, NKT Commercial 3765 s. Higuera St. Ste 102. Son LUIS OblSpO. CA 93401 p. (805) 543-1794 • f (805) 543-4609 www.rrmdesign.com a Cahtoma corpora11on • Lennf Grant, l'Jch1tect ':26973 • Jerrv M1cnael PE 36895 LS 6270 ·Jet! Ferb&r, L~ 28-14 Item 9.a. - Page 32 I I i I ' I I I· \ I [ I Minutes: City Council Meeting Tuesday, July 8, 2014 ATIACHMENT2 8.p. Consideration to Appropriate Additional Funding for the Old Ranch Road Pr perty , Improvements (Tract 3018) Project, PW 2013-10. Action: Appropriated an additional $30,000 towards the Old Ranch Ro Property (Tract 3018) Improvements Project to cover additional PG&E design an construction expenses. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS 9.a. Consideration of Application for Certificate of Public Conv ience and Necessity. Chief Annibali presented the staff report and recommended that e Council adopt a Resolution granting a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessit to Central Coast Taxi for the operation of a taxicab service within the City limits, contin nt upol'l full and total compliance with all conditions and requirements in Chapter 5. 72 "Ta · abs" of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code. - Sammy Orr, Central Coast Taxi, introduced hims and thanked the Council for the opportunity to operate his business in the City. Mayor Ferrara opened the public hearing, nd upon hearing no comments, he closed the public hearing. Action: Council Member Costello oved to adopt a Resolution entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE C OF ARROYO GRANDE GRANTING A CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE D NECESSITY TO CENTRAL COAST TAXI FOR THE OPERATION OF A TAX/C B SERVICE WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS CONTINGENT UPON FULL AND TOTAL CO PLIANCE WITH ALL CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS IN CHAPTER 5.72 "TAXL ABS" OF THE ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL CODE". Council Member Barneich se nded, and the motion passed on the following roll call vote: AYES: Co ello, Barneich, Brown, Guthrie, Ferrara NOES: ABSENT: 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 So1,1th Courtland Street; Applicant: MFI Limited & NKT Commercial. Item 9.a. - Page 33 l I 1- 1 I Minutes: City Council Meeting Tuesday, July 8, 2014 Pages 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 potel"!tial. 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 Designation, General Plan Amendment, Development Code Amendment entative Tract Map; Location: Traffic Way and East Cherry Avenue; A · ant: Mangano Homes, 'inc. Associate Planner Heffernen presented the st eport and recommended that the Council review the conceptual plans and provide co ents to the applicant. e a presentatic;>n of the conceptual project. Randy Russom, RR esign, spoke regarding the conceptual project and responded to questions from Co rl. C:led to questions from Council regarding the pedestrian path, agricultural mitigation, and access issues. Item 9.a. - Page 34 Minutes: City Council Meeting Tuesday, August 12, 2014 - ATIACHMENT3 Action: Council Member Barneich moved to adopt a Resolution entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ESTABLISHING A "NO LJ UCK PARKING" ZONE ON CERTAIN AREAS OF BELL AND BENNETT STREETS". Council Member Costello sec~ndea, and the motion passed on the following. roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Barneich, Costello, Brown, Guthrie, Ferrara None None 8.j. Consideration of an Amendment to Consultant Sen( es Agreement with Omni- Means for On-Call Engineering Consultant Se ces Related to Traffic and Circulation. Recommended Action: Approve Amendment N . 3 to the Agreement with Omni-Means for on-call traffic and circulation engineering c sultant services. Staff responded to questions by Council Memb rown regarding the contract process. Action: Council Member Brown move o approve Amendment No. 3 to the Agreement with Omni-Means for on-call traffic and cir ation engineering consultant services. Council Member Barneich seconded, and the motio assed on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: None. Brown, Barnei , Costello, Guthrie, Ferrara None None 10. CO NUED BUSINESS Mayo errara declared a conflict of interest due to ownership of real property near the project, ste ed down from the dais and left the room. Mayor Pro Tern Guthrie took over as Presiding 10.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.a. - Page 35 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 Tem 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 Decision of e San Luis Obispo County Health Department, Thereby Approving the ol Plans Submitted by Best Western Casa Grande Inn. Community Development Director McClish presented the staff report and commended that the Council adopt a Resolution upholding an appeal of the decision of th an Luis Obispo County Health Department; thereby approving the swimming pool plans mitted by the Best Western Casa Grande Inn. Building Official Hurst explained the con ction that had taken place and the his interpretation of the Building Code. Curt Batson, Director of Environmental Health reP. enting the County Health Officer, explained reasons for the denial of the project. Ray Bunnell, owner of the-Best We Grande Inn, stated that he would remove boulders on either side of the wate Mayor Ferrara-'invit public comment. Speaking from the public was GaiL Lightfoot, stating that as a retired RN e felt that CPR could safely be administered. 1cial Hurst provided an interpretation of the relevant Code. Item 9.a. - Page 36 I . f I ! PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES "NOVEMBER 18, 2014 ATTACHMENT 4 regarding amending the Telecommul:\icafion Facilities Siting Requirements and amending Condition No. 8 to specify protection of the equipment ·cabinet. . Associate Planner Heffernan responded to question~ from the th~ proposed proJect. Russell Story/NSA repre_senting 'Verizon Wireless, responded to regarc;lir:Jg the proposed project. Vice Chai.r Sperow opened the public hearing, amf . on hearing no comments, she closed tbe public hearing. Action: Commissfoner Goss moved to tinue this matter td a date uncertain and directed staff ·to return with siting guidelines that i _ d~ s_mall cell facilities, more inf9rrnatioF1 regarding the ·cost associated with underground ulting and bollard specifications. C0mmis.sioner· George seconded, and the motion R sed on the following roll vote: ·AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Com · i?ioner Russom recused' himself from Item 8.b. due· to having a conflict of interest and st ed down from the dais. ' . 8.-b. CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14\"0.Q2, SPECIFIC Pl,.AN AMENDMENT 14-001, CONDJTIONAf-·usE PER:MIT CASE NO. 1·4-009, AND VESTING TENtAllVE TRACT MAP 14-001; SUBDIVISION OF TWO (~) COMMERCIAL PARCELS l~TO FORTY-ONE (41) RESJD!;NTiAL LOTS, ONE .(1) COMMON' AREA LOT, AND TWO ·(2). COMMERCIAL LOTS; LOCATION -· SOUTHWEST CORNER OF EAST GRAND AVENUE ANO SOUTH COURTLAND STREET; APPLICANTS MFI !-JMITED AND 'NKT COMMERCIAL; REPRESENTATIVE -RRM DESIGN GROUP Assistant Pla_n_ner Downing presented the staff report and recommended that the Planning Commission· review the proposed project and ,make a recommendation to the City· Cot:mGi!. Assistant Planner' bow11ilig and Director Mcclish responded to que.stions fr:om the Commission regarding, the .proposed project. Debbie Rudd representative, and Scott 'Martin, architect, RRM Design Group, presented the , proposed pr~ject to the· Cqmmission, Nick Tompkins, -owner/~ppligant, respondeg to qu~~tions from the Gornmission regarding the proposed project. Andy Mggano, appjicant, responded to .questions from the Commission regarding the costs of the proposed homes. Vice Chair Sperow open the public; hearing . .John Fowler,. CEO, ·Peoples1 Self Help Housing, referred to his written correspondence and sp0ke in· support of the propo.sed project. I Item 9.a. - Page 37 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES NOVE[VIBER. 18, 2014. PAGE3 LeAnn. Al<ins, Cornw.all Avenue, stated the project is beautiful, but not for this location; expressed concern regarding lack of revenue from the propo!:!ed 9gmmercial development; water; sustainability; the entry level vvork fon:;:e cannot afford the cost of the homes; and unsure if the proposed project should move forward. Brenda Go(o9ki, Strawberry Avenue, expressed concern with safety of foot traffic on Courtland Street and Courtland Street not peing wide e.nc~ugh for on-i?treet parking. John Mack, Loganberry, thanked the developer and the team for the proposed projec~. state.d he. is in support of the proposed commercia'I development but stated he -thought the residential needed some refinements· including, .driveways need sepc::tration; more parJ<ing is needed; driveway needs· to be aligned with 'the access across Courtland' Street; pedestrian circulation need$ 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. NiQk Tompkins and Andy Magano addressed concerns of the Commission. Individual -Commissioners provided tbe following: clirected staff and developer to take another look. at the driveways on Courtland Street; investigate r:oom for .on-street parking. on Caurtlanc! Street; look into a crosswalk on Courtland Street; check on ·sufficient lighting in -the housing development; indicated that internal p.edestrian walkways are a safety issue;. potentially· widen 'plaza and put jn and out in the :middle; and see if play structure in green area is feasible. Action: Commissioner Goss moved to continu.e tnis item to ~ date certain of December 2, 2014. c:ommissloner Sperow seconded, and tne. motion passed on the follbwing roll call vote~ AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Go·ss, Sperow, Keen, George None Hussom 9. NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEM None tO. NOTICE OF ADMINlSTRATIVE DECISIONS SINCE NOVEMB 11. COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS Commissioner George· asked that when the Commission s large projects to review can they get the packet ea·rlier. 12. STAFF 'COMMUNICATIONS. Community Developer Director Mc.Clish star · hat on an upcomin~ City Coun.cil agenda,, there is tentatively scheduled to be consideratio of an ~merge_nc~ water ordinance. · 13. ADJOURNMENT On motion by Commissioner as~. seconqeq by· Commi'ssioner George and unanimously carried, the meetinf1 adjollr at 9:·1 t p.m; ATTE$T: -1 Item 9.a. - Page 38 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DECEMBER 2, 2014 ATTACHMENTS Director McClish stated staff would like to amend the recommendation and continue to a date uncertain an ordinance adding Chapter 16.86 to Title 16 of the Arroyo Grande M icipal Code relating to performance standards for deemed approved alcoholic bevera mercial sales. Action: Commissioner Keen moved to continue this it o a date uncertain. Commissioner Sperow seconded, and the motion passed on th owing roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Keen, Sperow, Ge None None Commi · ner Russom recused himself from Item 8.b. due to having a conflict of interest and ed down from the dais. 8.b. -CONTINUED 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 addressed the Commission's concerns from the November 18th Planning Commission meeting and stated the Architectural Review Committee recommends 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, RRM Design Group, addressed the Commission's concerns from the November 18th Planning Commission meeting. Joshua Roberts, Project Civil Engineer, responded to questions from the Commission regarding the proposed project. Vice Chair Sperow opened the public hearing. Aaron Henkel, South Alpine Street, expressed the following concerns/comments: the ingress/egress is too close to the traffic signal; the applicant should issue a template for semi- trucks in and around without blocking· traffic; feels most traffic will exit on East Grand Avenue and drivers desiring to go west on East Grand Avenue will have to make a u-turn; the traffic lanes are narrow for the housing project; there is lack of parking for the residents and guests; and would like to see cross section at Courtland Street/East Grand Avenue to make sure it will fit everything . LeAnn Akins, Cornwall Avenue, stated she is against the project; feels people will buy homes for vacation homes; and indicated there are 30 vacant commercial buildings on East Grand Avenue. Item 9.a. - Page 39 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DECEMBER 2, 2014 Vice Chair Sperow closed the public hearing. PAGE3 Individual Commissioners provided the following: make sure delivery truck radius are correct; there should be a crosswalk for pedestrians walking on South Courtland Street; eliminate parking on Courtland up to East Grand Avenue; ensure use of LED lighting; in favor of alternative 2 with center driveway ingress and western driveway egress; the commercial property is very well designed; tenant improvements are expensive elsewhere on East Grand Avenue; in favor the of the plaza option; and concern with the amount of parking. Scott Martin, architect, RRM Design Group, stated the residential entrance may be moved to add additional guest parking. Action: Commissioner Sperow moved to adopt a resolution entitled '~RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING THE Cl COUNCIL ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARA T/ON AND APPROVE GEN L PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002, SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001; CONDIT/O L USE PERMIT 14-009, AND VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001; LOCA1i AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF EAST GRAND A VENUE AND SOUTH COUR1i ND STREET; APPLIED FOR BY MF/ LIMITED AND NKT COMMERCIAL" as modified to . elude a crosswalk across Courtland Street; use of LED lighting; and commercial driveway alte ative 2 be considered. Commissioner Keen seconded the motion. After Commission discussion, Commissioner Sperow amende he motion to include restricting commercial vehicles from exiting through the East Gran Avenue entrance. Commissioner George seconded the motion. The motion passed on th allowing roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Sperow, George, Keen None· Russom 9. NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEM N e 10. NOTICE OF ADMINISTRAT E DECISIONS SINCE NOVEMBER 18 2014 This is a notice of administr: ive decision for Minor Use Permits, including any approvals, denials or referrals by the ommunity Development Director. An administrative decision must be appealed or called u or review by the Planning Commission by a majority vote. Case No. TUP 14-027 Hopper Family Christmas Trees Address 1587 El Camino Real Description ActiQn Planner Christmas Tree Lot A H. King Item 9.a. - Page 40 Minutes: City Council Regular Meeting Tuesday,Dece111ber9,2014 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS ATTACHMENT 6 9.a. Consideration of Adoption of Ordinance Amending Chapter 3.46 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Relating to Exemptions and Vacation Rentals and Homestays. · Acting City Manager Malicoat presented the staff report and recommended th he Council , adopt an Ordinance amending Chapter 3.46 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal ode to provide that the same exemptions that apply to the Transient Occupancy Tax ap to Arroyo Grande Tourism Business Improvement District assessments and amend the finition of "lodging" to include vacation rentals and homestays. Staff responded to question rem Council. Mayor Hill opened the public hearing, and upon hearing no omments, he closed the public hearing. Council Member comments ensued in support of th proposed Ordinance, acknowledgment of the protest letters received; the benefits of the To ism Business Improvement District, and that the revenue collected benefits all lodging b messes. Council Member Harmon expressed concern about the protest letters, acknowl ged they were not present, and stated she would have liked to hear directly from the pe e who submitted protest letter if their position on the proposed Ordinance had changed. Action: Council Member Bro n moved to adopt an Ordinance entitled: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF E CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE AMENDING CHAPTER 3.46 OF THE ARROYO GRA E MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE TO.UR/SM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT D TR/CT LAW". Mayor Pro Tern Barneich seconded, and the motion passed on the followin oil call vote: Brown, Barneich, Guthrie, Hill Harmon None 9.b. 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. Assistant Planner Downing presented the staff report and recommended that the 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. Staff responded to questions regarding the history of the project; clarification regarding the General Plan Amendment; allowable uses on the. site; additional traffic on S. Courtland; commercial traffic; fire department approval; water use and impacts; development impact fees; Item 9.a. - Page 41 Minutes: City Council Regular Meeting Tµesday,Decetnber9,2014 Page4 guest parking; pedestrian connection between the project and the Peoples' Self Help Housing project; and clarification regarding workforce versus attainable housing as defined in the Housing Element. Mayor Hill called for a break at 7:35 p.m. The Council reconvened at 7:45 p.m. Mayor Hill invited the applicants to address the Council. Debbie Rudd from RRM Design Group, representing the applicant, provided an overview of the project including an overview of the project timeline and public meetings held; site context; site plan; providing viable commercial along E. Grand Avenue; providing attainable housing; areas of concern expressed by the Architectural Review Committee, Traffic Commission, and Planning Commission that have been addressed in the project, including parking requirements and proposed alternatives; architectural renderings of the proposed project; E. Grand Avenue access to the commercial component; fencing design; Courtland Street Residential access; lighting throughout the development; adding an option for a play structure in the neighborhood green area; an overview of the project benefits; and requested additional direction from the Council regarding parking, Grand Avenue access, and the play structure. Nick Tompkins, applicant, provided a business and family background; projects in_ Arroyo Grande from 2007 to today, reviewed previous proposals submitted; stated the site is not viable for increased retail use or a large commercial center; stated this project could fill in existing commercial vacancies along E. Grand Avenue; requested approval of the proposed mixed use project, stating this project would have the lowest traffic impact for S. Courtland. Council questions ensued regarding delivery truck access; shortening the timeline required to build the commercial component;_ restaurant square footage; housing with deed restrictions requiring owner occupied units for first year to encourage home ownership; the proposed_ Homeowners Association and maintenance by a professional management company; hours for loading; additional parking spaces on S. Courtland; and street width as it relates to bike lanes, parking and a sidewalk. Mayor Hill opened the public hearing. Speaking from the public were Aaron Henkel, Arroyo Grande, who expressed concerns about delays in the development of the commercial component, width of bike lanes; and turning pockets; John Mack,_ Arroyo Grande, expressed concerns about lack of neighborhood involvement, reviewed prior concept plan for the site, favored commercial development on the site, provided suggestions for mixed uses in the Gateway District, opposed high density residential separated by a fence with commercial, lack of transition between the residential and commercial components, no pedestrian pathways, not enough parking, opposed architecture and style of residential component, lacks neighborhood services, and urged a continuance; Patty Welsh, Arroyo Grande, spoke in opposition to the proposed project stating it does not meet the General Plan, that it is a commercial corridor not residential, expressed concerned with fire and emergency access, traffic through Berry Gardens, parking, HOA fees, and fencing; LeAnn Akins, Arroyo Grande, expressed concerns about the residential component as it relates to attainability and affordability; Steve Hollister, spoke in support of the proposed project, stated it mitigates traffic impacts to B~rry Gardens with a smaller commercial component; Linda Drummond, spoke in opposition to the project expressing concerns with currerit traffic flow through Berry Gardens, generating more traffic -through the neighborho9d, water impacts, and traffic circulation; Chris Richardson, spoke in Item 9.a. - Page 42 Minutes: City Council Regular Meeting Tuesday,Dece111ber9,2014 Pages support of the proposed project; Michael Morrow, spoke in support of the proposed project; ·Shirley Gibson, spoke ~bout Mr. Tompkins and the Rooster Creek project, stating she respects his integrity and quality of his work. MayorHill called for a break at 9:20 p.m. The Council reconvened at 9:30 p.m. and resumed the public hearing Cheryl Schweitzerhof, Arroyo Grande, opposed·the play structure and expressed concern about parking constraints, lighting and architecture; Glenn Martin, supported development in concept, but expressed concerns about the residential component, favored more commercial, stated parking is an issue, and acknowledged that commercial generates more traffic but advocates more commercial on this site, and commented on delivery trucks; Beatrice Spencer, Arroyo Grande, expressed concern that of the 5 acre parcel, providing only 11,000 square feet of commercial is inadequate, the project should be 2/3 commercial and 1/3 residential as originally proposed, there is a lack of green space within the project, inquired where service trucks would park, and opposed the General Plan Amendment; April Mclaughlin, expressed concern about aesthetics and layout of the residential component, and said it should remain as commercial; Julie Tacker, ackn·owledged the quality developers and that they could do better, that the site should be used for commercial, there should be an Environmental Impact Report for economic impacts of the project, and that more public outreach is needed; Joshua Roberts, project Civil Engineer, responded to comments regarding truck delivery and turning movements, bike lanes, and that traffic stacking on S. Courtland would not exceed past the commercial driveway and "stay clear" zone; a Berry Gardens resident commented on traffic impacts, loss of revenue for the City, and the potential for developing the gateway to the City. Upon hearing no further comments, Mayor Hill clos~d the public hearing. Debbie Rudd, from RRM Design Group provided closing statements in support of the prqject. Nick Tompkins commented on the wish list for tenants and costs for new construction as it relates to costs for tenants. Council comments ensued as follows: Council Member Harmon supported the commercial component of the proposed project; did not support the residential component as proposed; there are too many exceptions for mitigation; noted there is a paradigm shift for this type of housing; and stated that this is one of the last vacant commercial parcels in the City. Council Member Brown acknowledged previous discussion with Mr. Tompkins about the project; acknowledged improved parking design; the commercial design is good; vertical mixed use is favorable and would like to see more; if commercial component is increased, traffic will increase in the neighborhood; more commercial at front of property; this is a mid block project, not a gateway project; need for transition and buffer between residential and commercial; does not support the proposed General Plan Amendment; there is a need for more connectivity and .· pathways within the project;. and could not support the project as proposed. Council Member Guthrie stated there is a lot of history with this parcel; spoke of efforts to create pedestrian friendly projects; previous projects were more intensive traffic generators; supported Item 9.a. - Page 43 Minutes: City Council Regular Meeting Tuesday,Dece111ber9,2014 _Page 6 the General Plan Amendment; commented on circulation, additional parking in the residential component, architecture, supported zero lot lines; commented on traffic, stated that the play structure should be a Homeowners Association decision; and supported the project as proposed. - Mayor Pro Tern Barneich commented on the history of p_ast proposals for the site; noted the six month review of this project; commented that the current General Plan requires all apartments or all commercial at this location; that the developer has put forth immense effort; that the City does not currently provide the type of residential as proposed in this project and the Housing Element encourages all types of housing; that the project is a good compromise; that pedestrian connectivity can be pursued; recommended that a three year timeline be required to build out the commercial component; supported the proposed architecture, noting that Grand Avenue is different than the Village; favored the driveway into the commercial component from Grand Avenue, and supported the project as proposed. Mayor Hill referred to the General Plan Amendment, noted this was one of the last commercial parcels in the City; favored buildings facing Grand Avenue, stated that more commercial is needed, commented that this project is a commercial veneer in front of high density residential; may have supported a smaller market project; expressed concern with traffic, noting that if there were more commercial, traffic would go toward Grand Avenue and not Berry Gardens; acknowledged the need to revitalize the commercial corridor in the City; that 60% of the site should be commercial with 40% residential; that more planning is needed to mitigate traffic and water impacts; that the negatives outweigh the positives and he could not support the project as proposed. Mayor Hill noted that Council policy requires a unanimous vote to continue the meeting past 11:00 p.m. Action: Council Member Brown moved to continue the meeting past 11 :00 p.m., Council Member Harmon seconded, and the motion passed by voice vote. ~ In response to concerns expressed by Mayor Pro Tern Barneich, discussion ensued regarding the desired time for ending the meeting. Action: Council Member Harmon moved to continue the meeting past 11 :00 p.m. and to end the meeting no later than 12:00 a.m. Council Member Brown seconded, and the motion passed unanimously by voice vote. Action: Council Member Brown moved to take tentative action to deny the project without prejudice and direct staff to bring back a ·supporting Resolution. Council Member Harmon seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Brown, Harmon, Hill Guthrie, Barneich None - _ 10. CONTINUED BUSINESS None. Item 9.a. - Page 44 Minutes: City Council Regular Meeting Tuesday, January 13, 2015 ATIACHMENT7 8.k. Consider_ation of Approval of Final Parcel Map 14-001, Subdividing One Parcel into Two (2) Parcels at 1450 Chilton Street; Applied for by Patrick Kimball and arlos Castaneda. Action: Approved Final Parcel Map 14-001; subdividing one (1) parcel · to two (2) parcels at 1450 Chilton Street; applied for by Patrick Kimball and Carlos , astaneda. 8.1. Consideration of Adoption of an Ordinance Approving the Fir Amendment to Development Agreement 09-002 to Modify the Legal Descri ion of the 5-Acre Property Located at the Northeast Corner of West Branch.,Street and Old Ranch Road (APN 007-011-056). / Action: Adopted an Ordinance entitled: "AN ORDINANCE/OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING HE FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 09-002 TO MODIF THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY". 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS 9.a. Consideration of Preliminary Appro al of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Projects for Year 2015. Associate Planner Heffernen presen (j the staff report and recommended that the Council provide preliminary approval of pr osed projects to be funded with the City's allocation of CDBG funds for the Year 2015. aff responded to questions from Council. Mayor Hill opened the pub· hearing, and upon hearing no comments, he closed the public hearing. Action: Council Me ber Brown moved to: 1) provide preliminary approval of proposed projects to be funded with e City's allocation of CDBG funds for the year 2015; and, 2) send a letter to the County Bo rd of Supervisors in support of CDBG funding for the Family Care Network. Mayor Pro 1 m Barneich seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll call vote: Brown, Barneich, Guthrie, Harmon, Hill None None 10. CONTINUED BUSINESS 1 O.a. Consideration of a Resolution Denying Without Prejudice General Plan Amendment 14-002; Specific Plan Amendment 14-001, Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14-001, and Conditional Use Permit 14-009; Location: Southwest Corner of East Grand Avenue and South Courtland Street; Applicants -MFI Limited and NKT Commercial; Representative -RRM Design Group. Recommended Action: Adopt a Resolution denying without prejudice General Plan Amendment 14-002; Specific Plan Amendment 14-001, Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14- 001, and Conditional Use Permit 14-009. Brief Council comments ensued regarding the proposed project review at the December gth meeting, alternatives identified for Council consideration in the current staff report, and Item 9.a. - Page 45 Minutes: City Council Regular Meeting Tuesday,January13,2015 Pages continuing the item to a date uncertain to allow the applicant to submit a revised project description. Action: Council Member Brown moved to .approve Alternative No. 4 to not adopt the Resolution, and to request concurrence from the applicant to reopen the public hearing for a future date after providing adequate notice. Mayor Hill seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Brown, Hill, Guthrie, Harmon, Barneich None None 1 O.b. Consideration of Adoption of a Policy to Have a Moment of Silence or a Moment of Reflection at the Beginning of City Council Meetings. Assistant City Attorney Hirsch presented the staff report and recommended that the Coun · consider the adoption of a policy of having a moment of silence or a moment of reflec ·on instead of an invocation at the beginning of City Council meetings. Mayor Hill invited public comment. Speaking from the public were Ron Dee, Harvest urch, in support of continuing the invocation; Linda Osty, Arroyo Grande, in support of c tinuing the invocation; Randy Ouimette, St. John's Lutheran Church, in support of ontinuing the invocation; Greg Steinberger, Arroyo Grande, in support of continuing the · vocation; David Leidner, Atheist United of San Luis Obispo, in opposition to continuing t invocation; Pastor Wayne Riddering, Peace Lutheran Church, in support of continuing the i ocation; Paul Rinzler, Atheist United, in opposition of continuing the invocation; LeAnn ins, Arroyo Grande, in support of continuing the invocation; Dan Feldman, spoke re rding traditions vs. policy regarding the invocation; Joseph Scott, James Way, spoke · support of continuing the invocation; Mike Rice, in support of continuing the invoc on; Paul Jones, in support of continuing the invocation; Robin Rinzler, in opposition of ontinuing the invocation; and Kim McGrew, Atheist United, in opposition of continuing th invocation. Upon hearing no further comments, Mayor Hill closed the public comment peri . Action: Cquncil Member Guthrie moved to dir t staff to change the agenda to have a moment of reflection on all future agendas. Mayor o Tern Barneich seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 10.c. Guthrie, Barneich Brown, Harmo None of Agreement with Regional Government Services for Interim City rvices. anager Malicoat presented the staff report and recommended that the Council agreement with Regional Government Services to provide Interim City Manager yor Hill invited public comment. No public comments were received. Item 9.a. - Page 46 Minutes: City Council Regular Meeting Tuesday, February 10, 2015 AT iACHMF.NT 8 Action: Council Member Brown moved to appoint Gregory King to the Parks and Recreation Commission. Mayor Hill seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll call vote· AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Brown, Hill, Guthrie, Harmon, Barneich None None 11.b. Presentation on Southern California Gas Company Pipej.i e Safety Enhancement Project and Consideration of a Waiver of the Five ~ar Pavement Trench Cut Prohibition. Public Works Director English presented the staff repo and recommended that the Council receive and comment on a presentation from Souther California Gas Company staff about the proposed Pipeline Safety Enhancement project; an approve a waiver of the Five Year Trench Cut Prohibition on new pavement for sections of est Branch Street and El Camino Real. Tim Mahoney, Public Affairs Manager, M Holden, Project Manager, and Olga Quinones, Community Education and Outreach Ma ger, representing Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas), provided a presentation the Pipeline Safety Project in which SoCalGas will be pressure testing or replacing pipeli s at various locations in Arroyo Grande. They explained that customers would be notifie via a public outreach campaign when pressure testing or replacement activity is coming their neighborhood and other efforts to minimize impacts on the community. The Pipeline afety Project is scheduled to begin in early 2015 and is expected to take 10 to 12 weeks. St and SoCalGas representatives then responded to questions from Council. ic comment. No public comments were received. Action: Coun · Member Barneich moved to approve a waiver of the Five Year Trench Cut Prohibition o ew pavement for sections of West Branch Street and El Camino Real. Council Member Br seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll call vote: Barneich, Brown, Harmon, Guthrie, Hill None None 11.c. Consideration of a Memorandum of Understanding with NKT Commercial Regarding Development of the Vacant Lot at the Southwest Corner of East Grand Avenue and South Courtland Street. Assistant Planner Downing presented the staff report and recommended that the Council approve a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with NKT Commercial regarding negotiating a Development Agreement for the development of a mixed use project on the vacant lot at the southwest corner of East Grand Avenue and South Courtland . Street and provide general direction to staff and the developer. Council questions of staff and the applicant ensued regarding the proposed alternatives listed in the MOU. Item 9.a. - Page 47 Minut~s: City Council Regular Meeting Tuesday, February 10, 2015 Page4 Mayor Hill invited public comment. Speaking from the public was John Mack, Arroyo Grande, in support of Alternative 1 ; and Michael Morrow, Arroyo Grande, in support of the proposed MOU and Alternative 2. No further public comments were received. Council comments ensued in support of the MOU containing both Alternatives, acknowledgement that this area of the City contains commercial uses; clarification that any future project applications would still need to go through the application, planning, and environmental review process; that flexibility is needed in both alternatives; that Alternative 1 is more in line with the General Plan; Alternative 2 seems vague and is similar to the prior proposal for the site; some opposition was expressed regarding high density residential on the site; development of the site is essential for economic development of the City; that a small segment of vertical mixed use on the site is desired; concern regarding traffic if a future proposal contains all commercial use; that alternative housing options are needed in the City; and that a project on this site would encourage revitalization of the rest of Grand Avenue. Action: Council Member Brown moved to approve a Memorandum of Understanding with NKT Commercial regarding negotiating a Development Agreement for the development of a mixed use project on the vacant lot at the southwest corner of East Grand . Avenue and South Courtland Street. Council Member Harmon seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Brown, Harmon, Guthrie, Barneich, Hill None None Mayor Hill called for a break at 7:55 p.m. The Council reconvened at 8:05 p.m. 11.d. Status Update and Consideration for Short Tenn and Long Tenn Ope~m Street Park Off-Leash Dog Park. L..__ "-- Interim City Manager McFall presented the staff report and recommen~ that the Council: 1) Direct s~aff to either: 1) Keep the Elm Street Dog Park open using c~ract staff to perform basic maintenance functions; or 2) Close the Dog Park until a determi!JatiOn is made on the long term operation of the Dog Park; 2) Approve an appropriation of $7~00 for maintenance costs if the · Council directs to keep the Dog Park open; and 3) Ref~A6 evaluation of long term alternatives for the on-going maintenance and operation of t~og Park to the Parks and Recreation Commission. Staff then responded to questions fr m Council. Mayor Hill invited public comment. Spea · g from the public were Ann Stalcup, Pismo Beach, expressed concern about donated fun for operation and maintenance of the park, that she is willing to volunteer at the Park, th ed those who served on Five Cities Dog Park Association Board, hoped the park would r ain open, and that the donations should remain with the park to support it; Patricia Willi s, expressed concern with large dogs using the small dog park area; Patty Welsh, Ar.. yo Grande, expressed concerned with donated funds for park improvements and r ested staff_coritact the Association to request those funds be provided to the City; Jan Sea , Arroyo Grande, expressed concerned with the current wood chips, broken glass in the I e dog area, big dogs in the small dog area, and stated that the volunteers want to continu orking; Beatrice Spencer, Arroyo Grande, expressed concern about the perception of loss of volunteers and the desertion of the Association with no notice, suggested an online scheduler for volunteers, stated that donations to the Park were intended for renovations, and Item 9.a. - Page 48 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING REGARDING NEGOTIATION OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR MIXED USE PROJECT ATTACHMENT 9 THIS MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ("MOU") dated as of this Jo+h day of February, 2015, is by and between the City of Arroyo Grande ("City"), a municipal corporation, and NKT Commercial, LLC, a California limited liability company ("Property Owner") (each individually a "Party" and, collectively, the "Parties"), RECITALS WHEREAS, Property Owner is the owner of real property consisting of approximately 4.47 acres identified as Subarea 3 of the Berry Gardens Specific Plan located in the City of Arroyo Grande, State of California and legally described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (hereinafter referred to as the "Property"); and WHEREAS, Property Owner and _City desire to facilitate the development and construction of a mixed use (commercial and office/residential) project on the property (the "Project") in order to accomplish three shared important goals: 1) Provide NKT with sufficient flexibility to induce investment related to the Project; 2) Generate economic· revitalization of the Grand Avenue corridor through a high quality Gateway development project; and 3) Preserve the adjacent neighborhood's residential character; and WHEREAS, in furtherance of the Project, Property Owner and City desire to reach a Development Agreement in accordance with the provisions contained in California Government Code Sections 65864 et seq. and Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Section 16.16.150; and WHEREAS, prior to executing a Development Agreement, the Parties wish to enter into this non-binding MOU to set forth a framework for the parameters and terms to be negotiated. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is acknowledged, City and Property Owner agree as follows: Section 1. Recitals. The above recitals are hereby incorporated into the body of this MOU as though set forth in full herein. · Section 2. Preservation of City and Property Owner Discretion. By execution of this MOU, City is not committing itself to or agreeing to undertake any acts or activities requiring the subsequent independent exercise of authority or discretion of City or any body or department thereof. Property Owner is not committing itself to or agreeing to µndertake any acts or activities. Execution of this MOU is merely an agreement to enter 1 Item 9.a. - Page 49 into a period of good faith negotiations according to the terms hereof, reserving final discretions and approval by the City and Property Owner as to any Development Agreement, Project Entitlements (as defined below), and all necessary and required proceedi_ngs and decisions in connection therewith relating to the Project. Nothing in this MOU creates a binding.obligation, and no binding agreement will exist unless the Parties sign a final and definitive agreement. Each Party expressly acknowledges and agrees that this MOU creates no obligation on the part of any Party to: (i) enter into a Development Agreement; (ii) grant any approvals or authorizations required for the Project; (iii) agree to any specific terms or obligations; or (iv) proceed with the development of the Property. All of the terms set forth in this MOU are preliminary in nature and subject to approval by the City and Property Owner and memorialization in an executed Development Agreement. The Parties acknowledge that the Project may be revised as the environmental and planning processes proceed. In particular, the Parties further acknowledge the following statutory and local ordinance requirements which must be complied with in order for the Project to proceed: a. The provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq. ("CEQA"), including but not limited to project alternatives or mitigation measures, as well as the alternative of not going forward with the Project; b. The provisions of Government Code Sections 65864 et seq. and Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Section 16.16.150 relating to the approval of development agreements, including the requirement for public hearings and requiring that certain findings be made; c. The provisions of Government Code Sections 65300 et seq. and Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Section 16.16.020 relating to the approval of general plan amendments. d. The provisions of Government Code Sections 65450 et seq. and Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Section 16.16.030 relating to the approval of specific plan amendments. e. The provisions of Government Code Sections 66410 et seq. and Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Section 16.20.10 et seq. relating to divisions of land. f. The provisions of Government Code Sections 65901 and Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Section 16.16.050 relating to conditional use permits. Section 3. Good Faith Negotiation of a Development Agreement. During the term of this MOU, Property Owner and City shall negotiate in good faith the terms and conditions of the Development Agreement, subject to the retained discretion described in Section 2, above. Any such Development Agreement resulting from negotiations 2 Item 9.a. - Page 50 hereunder shall only become effective after, and if, the Development Agreement has been considered and approved by the City in accordance with Government Code Sections 65864 et seq. and Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Section 16.16.150 and approved by Property Owner. If such Development Agreement is approved and executed by City and Property Owner, it shall thereafter govern the rights and obligations of the Parties with respect to the Project. Best efforts will be exercised by both the City and Property Owner to complete the referenced Development Agreement within 60 days of the adoption of this MOU. It is contemplated that the Development Agreement will include the following terms: a. Term. The term of the Development Agreement will be negotiated but in no event shall the term be for a period less than 3 years, and it shall also include provisions to comply with the requirement in Government Code Section 65865.1 relating to periodic review of the Development Agreement. b. Project Development. The Development Agreement will include the specifics regarding the Project that Property Owner would agree to develop and construct. Alternative 1 is expected to include the following: (1) No less than 70% of the land area will be developed with commercial uses and supporting parking with parking not less than required by the City municipal code, including allowable reductions, and no more than 30% of the land area will be developed with high density residential units, continuing care retirement community 'units, (or similar assisted living facilities) and supporting parking, either with apartments for rent, assisted living units for hire or rental, or residential units for sale with a density of no less than 20 units per acre; (2) Any stand alone office or residential/retirement or assisted living development will be at the rear of the Project, away from East Grand Avenue, and may only commence after building construction has commenced on the front portion of the Project and after all public improvements that are the responsibility of the Property Owner have been completed; (3) Commercial building square footage is estimated to be approximately 55,000 square feet if the Project is entirely commercial, and in no case less than 38,500 square feet; (4) No individual buildings may exceed 40,000 square feet; (5) Commercial buildings may include office, including medical use, and other commercial uses identified in the City municipal code; however, the office use must be located behind and/or above retail and may not exceed 55% of the land area; 3 Item 9.a. - Page 51 (6) No less than two retail commercial buildings shall be located on East Grand Avenue; (7) Vertical mixed use is strongly encouraged but not a requirement of the Project; (8) The Project architecture will be consistent with the Berry Gardens Specific Plan, the Design Guidelines and Standards for Mixed-Use Districts, and the East Grand Avenue Enhancement Plan, or as agreed to by the City and Property Owner. Alternative 2 is expected to consist of the project that was reviewed by City Council o.n December 9, 2014, as modified by a minimum of 5,000 s.f. of additional commercial or office space and a corresponding reduction of area devoted to single family detached housing, or continuing care retirement community units, (or similar assisted living facilities) and supporting parking. It is recognized and acknowledged that the Project descriptions contained in this MOU are not complete at this point. The Development Agreement shall include provisions relating to the density and intensity of use, maximum height and size of proposed buildings which shall be consistent with this MOU, a plan of development and provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes. c. Citv Approvals. The Project is anticipated to require the following review: Staff Advi.sory Committee, Architectural Review Committee, Traffic Commission, Planning Commission and City Council. The Project is anticipated to require the following approvals and entitlements: .Mitigated Negative Declaration, Specific Plan Amendment, Vesting Tentative Tract Map and Conditional Use Permit. d. Project Public Improvement Requirements. Anticipated improvements to streets and the intersection will be limited to the improvements contained in the prior conditions of approval for the MH1 and NKT project. e. Development Impact Fees and Reimbursement for Costs incurred by the City. The timing of payment of applicable development impact fees shall occur following entitlement at the time of issuance of a permit for construction activities on the site, as permitted in the City municipal code. In addition, a Specific Plan Amendment will be required. Property Owner agrees to pay the costs incurred by the City in preparing the revised Specific Plan. Section 4. Notices. To be effective, all notices, requests, demands, and other communications required or permitted under this MOU shall be in writing and shall be delivered either in person or by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested. Notice is deemed effective on delivery if served personally on the Party to whom notice 4 Item 9.a. - Page 52 is to be given and delivery is confirmed by a receipt. Notice is deemed effective on the second day after mailing if mailed to the Party to whom notice is to be given, by first class mail, registered or certified, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, and properly addressed as set forth below. Any correctly addressed notice that is refused, unclaimed, or undeliverable because of an act or omission of the Party to be notified shall be deemed effective as of the first date that said notice was refused, unclaimed, or deemed undeliverable by the postal authorities. The addresses for purposes of giving notice are as set forth below but each Party may change its address by written notice in accordance with this paragraph. If to Property Owner: lfto CITY: NKT Commercial, LLC Attn: Nicholas Tompkins 684 Higuera Suite B San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93401 City of Arroyo Grande Attn: City Manager 300 E. Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Section 5. Authorizations. All officers and individuals executing this and other documents on behalf of the respective Parties do hereby certify and warrant that they have the capacity and have been duly authorized to so execute said documents on behalf of the entity so indicated. Section 6. Headings and Captions. The captions and headings of this MOU are inserted for convenience only and shall not be deemed a part of this MOU and shall not be used in interpreting this MOU or in determining any of the rights or obligations of the Parties. Section 7. Severability. If any term, provision, covenant, or condition of this MOU shall be or become illegal, invalid, null, void, unenforceable, or against public policy, in whole or in part, or shall be held by any court of competent jurisdiction to be illegal, invalid, null, or void, or against public policy, the term, provision, covenant, or condition shall be deemed severable, and the remaining provisions of this MOU shall remain in full force and effect and shall not be affected, impaired, or invalidated. The term, provision, covenant, or condition that is so invalidated, voided, or held to be unenforceable shall be modified or changed by the Parties to the extent possible to carry out the intentions and directives set forth in this MOU. Section 8. Counterpart Execution. This MOU may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. Section 9. Entire Agreement. This MOU constitutes the final, complete, and exclusive statement of the terms of the MOU between the Parties pertaining to the MOU and 5 Item 9.a. - Page 53 supersedes all prior and contemporaneous agreements, promises, representations, warranties, understandings, or undertakings by either of the Parties, either oral or written, of any character or nature. No Party has been induced to enter into this MOU, nor is any Party relying on, any representation or warranty outside those expressly set forth herein. Section 10. Ambiguities. Each Party and its counsel have participated fully in the preparation, review and revision of this MOU. Any rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting Party shall not apply in interpreting this MOU. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Memorandum of Understanding which shall be deemed effective as of the first date set forth above. CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE .. Iv-rt---~--> NKT COMMERCIAL, LLC fiHIL:- ?YOR MANAGING MEMBER ATTEST: ~'--.-Pl;L,~ ·(o~~ORE, _: -----, .. , ' - B B McFALL INTERIM CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: TID~.~r CITY ATTORNEY 6 Item 9.a. - Page 54 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 18, 2015 ATTACHMENT 10 THE BURKE FAMILY TRUST". Commissioner Fowler-Payne seconded and the motion passed o the following roll call vote: 8.a. CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002, SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001, AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 15-002; SUBDIVISION OF TWO (2) COMMERCIAL PARCELS INTO THIRTY-EIGHT (38) RESIDENTIAL LOTS, ONE (1) COMMON AREA LOT, AND THREE (3) COMMERCIAL LOTS; LOCATION -SOUTHWEST CORNER OF EAST GRAND AVENUE AND SOUTH COURTLAND STREET; APPLICANT -NKT COMMERCIAL; REPRESENTATIVE -RRM DESIGN GROUP Associate Planner Downing presented the staff report and recommended that the Planning Commission review the proposed project and adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council consider the Mitigated Negative Declaration; Adopt a resolution certifying the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approving General Plan Amendment 14-002, Specific Plan Amendment 14-001, Conditional Use Permit 14-009, and Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14-001 and adopt an ordinance approving Development Agreement 15-002. Associate Planner Downing and Community Development Director McClish responded to questions from the Commission on the proposed project. Debbie Rudd, RRM Design Group, applicant representative, presented the proposed project. Nick Tompkins, applicant, stated that the macro market for retail has changed and responded to questions from the Commission. Darin Cabral and Scott Martin, RRM Design Group, applicant representatives, responded to question/concerns from the Commission. Chair George opened the public hearing. The following people spoke against the proposed project and provided the following comments: • Patty Welsh, Pradera Court, stated the print was too small to read on the posted signs; would like the item to be continued to a date when there is a full Commission; traffic will increase; and asked that the proposed project be denied. • April Mclaughlin, questioned where delivery trucks will go; doesn't think delivery trucks can make the turn from Courtland; and concern with parking. • Beatrice Spencer, Collado Corte, presented to the Commission a copy of an excerpt from Berry Gardens Specific Plan, stated the commercial use has decreased; concerned with large trucks; stated parking will be a problem; and the proposal is too dense. • Aaron Henkel, South Alpine, stated parking is a problem; would like to see street cross sections; does not see template for trucks; worried about the developer completing the commercial site; did not see a traffic study; and would like to see this item continued to get clarification. Item 9.a. - Page 55 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 18, 2015 PAGE4 • Linda Drummy, Blackberry, concern with traffic circulation; suggested a designated right hand turn lane from Courtland onto East Grand Avenue; concern with creating low end/low rent housing; not appropriate for this neighborhood; does not want a fast food restaurant or smoke shop; suggested a water moratorium; and asked that the proposed project be denied. • Mary Beedle, Blackberry Avenue, the homes do not fit the extension of Berry Gardens; stated the homes are not appropriate for young families; perimeter elevations are unattractive; does not want to see the high density homes in this area; and she does not have a problem with the commercial. • Lloyd Gilmore expressed his concern with density and vehicle parking. Additional comments from the public included: Jim Hill, referred to the February 10, 2015 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), between the City and NKT Commercial, LLC, and made a point of clarification regarding the amount of commercial development under one of the options. Terry Berkeley, Cedar Street, expressed his concern with traffic flow of the project; need turn lanes; need street parking on the north side; bike lanes are required on the right side of the road, either eliminate or have on both sides of the road; vehicles will park in the bike lane; concern with commercial traffic; concern with oversize of delivery trucks; and Courtland Street should be posted "No Commercial" traffic south of the project. Michael Omorrow, Raspberry Avenue, stated traffic has increased on Courtland Street; objects large trucks from commercial; he is in favor of the proposed changes; and supports the project. Nick Tompkins, applicant, stated he knows some functional specifics need to be worked out; explained financial reasons why if more commercial is wanted the project will not work; this is the lowest impact for traffic; would install all the improvements starting with East Grand Avenue first; and added he is committed to making sure the commercial is done. Hearing no further comments, Chair George closed the public hearing. Commissioner Mack stated he likes the commercial architecture; the massing of the building; the Commission has to make sure there is parking; did not see on site queuing in the Omni-Means Traffic Study; parking is necessary for a successful commercial restaurant; concern with residential with commercial wrapped around it; handicap needs to be accommodated; and need to conform to the enhancement plan. [On September 1, 2015, the Commission voted unanimously (John Keen absent) to amend the August 18, 2015 minutes to include the following comments by Commissioner Mack] Commercial parking lot is way under parked for the uses proposed. Minimum of 120 parking stalls to take in consideration peak times for the restaurant and employee parking. Vehicle circulation needs to stay contained in the project parking lot, if project is phased the commercial component needs to be constructed first prior to any single family homes. Residential component accessible guest stalls to each unit, units need adequate setback from a private street for pedestrian walking and community services such as trash pickup to not occur in a fire lane. Looking for site sections to show the existing commercial and proposed commercial buildings in the back ground of the Item 9.a. - Page 56 PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 5 MINUTES AUGUST 18, 2015 residential units to see a true representation of the proposed project. The proposed ratio of residential acreage to commercial is too great and should be reversed. Findings: That the proposed added language for LU5-10.1 -in not acceptable and leads to the deterioration of our future and existing commercial core. "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. Commissioner Fowler-Payne suggested a senior housing project and said parking is an issue. Commissioner Martin stated he likes the commercial; concern with parking; the parking requirements and standards in the Municipal Code are inadequate; the density of residential is not functional; and not enough parking for the residential; cannot support the project as it is, could support 28 units instead of 38 units; trash pick up needs to be addressed; and design details need to be worked out. Commissioner George stated she would like to see more commercial like Ember and Figueroa Mountain; the City is growing in commercial; concern about trucks; commercial vehicles; the City needs housing; questioned if the proposed homes are affordable; would like to see less than the 38 units and would like to see Option One and Two from the MOU. Action: Commissioner Martin moved to deny the resolution entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A MIT/GA TED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 15-002, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002, SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009, AND VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001; LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF EAST GRAND AVENUE AND SOUTH COURTLAND STREET; APPLIED FOR BY NKT COMMERCIAL" due to lack of residential parking, the parking needs to be more evenly distributed; circulation, queuing at the corner, the lack of turn lanes, location of trash pickup, and would like to review and comment on the wall designs. Commissioner Mack seconded and the motion passed on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Martin, Mack, Fowler-Payne, George None Keen 9. NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEM None 10. NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS SINCE AUGUST 4, 2015 This is a notice of administrative decision for Minor Use Permits, includin -approvals, denials or referrals by the Community Development Director. An administrat' ecision must be appealed or called u for review b the Plannin Commission b ote. Case No. Applicant Description Action Planner TUP 15-013 St Patrick School Use of parking lot for annual A S. Anderson St. Patrick School BBQ TUP 15-014 Temporary placement and use A S. Anderson of a tent 30' x 50' for annual labor da sale ssioner Payne reported she attended ARC and HRC meetings. Item 9.a. - Page 57 ATIACHMENT 11 Berry Gard.ens Spedfic Plan Amendment -Subareas 3a and 3b 07.15.15 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 Subareas 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 Suharea 3a-Mixed-Use Commercial Subarea 3a provides for mixed-use commercial/retail and/or office development of approximately 1.24 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 (South Courtland Street): Shall be a minimum of 0-5'. The street yard is that side which is closest to South Courtland Street (reference Exhibit 3-4.B}. 3. Minimum Interior Side Yard Setback (City Limit Line and Subarea 3b): Shall be a minimum of O- S'. The interior side yard is that side which is closest to the City Limit Line and Subarea 3b (reference Exhibit 3-4.B}. 4. Minimum Rear Yard Setback (along Subarea 3b): The primary commercial buildings shall be a minimum of 0-5'. 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'. 1 Item 9.a. - Page 58 8. Parking: Shall be provided at a minimum ratio of one (1) space for every 250 square-feet of commercial building area, with one (1) designated parking space required for each residential unit, and one (1) shared parking space for each residential unit. The shared spaces will be available for use by 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/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 entry-level/workforce housing residential development of approximately 3.12 acres. All development within Subarea 3b shall conform to the following standards: 1. Maximum Density: Shall be a maximum of 20 units per acre. 2. Minimum Lot Size: Shall be 2,000 square-feet. No subdivision resulting in lots less than this minimum size shall be allowed. 3. Project Boundary Setbacks: a. Minimum Project Front Yard Setback (South Courtland Street): Shall be a minimum of 10'. The front yard is that side which is closest to South 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). 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). 4. Interior Yard Setbacks: a. Courtyard/common open space area setback: Shall be a minimum of 8' b. Side yard setbacks: Shall be a minimum of 4' c. Interior private drive setback: Shall be a minimum of 2' 2 Item 9.a. - Page 59 5. Maximum Lot Coverage: Shall be 65%, inclusive of all enclosed structures. 6. Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR): Shall be 1.25, inclusive of total floor area. 7. Maximum Building Height: Shall be 35' or two (2) stories, whichever is less. Total height including any appurtenances shall not exceed 40'. 8. Parking: 2 spaces shall be provided per unit within an enclosed garage and guest spaces shall be provided at a minimum ratio of 0.5 per unit. Two of the guest parking spaces may be provided in driveways where feasible 9. Minimum Open Space for Subarea 3b: Shall be 35%. 10. Signage: Shall comply with Municipal Code Section 16.60.040-A, Subsections A.1 (Single-family neighborhood identification) and be subject to discretionary review and approval. 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 South 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. 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 South Courtland Street with connections to interior of the site. Pedestrian pathways shall be provided in Subarea 3b through the neighborhood green. Sidewalks are not required adjacent to the private drive. 5. South Courtland Street: The private access drive for Subarea 3b shall be aligned with the existing commercial development driveway across South Courtland Street. Development of each Subarea shall include widening of South Courtland Street to its ultimate width along that Subarea's frontage. The southwestern curb return at East Grand Avenue and South Courtland Street shall be rebuilt as a part of the South Courtland Street widening. 3 Item 9.a. - Page 60 6. Bicycle Lanes: Shall be provided on South Courtland Street along the project frontage. Street Trees and Landscaping Trees shall be provided along South 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 4 and 23-27) and/or along western edge of property (lots 17-23) to buffer from large wall expanses of existing buildings. Fencing located adjacent to commercial and/or along the western edge of the property shall be double sided. Perimeter fencing or walls along the East Grand Avenue and South Courtland Street frontages shall be limited to 3.5' in height unless the portion over 3.5', up to 6', is 75% light emitting, or combined with a raised planter. All fences and walls shall be subject to discretionary review. Sto:rm Drainage and Water Quality Fadlities 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 South Courtland Street to the Poplar Basin, which was designed and built to accommodate development of the Subareas. 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 Garden Neighborhood. 4 Item 9.a. - Page 61 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.a. - Page 62 Exhibit 3-4.A -Subareas 1 : 100 Item 9.a. - Page 63 Exhibit 3-4.B -Allowed Project Boundary Setbacks 1 : 100 Item 9.a. - Page 64 .g "P z p ATTACHMENT 12 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 Branch 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 Financial Services NP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP CUP Medical Services -doctor's of-NP MUP MUP/ MUP MUP/ MUP MUP p CUP flee PED PED Medical Services -clinic, lab, NP MUP CUP/ MUP MUP/ MUP MUP MUP CUP urgent care PED CUP/ I PED Medical -hospital NP NP NP NP NP NP NP CUP NP Item 9.a. - Page 65 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 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 tal 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 -Major repair or body work Automotive and vehicle ser-MUP MUP NP NP NP NP MUP NP NP 16.52.210 vices -minor maintenance or repair including tire services Catering 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 Drive-through services NP CUP NP CUP NP NP CUP CUP cup Equipment rental MUP CUP NP CUP NP NP CUP CUP NP Kennel, animal boarding CUP CUP NP CUP NP NP CUP CUP NP 16.52.100 Lodging-Bed & breakfast inn NP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP CUP 16.52.080 NP Item 9.a. - Page 66 VMU VCD D-2.11 AUowed Land Uses and Pennit 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 Lodging-Hotel or motel NP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP NP See General Plan Pol- icyLU7-4 Lodging-Recreational Vehicle NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP (RV) Park Maintenance services-client site MUP MUP NP MUP NP MUP MUP MUP NP services Mortuary, funeral home CUP NP NP NP NP NP NP CUP NP Personal services NP MUP MUP· MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP Personal services-Restricted NP CUP NP NP NP NP CUP NP NP 16.52.030 Public safety facility MUP p MUP/ p p p p p p PED Repair service-Equipment, MUP MUP NP CUP CUP MUP MUP NP NP large appliances, etc. Social services organization NP CUP NP CUP CUP/ MUP CUP MUP NP PED Tele-communication facilities CDP MUP NP CUP CUP CUP MUP CUP CUP (commercial) Vacation rentals and homestays NP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP NP 16.52.230 16.52.240 C. INDUSTRY, MANUFAC- TURING AND PROCESS- ING, WHOLESALING, STORAGE Agricultural product processing CUP CUP NP CUP NP NP NP NP NP 16.52.095 Construction yard MUP NP NP NP NP MUP NP NP NP 16.52.095 Drive-thru services NP CUP NP CUP NP NP CUP CUP CUP Furniture and fixtures manu-MUP NP NP NP NP MUP NP NP NP 16.52.095 facturing, cabinet shop Industrial research and devel-CUP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP 16.52.095 opment Item 9.a. - Page 67 "' :g z p "' ·"' -;> :;;: Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements-LAND USE Laboratory -Medical, analyti- cal, research and development Manufacturing or Processing - Light Printing and publishing Recycling -scrap and disman- tling yard Recycling -Small collection facility Storage -Outdoor Storage (mini -storage) Wholesaling and distribution Winery D. RETAIL TRADE Accessory retail uses Adult business Alcoholic beverage sales Artisan shop Auto, vehicle and heavy equip- ment sales & rental Auto, vehicle parts sales w/ in- stallation services Auto, vehicle parts sales with- out installation services IMU CUP MUP MUP CUP CUP MUP 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 MUP NP NP NP NP NP MUP MUP/ MUP PED MUP 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 GMU FOMU HMU NP NP CUP NP NP CUP CUP CUP MUP NP NP NP MUP/ MUP MUP PED NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP CUP NP NP CUP p p p NP NP NP CUP CUP CUP MUP MUP MUP NP NP MUP - NP NP MUP CUP/ CUP/ MUP PED PED OMU1 D-2.20 RC2 MUP NP NP NP MUP NP NP NP MUP MUP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP p p NP NP CUP CUP MUP CUP/ PED NP NP NP CUP NP CUP Specific Use Standards and other references 16.52.095 16.52.095 16.52.095 16.52.095 16.52.095 16.52.095 16.52.095 16.52.095 16.52.095 Subject to Business License clearance Subject to Section 16.52.030 for location parameters and devel- opment standards 16.52.060 16.52.070 PED=Use not allowed within 200 feet of E. Grand Avenue Front- age -0\ L.> 0\ 0 UJ 0 Item 9.a. - Page 68 Vt !.J.) 00 Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements-LAND USE Building and landscape materi- als sales-indoor Convenience store Drive-through retail Extended hour retail Farm supply and feed store Farmers market Formula Business Fuel dealer (propane for home and farm use) Gas station General retail-5,000 sf or less General retail -5,001 to 19,999 sf General retail -20,000 sf to 102,500 sf General Retail-Restricted TMU IMU D-2.11 MUP MUP CUP MUP NP CUP CUP MUP MUP CUP CUP MUP Permit Permit required required as identi-as identi- lied by lied by underly-underly- ingland ingland use use CUP CUP CUP CUP NP MUP NP CUP NP MUP CUP NP VMU VCD D-2.11 HCO HCO D-2.4 D-2.4 GMU CUP CUP MUP/ PED MUP MUP MUP NP NP CUF3 MUP MUP MUP NP CUP NP MUP MUP CUP NP NP For Permit D-2.4 required as identi- lied by underly- ingland use NP NP NP NP NP NP p p p MUP CUP MUP NP NP CUP NP NP NP OMU1 Specific Use Standards FOMU HMU D-2.20 RC2 and other references MUP MUP NP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP NP CUP CUP CUP 16.52.090 LU7-4 MUP MUP MUP MUP NP CUP NP CUP CUP MUP CUP CUP Permit Permit Permit Permit required required required required as identi-as identi-as identi-as identi- fled by fled by fled by lied by underly-underly-underly-underly- ingland ingland ingland ing land use use use use NP CUP NP NP NP CUP NP NP 16.52.170 p MUP MUP p Section 8.38 P-Subject to Business License clearance MUP MUP CUP p Section 8.38 P-Subject to Business License clearance CUP CUP NP p Note: Maximum Building Size per/dis- trict, Section 16.52.220 and Section 8.38 NP CUP NP NP Subject to Section 16.52.030 for location parameters and devel- opment standards Item 9.a. - Page 69 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 MUP 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 Building Size per/dis- trict and Section 16.52.220 Outdoor retail sales and activi-MUP MUP 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 MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP NP Shopping 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, private meeting NP MUP MUP CUP MUP/ MUP MUP CUP NP hall PED Commercial recreation 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 facility NP CUP CUP CUP MUP MUP CUP CUP CUP L1brruy, museum NP CUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP NP Park, playground NP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP NP Item 9.a. - Page 70 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 Religious facility 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 -Specialized education/ MUP MUP CUP/ CUP CUP/ CUP MUP CUP NP training PED PED Studio -art, dance martial arts, NP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP/ music, etc. PED Theater, auditorium NP NP CUP CUP CUP CUP NP CUP CUP F. RESIDENTIAL USES Assisted Living 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-family housing 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 required by Housing feet feet) Element is not re- quired on lots fronting E. Grand Ave., E. Branch Street or in HMU or !MU dis- tricts. Multi-family housing in a NP NP MUP/ MUP CUP/ CUP/ CUP CUP NP Minimum density mixed use project PED PED PED (75% of total density allowed by district) required by Housing Element is not re- quired on lots fronting E. Grand Ave., E. Branch Street or in HMU or !MU dis- tricts. Item 9.a. - Page 71 en .g .,, z p ..., -"" ,, :;;: VMU VCD D-2.11 Allowed Land Uses and Permit TMU HCO HCO Requirements-LAND USE IMU D-2.11 D-2.4 D-2.4 GMU FOMU Residential care facility, 6 or NP NP MUP/ MUP MUP/ MUP less clients PED PED Residential care facility, 7 or NP NP CUP/ CUP CUP/ CUP/ more clients PED -PED PED Single family residential within NP NP NP MUP NP NP a mixed use project 1 Requirements of this section supercede corresponding requirements in the PD 1.1 district. 2 Requirements of this section supercede corresponding requirements in the PD 1.1 district and PD 1.2 district. 3 Drive-through retail only allowed within shopping centers with three or more major tenants. OMU1 Specific Use Standards HMU D-2.20 RC2 and other references NP MVP NP NP CUP NP NP NP NP ....... O'I w O'I 0 w 0 Item 9.a. - Page 72 I • ATTACHMENT 13 Courtland and Grand Mixed Use Project Prepared for: City of Arroyo Grande Prepared by: omni·means ENG1NEEfUNG SOLUTIONS Item 9.a. - Page 73 COURTLAND AND GRAND MIXED USE PROJECT Prepared For: City Of Arroyo Grande 300-E. Branch Street Arroyo Grande, Ca 93420 Prepared By: Omni-Means, Ltd. 943 Reserve Drive, Suite 100 Roseville, Ca 95678 91 &-782-8688 JULY 2015 25-1275-30 R1923TIA002.docx Item 9.a. - Page 74 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 3 Existing Conditions ....................................................................................................................... 5 Existing Transportation System ........................................................................................... 5 Data Collection & Existing Traffic Volumes ................................................................ 6 Existing Pedestrian & Bicycle Facilities ............................................................................... 6 Existing Transit Services ..................................................................................................... 6 Traffic Analysis Parameters ....................................................................................... 7 Existing Traffic Operations ................................................................................................ 10 Project Description ...................................................................................................................... 13 Project Site Access ............................................................................................................ 14 Site Access Evaluation ............................................................................................. 15 Trip Generation & Distribution ........................................................................................... 15 Existing Plus Project ................................................................................................................... 17 Cumulative Conditions ................................................................................................................ 19 Cumulative No Project Traffic Volumes ............................................................................. 19 Cumulative Plus Project .............................................................................................................. 21 Project Impacts and Mitigations .................................................................................................. 24 Existing Plus Project Conditions .............................................................................. 24 Cumulative Conditions ............................................................................................. 24 Courtland and Grand Mix Use Pro1ect City of Arroyo Grande Pagei R1923TIA002.docx Item 9.a. - Page 75 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Project Location and Vicinity Map ............................. : .................................................... 4 Figure 2 -Existing Control and Lane Geometrics ....................................................................... 11 Figure 3 -Existing Traffic Volumes ............................................................................................. 12 Figure 4 -Trip Distribution .......................................................................................................... 16 Figure 5 -Existing Plus Project Volumes .................................................................................... 18 Figure 6 -Cumulative No Project Volumes ................................................................................. 20 Figure 7 -Cumulative Plus Project Volumes .............................................................................. 22 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: LOS Criteria and Definition For Intersections ................................................................. 8 Table 2: Existing Conc:Jitions: Intersection LOS ........................................................................... 10 Table 3: Project Trip Generation ................................................................................................. 15 Table 4: Existing Plus Project conditions: Intersection LOS ....................................................... 17 Table 5: Cumulative No Project Conditions: Intersection LOS ................................................... 19 Table 6: General Plan And Proposed Project Trip Comparison ................................................. 21 Table 7: Cumulative Plus Project Conditions: Intersection LOS ................................................. 23 Table 8: Cumulative Plus Project Conditions: Mitigated Intersection LOS ................................. 24 Project Site Plan Level of Service Worksheets Courtland and Grand Mix Use Project Ctty of Arroyo Grande APPENDIX Page 11 R1923TIA002.docx Item 9.a. - Page 76 Introduction 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 the proposed Courtland and Grand Mix Use Project (Project). The proposed project contains 15,600 square feet, four 650 square feet residential units above outdoor plaza, and 38 townhome residential units. Figure 1 illustrates the project location and vicinity map. The following scenarios are analyzed as a part of the TIAR, as established in the original Scope of Work: • Existing Condition • Existing Plus Project Condition • Cumulative No Project Condition • Cumulative Plus Project Condition The Existing conditions analyzes current traffic operations within the study area. Traffic counts were taken at all study locations in order to simulate typical weekday conditions during the AM and PM peak hours. The Existing Plus Project conditions builds upon the Existing conditions analysis by generating trips for the proposed project over the Existing intersections volumes. The Cumulative No Project conditions analyzes future traffic forecasts using the City of Arroyo Grande Travel Demand Model, assuming full build-out of the City's General Plan land uses and circulation network. The City's General Plan land use on the proposed project site is "Mixed Use" which allows for development of commercial uses and multi-family housing. The Cumulative Plus Project conditions analyzes buildout of the City's General Plan with the proposed project land uses substituted for the allowable development under the General Plan. Since the proposed project proposes single family housing, the project will require a General Plan amendment, and will result in a less intense mix of uses than allowed under the existing General Plan. Therefore, the Cumulative Plus Project condition will result in fewer new trips generated at the project site than under the Cumulative No Project analysis, which simulates buildout of allowable General Plan land uses. Ttfle of Report Client Page3 R1923TIA002.docx Item 9.a. - Page 77 ' . \ J l i 'I I '"{"'· j -r 1.1' I 1-I I ' I .I.. l :1 I ... ---· -1 I I I I ! \ ' I y .· f ./ rt\ Ji'ARROLL A VE '] I I ----1 11 i 1·· J l - \ r _/. .. I _J ; +-' TIIE PIKE --- FA//! OAKS AVE I ..... J I i_J J I , I Courtland and Grand Mixed Use Project Transportation Improvement Study f " / ·~ ./ \ \, \ Fi Item 9.a. - Page 78 Exusting 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 south of the City of San Luis Obispo, along the US 1901 coastal corridor. The City is 5.84 square miles in area and is at an elevation of 114 feet. The City is located contiguous with the incorporated areas of the City of Pismo Beach to the northwest and the City of Grover Beach to the west. Based on the data provided by Census 2010. population in the City has increase roughly 1,400 from 15,851 in 2000 to 17,252 in 2010, a 9% increase. The proposed project is located on the southwest corner of Courtland Street and E Grand Avenue. Existing Transportation System The following roadways provide primary circulation within the City for Arroyo Grande and in the vicinity of the propose project. US 101 is a major north-south freeway facility that traverses along coastal California. US 101 serves as the principal inter-regional auto and truck travel route that connects San Luis Obispo County (and other portions of the Central Coast_ with the San Francisco Bay Area to the north and the Los Angeles urban basin to the south. Within San Luis Obispo County, US 101 provides major connection between and through several cities. Through the "Five Cities" area of the San Luis Obispo County, US 101 represents a major recreational as well as commuter travel route and has a general four-lane divided freeway cross-section with 65 mph posted speed limits. Within the City of Arroyo Grande, US 101 forms full-access interchanges with Oak Park Boulevard, Brisco Road/Halcyon Road and Grand Avenue/Branch Street as well as direction interchange access at Traffic Way and Fair Oaks Avenue. El Camino Real is a two to three lane northeast-southwest arterial that operates as a frontage road on the southwest side to us 101. Oak Park Boulevard is a general five lane north-south street that runs along the northwestern City limit line, defining Arroyo Grande's boundary with the adjacent Cities of Grover Beach and Pismo Beach. Oak Park Boulevard forms a full-access interchange with US 101, and extends south of US 101 into the City of Grover Beach, approximately defining the City of Arroyo Grande's southwestern City limit line. North of the City of Arroyo Grande, Oak Park Boulevard forks into Old Oak Park Road, which extends north into County lands, and into Noyes Road which extends in a northeasterly direction to connect with SR 227. E Grand Avenue is a four to five lane road that runs in the east-west direction. E Grand Avenue starts at the City Limits and continues east until it connects to SR 227. Courtland Street is a north-south road that starts at Newport Avenue to the north and terminates at Ash Street to the south. Courtland Street is a two lane collector roadway. 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 City of Arroyo Grande Page 5 R1923TIA002.docx Item 9.a. - Page 79 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 Study Guidelines, whereby a study intersection is analyzed if 20 or more project-generated trips are projected to travel through it. Intersection counts for the AM and PM peak hour were conducted on Wednesday September 24, 2014. They were the following locations: - 1. Oak Park Boulevard & W Grand Avenue/E Grand Avenue 2. Courtland Street & E Grand Avenue 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 The AM peak hour is defined as the one continuous hour of peak traffic flow counted between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m., and the PM peak hour is defined as the one continuous hour of peak traffic flow counted between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. under typical weekday conditions. Existing Pedestrian & Bicycle Facilities The City of Arroyo Grande recently adopted the 2012 Bicycle & Trail Master Plan which includes proposed bicycle and pedestrian trails, as well as on-street bicycle facilities to complete the partial network already in place in the City and County. The plan encourages the use of walking and bicycling and recognizes three classes of bikeways: Class I Multi Use Path typically known as bike paths, Class I facilities are multi-use facilities that provide a completely separated right-of-way for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians with cross flows of motorized traffic minimized. Class II Bike Lane known as bike lanes, Class II facilities provide a striped and signed lane for one way bicycle travel on each side of a street or highway. The minimum width for bike lanes ranges between four and five feet depending upon the edge of roadway conditions (curbs). Bike lanes are demarcated by a six-inch white stripe, signage and pavement legends. Class Ill Bike Route known as bike routes, Class Ill facilities provide signs for shared use with motor vehicles within the same travel lane on a street or highway. Bike routes may be enhanced with warning or guide signs and shared lane marking pavement stencils. While Class Ill routes do not provide measures of separation, they have an important function in providing continuity to the bikeway network. , In the project vicinity, there are currently Class II Bike Lanes on E Grand Avenue, El Camino Real, and Oak Park Boulevard. A Class II Bike Lane will be added to Courtland Street to connect this project 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 R1923TIA002.docx Item 9.a. - Page 80 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. Route 10 is a regional transit route that is served by these three routes and a park and ride at Halcyon Road and El Camino Real. Traffic Analysis Parameters This TIAR provides a "planning level" evaluation of traffic condition, which is considered sufficient for CEQA/NEPA clearance purposes. The "planning level" evaluation incorporates appropriate heavy vehicle adjustment factors, peak-hour factors, and signal lost-time factors. LOS operations have been determined using HCM-2010 methodologies for determining intersection delay, incorporating the aforementioned factors. The following subsections outline the methodology and analysis parameters used to quantify traffic operations at study intersections. Intersection LOS Methodologies Levels of Service (LOS) have been calculated for all intersection control types using the methods documented in the Transportation Research Board Publication Highway Capacity Manual, 2010. Traffic operations have been quantified through the determination of "Level of Service" (LOS). Level of Service is a qualitative measure of traffic operating conditions, whereby a letter grade A through F is assigned to an intersection or roadway segment representing progressively worsening traffic conditions. For signalized intersections and All-Way-Stop- Controlled (AWSC) intersection, the intersection delays and LOS are average values for all intersection movements. For Two-Way-Stop-Controlled (TWSC) intersections, the intersection delays and LOS is representative of those for the worst-case movement. LOS definitions for different types of intersection controls are outlined in Table 1. Synchro 8 Modeling The Synchro Version 8 software suite by Trafficware has been used to implement the HCM- 2010 analysis methodologies. The peak hour capacity tables contained in this report present the intersection_ delay and LOS estimates as calculated using the Synchro software. Courtland and Grand Mix Use Project City of Arroyo Grande Page 7 R1923TIA002 docx Item 9.a. - Page 81 TABLE 1: LOS CRITERIA AND DEFINITION FOR INTERSECTIONS ~:~~~}'(~~ff;~~~~f;j.1~lf~:~;1~;}~//i1;.:~~r~[;f:l'~~{,f t~:\:~~lt~tf}t:'.:~:~~~:,~;g~~~;:,:j:~~;:~T;::~,~.~~~~~~~~:;i~':~~;~~tc~ ·iSel'Vice·:,Etow ,:~. · \:ll>elay,._---'.~-;;. : ::,;."-/.~c:.c;~~o:;;/ ;;'::'.:;:; ..: : , : -c _,_ c'cManeuverao1hty;·>··· 0: • :··::sigmilizech::sigrialiiei:foJ; Stop~·.o;t;, A B c D E F (!) ::0 ~ co 0 --(/) u.. Q) :0 ~ co 0 U5 u: Very slight delay Progression is Turning movements very favorable, with most are easily made, and vehicles arriving during the green nearly all drivers find phase not stopping at all. freedom of operation. Vehicle platoons are Good progression and/or short formed. Many drivers cycle lengths. More vehicles stop begin to feel than for LOS A, causing higher somewhat restricted levels of average delay. within groups of vehicles. Higher delays resulting from fair ,progression and/or longer cycle ·Back-u s ma lengths. lnd1v1dual cycle failures d 1 p b h' yd . h' 1 1 eve op e 1n may begin to appe~r at t 1s eve . turning vehicles. Most The number of vehicles stopping d "' 1 h t . . .fi t Ith h fll rivers 1ee somew a 1s s1grn 1can , a oug ma~y s 1 restricted pass through the intersection without stopping. The influence of congestion ·becomes more noticeable. 'Longer dela.ys r:nay result from Maneuverability is some combination of unfavorable 1 1 t d . 1 1 1 h severe y 1m1 e progression, ong eye e ~ngt ~· during short periods gi or high volume-to-capacity ratios. due to tern orar ..t: ID 'Many vehicles stop, and the b k p y u -rt' f h' I t ac -ups. gi iij propo ion o ve 1c es no 0. Cii ~ stopping declines. Individual ~ :§ ~ ·cycle failures are noticeable. :s: 0 u: ~ ..c Cll -(/) c :::> :s: 0 u: "O Q) e 0 u.. Generally considered to be the limit of acceptable delay. Indicative of poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high volume-to-capacity ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. ·Generally considered to be ·unacceptable to most drivers. Often occurs with over saturation. May also occur at ·high volume-to-capacity ratios. There are many ind1v1dual cycle failures. Poor progression and long cycle lengths may also be major contributing factors. References 2000 Highway Capacity Manual Courtland and Grand Mix Use Project City of Arroyo Grande There are typically long queues of vehicles waiting upstream of the intersection. Jammed conditions. Back-ups from other locations restrict or prevent movement. Volumes may vary widely, depending principally on the downstream back-up conditions. < 10.0 >10.0 and < 20.0 >20.0 and < 35.0 >35.0 and < 55.0 >55.0 and < 80.0 > 80.0 < 10.0 >10.0 and < 15.0 >15.0 and < 25.0 >25.0 and < 35.0 >35.0 and < 50.0 > 50.0 < 10.0 >10.0 and < 15.0 >15.0 and < 25.0 >25.0 and < 35.0 >35.0 and < 50.0 > 50.0 Page 8 R1923TIA002.docx Item 9.a. - Page 82 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 section CT2, the City establishes the following performance standards for acceptable LOS: CT2. Attain and maintain Level of Service (LOS)'C' or better on all streets and controlled intersections. CT2-1 Where deficiencies exist, mitigate to an LOS 'D' at a minimum and plan improvement to achieve LOS 'C' (LOS 'E' or 'F' unacceptable = significant adverse impact unless Statement of Overriding Considerations or CEQA Findings approved). The design and funding for such planned improvements shall be sufficiently definite to enable construction within a reasonable period of time. In addition to the City of Arroyo Grande designated LOS "C" as the minimum acceptable LOS standard on City facilities, Caltrans LOS policy for state highways will also be implemented. The Caltrans published Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies (dated December 2002) states the following: "Caltrans endeavors to maintain a target LOS at the transition between LOS "C" and LOS "D" on State highway facilities, however, Caltrans acknowledges that this may not be always feasible and recommends that the lead agency consult with Caltrans to determine the appropriate target LOS." Consistent with Caltrans policies quoted above and City policies, LOS "C" has been taken as the general threshold for acceptable operations at study intersections and roadway segments maintained by the City, and LOS "D" has been taken as the general threshold for acceptable operations at study intersections and roadways maintained by the State. Courtland and Grand Mtx Use Pro1ect City of Arroyo Grande Page 9 R1923TIA002.docx Item 9.a. - Page 83 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 lane geometries and control, while Figure 3 shows existing peak hour volumes at the study intersections. Existing AM and PM peak hour intersection traffic 6perations are quantifies using intersection lane geometrics and traffic volumes. Table 2 shows the peak hour intersections level of service operations at study locations under existing conditions. TABLE 2: EXISTING CONDITIONS: INTERSECTION LOS 2 Courtland St & E Grand Ave 204 c 1 224 c 3 Elm St & E Grand Ave c 18 0 B 26.0 c 4 Brisco Rd & E Grand Ave c 11 5 B 15.2 c 5 Oak Park Blvd & El Camino Real Signal c 18.6 ' B 31.5 c t I 6 Oak Park Blvd & CA 101 On Ramp/W Branch St Signal D 22 8 c 16.2 B i 7 Courtland St&Ash St 1WSC c 11.3 ! B 13.0 B As presented in table 2, all study intersections are currently operating acceptably. Courtland and Grand Mix Use Pro1ect City of Arroyo Grande Page 10 R1923TIA002.docx Item 9.a. - Page 84 ' I i 11 ~ ... i, I ·-j -•• {I __ , __ ---f i' ' ATLANTIC. CITY AVE I ---J ---~ ; ~ ' l"'-PROJECT T~ --r'-j -' "" ! ~ { ' $f ',,_ i<t~ '----3-~ \ '--,.-- 1 -(I --! I :~, 3 ~ '" + .,.__ .,----- ~ .,.__ .,-----.,----- / \ ,- / \ \ / ';' / Existing Lane Geometrics and Control 11/e/2014 2.1B 0 M K \PRJ\1923\11g2J\Tt923TG001 owe ft 4 ~~ Jl -, -, d01S _j dOlS Item 9.a. - Page 85 ,,,,-..,,,.·· : ./ ' ; ~ .. . 1--. --( / ,_~ ~~N v9¥ rooo nN- ) + l 124(181l_J 296(507 - 20( 46 ---,. --·....-·---~ I 1 ATLANTIC CITY A VE L111(163) 4-268(490) p-72(117) it i ~ <O IO <O ...-io...., ~N-r-.~~ N<On NN ....,_ PROJECT LOCATION "" 1-I 1' j I I I I ----·I ---. I I I I !---.L --1 f t. ---~ ----· --.lt r;),_lt) _,.....,. -<0-~~ .... IO_ .... _,... ) + l 57(94l_J 420(755 - 14(37 ---,. 7 ~NN OlNN L18(51) ~ NNn 4-419(630) ) + l p-27(76) iti 14{15l_J 300(446 - ~ 36(69 ---,. <DnN ~ ..,.....,_ ' ,' \. --· ' ' I I --1 I I i I -I _JI ___ _!_ A~H ST I I I L36(14) 4-362(437) p-88(175) iti ~ ~ OlNtn ~~ ;;~ oi n IO N N ;} .;/~' ( I { / / ';,' / ' l "• --~·' I FAIR OAKS AYE 0 ~-" 0 ...-in...., N "'"'...., O' ...., ~~- O' L55(45) "''°~ L116(112) ~ 10 roN N -NOl ) l. 4-326(584) )+l 4-20(34) p-8(23) 235f230~J 234(500l_J i t i 385 630 -52(71 - 147(437 ---,. ~ Ol ro N "'_...., ~"'~ a~N IO,.._ N Ol "' :: ·' '~ ~ ~~co 0 0 mLOco ~.::::, L223(143) r-.~lll L12(21) ~en~ ...-~N ~rt)~ N...-N ) + l. 4-21(58) ) + l. 4-118(134) p-159(480) p-10(21) iti 26(37~-3 iti 92(160 -~ 28(24 ---,. ~ vvN ~Lt)...- Wl0¥ ;;;; - 01<)0 LO...-- I LEGEND: xx AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (XX) -PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES Courtland and Grand Mixed Use Project Transportation Improvement Study Existing Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 11/5/2014 4'45 PM K \PRJ\192J\T192J\T1923TG001 owe Item 9.a. - Page 86 Project Description 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 horizontal mixed-use arrangement. However, since the project proposes to construct some single family housing, it 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 site plan is presented in the Appendix, and is shown in Inset 1 below. INSET 1 PROPOSED PROJECT SITE PLAN Gropbjc Legend The proposed project is divided into two subareas. The northern subarea is primarily commercial development containing approximately 15,600 square feet of commercial, with four (4) multi-family residential units above commercial uses. A proposed outdoor plaza will have dining and public art with a pedestrian-only connection to the southern residential subarea. The southern residential subarea is residential and includes 38 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 Mtx Use Pro1ect City of Arroyo Grande Page 13 R1923TIA002.docx Item 9.a. - Page 87 Project Site Access Two project site access alternatives have been proposed. Option "A" would include two driveways on E Grand Avenue. A right turn only one-way ingress off of E Grand Avenue and a separate right turn only one-way egress west of the ingress would be provided. Inset 2 presents the Option "A" layout. INSET 2 OPTION "A" SITE ACCESS PLAN Option "B" would propose only one driveway on E Grand Avenue, which would allow both ingress and egress, and would be restricted to right turns only. Inset 3 presents the Option "B" layout. Courtland and Grand Mix Use Pro1ect City of Arroyo Grande INSET 3 OPTION "B" SITE ACCESS PLAN Page 14 R1923TIA002.docx Item 9.a. - Page 88 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 Evaiuatnon From an intersection operations standpoint, either access alternative functions similarly. The restriction to right turns benefits operations on E Grand Avenue and the addition of new protected parallel parking stalls will benefit visitors. However, Option "A" has the potential to introduce confusion as visitors will not be able to leave the site from the same driveway they entered, and may attempt to exit via the entrance driveway. Option "B" also benefits transit access by relocating the bus stop adjacent to the new development. Trip Generation & Distribution Consistent with the City's Draft Traffic Impact Study Guidelines, project trip generation forecasts were derived using the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Generation Manual 9th Edition. Table 3 presents the estimated trip generation for the proposed land use. ~\~.~~~~~1:-~f-;; 1ei9je£tl. :shopping Center Internal Capture w!Townhouses Internal Capture wl Apartments 1Townhouses 1 Internal Capture wl Shopping Center iApartements Above Shopping Center ' Internal Capture wl Shopping Center !Trips at Project Driveway(s) Pass-By Trip Reduction (40%) \Net New Project Trips !Notes· TABLE 3: PROJECT TRIP GENERATION ::iJr;.-: :~~~?:z~S'~-~~::~··j:;.::;~;~~~~ il:i1';'.f~~s~~1::;::f~~;~;~:~t;:,·:f :~~b;:; _rA~iR~ill<'~lffpur}FrJp~~ef\JnitJ ~131VJ~~~~~Q!Jtif-rlplq1jefl,J~jf::, ;~~P\~t::'')',,JnW~J~;.::~M:>~:;~(it ~~~:1@.aJ.~;1J,T,;i_:~1Jn,14r_::':~~o~~'.*!)2[ 3.22 62% 38% 11.06 48% 52% 0.97 25% 75% 1.16 63% 37% ' 0.51 20% 80% 0.62 65% 35% : 15.6 50 32 18 173 83 90 0 0 0 -18 -6 -12 0 a· 0 0 0 0 38 37 9 28 44 28 16 0 0 0 -18 -12 -6 4 2 0 2 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 89 42 48 183 94 89 -20 -13 -7 -62 -31 -31 69 29 40 121 63 58 As presented in table 3, the proposed project will generate an estimated 69 new AM peak hour trips and 121 new PM peak hour trips. Project trip distribution estimates were developed using Traff1x 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 R1923TIA002.docx Item 9.a. - Page 89 ' ., \ ' \ I 1 t , t L , Courtland and Grand Mixed Use Project Transportation Impact Study FAIR OAKS A VE y:;,----~-----·-··------------~--.. ------~--------------··-------------------------- ~--·-rip Distribution lBi-DirectionalJ I \ c'\ ,-.~·-.-.. ---~ >_ -.~'~--,, ' ' I \. . , I i ' : '-, >." \ '"-.' \, \ Item 9.a. - Page 90 Existing P~us 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 distribution (Figures 4A and 4B) onto existing traffic volumes (Figure 3). The resulting Existing Plus Project traffic volumes are presented in Figure 6. Intersection analysis was performed assuming the existing intersection lane geometrics and control types (Figure 2). Table 4 presents the results of the Existing Plus Project conditions analysis. TABLE4: EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS: INTERSECTION LOS Signal C 22.9 C , 30.4 c 2 Courtland St & E Grand Ave Signal C 20.6 C 23.0 C 3 Elm St & E Grand Ave Signal c 18.1 B I 26.4 c 4 Brisco Rd & E Grand Ave TWSC C 11.5 B 15.5 C 5 Oak Park Blvd & El Camino Real Signal c 18.7 B 31.9 c 6 Oak Park Blvd & CA 101 On RampNV Signal D 22.8 c 16.2 B 7 Courtland St & Ash St TWSC c 11.4 B 13.1 B 8 Project Driveway & E Grand Ave TWSC c 10.0 A 12.4 B 9 Project Driveway & Courtland Street TWSC c 9.5 A 10.8 B ; 10 Project Driveway & Courtland Street TWSC c 9.4 A 10.5 B !Notes· L_J,_'-~--r1. TWSC = TIW Way Stop Control 12. LOS ;;Delay based onoorst ,m·:-·no-r-sY,,_e-et'"""a-pp'roach for TWSC intersections, average of all approaches for Signal L.~~~~'--~~~~-~---'-'-·-~~~~~~~~-·~-~-'-'---~~---'0----~~ As presented in Table 4, all study intersections are projected to operate acceptably under Existing Plus Project conditions. Courtland and Grand Mix Use Project City of Arroyo Grande Page 17 R1923TIA002.docx Item 9.a. - Page 91 ~~ ~.::,E, ._..ca l._ ~ ~~::: 120(173) I I I ._ 275( 498) .i + ~ r73(120) 124(181l_J 301(517 - 20(46 1 It i 58(95l _J ~ t i 424(765 -I 18(431 ~ _______,,._, lO lO ..... <Of')N ~ ~ L36(14) I I I ._ 369( 453) .i + ~ raa(175) 16(17l_J 312(459 - 38(711 !ti 4 -;;:- ~ 0 'N' n tC ~ L55(45) -331(596) ...: ) l ------+------'} 238(233) _J 8 394(640)-f!l ~ ,' """""~~~~=D-,,A~V.~N=u="".:'': ~~ ..rt'l~ ..r lO f') C'j<Of') ~~ L116(112) ~NO> )!l -20(34) r8(23) 234(500l_J I t i 52(71 - 148(440 1 OU1N r--Nf'l ....... "' ....... l'i}';o)'gj 0 9 ,.... L223(143} 4--21(58) r16o(481) L13(24} 4--118(134) r10(21) 4--529(828) !ti 27(40l_J ~ t i 92(160 -I 28(24 1 ~ LEGEND: ~ ~ 485(869l- 18(43 1 -;;:- ~oo ..r~ ~ ....... ....... oo <XJlt) ~ ! 23(9)J 6(2)1 •' ·' I t r::;r;::-._..N "'~ 0 ~ xx AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (XX) -PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES Study Existing Plus Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 11/5/2014 4 44 PM K. \PRJ\1923\T1023\T1923TGOOl.Ol'.I: Item 9.a. - Page 92 Cumu~ath1e Condmtions 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 General Plan land uses and circulation network. Cumulative No Project conditions will assume that the proposed project site is developed consistent with the existing General Plan land use designation, "Mixed Use", which allows for commercial and multi-family residential development. Cumulative Plus Project conditions will be developed by replacing the existing General Plan land uses on the proposed project site with the proposed project land uses, which include a mix of commercial, multi-family housing, and single family housing. Cumulative No Project Traffic Volumes The existing City Travel Demand Model was used to generate the Cumulative base condition volumes. Future lane geometrics are the same as the existing intersection lane geometries and control as shown in Figure 2. Figure 6 shows Cumulative No Project peak hour traffic volumes at study intersections. Table 5 shows the peak hour intersections level of service operations at study locations under Cumulative No Project conditions. TABLE 5: CUMULATIVE NO PROJECT CONDITIONS: INTERSECTION LOS 1 Oak Park Blvd & E Grand Ave Signal c 27.5 c 33.6 c 2 Courtland St & E Grand Ave Signal c 23.2 c 31.4 c 3 Elm St & E Grand Ave Signal c 21.1 I c 25.3 ~ c ' 4 Brisco Rd & E Grand Ave lWSC c 18.7 f c 26.9 D Yes 5 Oak Park Blvd & El Camino Real Signal c 23.9 c 42.4 J D 6 Oak Park Blvd & CA 101 On RampNV Signal D 27.1 t c 37.9 ' D ! 7 Courtland St & Ash St lWSC c 12.1 ~ B 15.1 c !Notes: : 1. TWSC =Too Way Stop Control :2. LOS= Delay based on oorst minor stree_t approach for TWSC intersections, ave!_a,ge of all approaches for Signal As presented in Table 5, two intersections are projected to operate at unacceptable LOS in Cumulative No Project conditions. The Brisco Road/E Grand Avenue and Oak Park Boulevard/El Camino Real intersections are both projected to operate at LOS D in the PM peak hour. Recommended improvements to mitigate these deficiencies are proposed in the concluding section of this report. Courtland and Grand Mix Use Pro1ect City of Arroyo Grande Page 19 R1923TIA002.docx Item 9.a. - Page 93 . ·,.(. ' J I ( / 125(1B5~J 375(590 - 30(55 ~ I , -, ---r---~,-' I <l...., 80(115lJ ~ t i 660(995 --+ I 45(70 ~ ~ -~ '-'LOLO ::2.q-'"' ~CLO "--''°""" ~CO' -''"" j~l 125~125lJ 545 690 --+ 40(70 ~ '· , ..... ,.'< \ _ _.. ,_' i 4 L1s(so) -560(635) r90(115) !ti 'iiiC50 ee~ LOO'-' O>I"'~ N l ( ... _ ... , / ,--.. ,,..,,. \ / 10' 10' 5 LOR a ;;:; ~ ~ In' In' L140~130) LO LOO L170i150) o o OJ O>N N -_,,.,_ j l -505 760) j~l -30( 5f r1025 270(535lJ I t i 55(75 --+ 160(450 ~ ______.... LOO LO f'-LO I') ~r--~ 'C)S,_ <000 -r--r--O~LO OOc L225t5~ r--om Lso(1oi ~-~ OOLO lf)~lf) Nlfl<O NIO<O j ~ l. -125160 j ~ l. -120(1 5) r200 505) r10(25) !ti 30(4o~J I t i 95(165 - 30(25 ~ lOU1in -~ ....,,,., I{) rn -"l ----f-----r 1' ' ' ( \ 1--- ATLANTJQ CITY AVE / i j ,. ;_ ,,_..-,-"~ I I I i ! I I ' -I ------/---t-_ _)_ -1 . _j_ __ -I -- 1 I -i-------r -1---_ , __ l __ +_J_ -I ~ ·1- I 1 1 r 1 , ~ r ------r---"'l ----f=---=--=..,,._-~-----. ---+ j --l ___ l _;_ 1 -'--~ ! I ~ I 1 ; ! / 1 ! T I ' 1 ! ~ ·T-----r ---i;i -------I-_ 1 ____ ; __ _L_r 1, S> -/--! i __ i ___ i_ ./"' __ I I ~ i 1· ··co?- i I w cn!tNn/ AVE 1 · --T ·--~ 1· 8 I 1-_r ~?-\S , --/ ... I --.. l_ / / / ! 9 1· 3 .Ii' a.1qNLJ, i I otJcB~~7:H AVE -,----1 10 __ _J I\ 4 "./i' I: __ !_ I 1 1 1 1 1 -,--t;-- 1 ·r-·1--\ ~. . 'f . 1 ! , __ /1 ---1/_ ~ P~~~racr ,-~~~~,;-;;~!';,' __ fc __ :J_--.r~_~_-,1' ·--::i--\·~-~-----'1 ' . : _,.. 1-\ ,.; --~ ----· -..... I[ ----_j ___ .. I , s I II_._-_ --· -fti ---1---· 1----/" ·t-L·-1-! _ _[__ ",-t~§=~ I I AJJf ST 1.J-~ -------L--., I ! I I I ~ I ' ' --i-_ _j__ I I 7 I I ~ --,- 1 I -I ; f---!"' --1~::-~~i.~--:' I : ~ FA~R OAKS AYE I I LEGEND: xx AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (XX) -PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES Courtland and Grand Mixed Use Project Transportation Improvement Study Cumulative No Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 11/5/2014 4 44 P~ K \PRJ\192J\T192J\T192JTGOOl.DWC Item 9.a. - Page 94 Cll.llmu~atove P~us Project 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 estimated using ITE Trip Generation methodologies. The trip generation of the existing General Plan land uses was then compared to the trip generation of the proposed project in order to determine the net change in trip generation resulting from the proposed change in land use. Table 6 presents the trip generation comparison. TABLE 6: GENERAL PLAN AND PROPOSED PROJECT TRIP COMPARISON ICommerc1al 3 24 65 41 24 228 110 119 Internal Capture w!Multi-Family -1 -1 0 -21 -7 -14 I Multi-Fam ilv Res identlal3 54 30 6 24 48 31 17 Internal Capture w!Commercial -1 0 -1 -21 -14 -7 I General Plan Allowed Uses 94 46 48 234 1Hl 114 I Proposed Proiect Uses 69 29 40 121 63 58 I Net Trip Generation Difference -25 -17 -8 -113 -56 -57 I Notes: ! 1. 1 ksf = 1,000 square feet DU= dtAelling umt -~ ----' :2. Trip rates based on /TE Trip Generati-on_M_a_n-ua-l-9t-h-ed-1t-1on fitted curve equations :3. Assumes allowable General PJBn "Mixed Use" development as follows: ---- ' \ -Half of 4.35 acre site developes as commercial at 0.25 FAR 1 -Half of 4.35 acre site deve/opes as mult1-family residential v.efth a 25 unit/acre density ·----------· As presented in Table 6, the proposed project is estimated to generate 25 fewer AM peak hour trips and 113 fewer PM peak hour trips than the allowable uses under the existing General Plan. The Cumulative Plus Project traffic volumes were developed by adjusting the Cumulative No Project traffic volumes downward according to the net difference in trip generation. The resulting volumes are shown in Figure 7. Table 7 presents the LOS at the study intersection in the Cumulative Plus Project conditions. Courtland and Grand Mix Use Pro1ect City of Arroyo Grande Page 21 R1923TIA002.docx Item 9.a. - Page 95 ~ ~ 0 ~1()1() ~ 0 l()NN lll~CJ ~SLO <X)IOI'> no_ .::..'C5ln' -a::i~ ~.., .... Lz1srss} ~o L60(95) ~~ OON lOlO N ..,.l'"JN <ON- ..J i l. +-355 565 ..J i l. +-640(850) ..J i l. ,.---165 205 ,.---7s(110) 125t185lJ it i 80(115lJ it i 125t125l_J 375 580 -660(980 -545 675 - 30(55 1 OLO'O 45(70 1 OLO'O 40(70 1 IO<XlN " .... aJ ~NN ~ o~ 1'")1()1() aJ .... " tn-l'")N ~J_j __ J ~fj~~-~.1-~l~:J----i-------+ -,--·-_::--:, '., ''4~<1'. I I r I I j I E;; --r·--1----§1 -L_ ------}--------- 1 • I ' V, , ~ !'--------, ----l -I ! i j ~ I I _ __j ' ' I I ! ' I r-r--:--1---, r -i------1----~--+--' +-j! ___ ! __ 1 __ _r-"'< ~\) -I -;/ ~ruN»/-~-vf-1 ---/------/----i-1 / _ f--1 / ~~~sc0 .., \' I / i 1 I , Ra --- lO 5 wa lO ;;:; ~ ,, 'ii)' 'ii)' L7s(so) L140~130) IOIOO L170(1so) 0 ~ <XlO>N N _,...,_ +-555(620) .J l. '4-505 750) ..J i l. '4-30[455 ,.---90(175) iti lO'OO ~~ ino~ an-...~ "' 255~245lJ 625 860 - I~ L225{145) '4-125160) ,.---200 505) ~ ~ o~tn r--om ~-~ lll~lll N lt>CO ..J i l. 30{40lJ 95(165 - 30(25 1 lti 8(21)J 2(5)---., ,.---10 25 270{535}J it i 55(75 - 160(450 1 lilOli) "1()1") ~ ..... ~ lll~lll IOION I'} a::> L60(70j +-120(1 5) ,.---10(25) I t i 775{1131l- ~ 18(43---., ~l{")tl) "' I'} 23(9)J 6(2)---., ~ t I'} 0 ~ -~ --r--/--~i;Bi~iH AVE ---1--------1 10 1 1 s ~NLJ 4"'R .:.: ! I I I I E-. -1 __ 1__ ---'...:...'-I-'" -·----I I I ---1--V>--1 -i---I '---_, ~-=1l~OJ~E=c=T~D=R=1=.vE=w.~_,,~3.-; y 1 1 --( __ t; P~O~ECT I~~~~;~~--r-_--t~= L --1-~----11 I 1 1 I I I -I 1---\ ·1·--'-~ -'---( ______ !_ --l I I L l ---1-----)~ ! I I _! __ A_J ___ S_T __ -I I l--- "' 1 1 1 1 --------.---------r-~~-- 1 , _l~ -------r----- -i--r~---J,~lr·--:--t--:~+-~--!-1 ~---1-+-~·-.iil-~-~~-·-:l___l~_l_' --!-~~~L..§.L_~ 0 r---") jl_I ·: --t---I~ -_i ___ --1-' 7 \ I 1 11 ~ FAIR ~~·A VE I I ·1·· ----1--I -_____ , I I LEGEND: xx AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (XX) -PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES Courtland and Grand Mixed Use Project Transportation Improvement Study Cumulative Plus Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 11/5/2014 4•44 PM K:\PRJ\1923\TI923\11923TGOOI 01\U Item 9.a. - Page 96 TABLE 7: CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS: INTERSECTION LOS Signal C 27.7 C 34.1 C 2 Courtland St & E Grand Ave Signal C 23.1 C 25.5 C 3 Elm St & E Grand Ave Signal C 21.0 C 25.1 C 4 Brisco Rd & E Grand Ave TWSC C 18.5 C 26.1 D Yes 5 Oak Park Blvd & El Camino Real Signal C 24.4 C 42.4 D 6 Oak Park Blvd & CA 101 On Ramp/W Signal D 27.1 C 33.5 C 7 Courtland St & Ash St 1WSC C 12.1 B 151 C 8 Project Driveway & E Grand Ave 1WSC C 11.4 B 12.5 B 9 Project Driveway& Courtland Street 1WSC C 10.5 B 10.8 B ; '10 ProjectDriveway&Courtland Street 1WSC C 10.5 B 10.5 B I Notes· i1.TWS~C~=~T~oo-.W~a-y~s=ro-p~C~o-n~m~ol,--~~~~~--~~~~~~~--'-~~~~~·--'.~----'~~~- ;:r[os =Delay based on 1«1rst mmor street approach for 1Wsc/ntersect1ons, average of all approaches for S7fjiiiit------_ . 3. Warrant= Based on California MUTCD Warrant 3 As shown in Table 7, the two intersections projected to operate at LOS D in the PM peak hour during Cumulative No Project conditions are still projected to operate at unacceptable LOS D in the Cumulative Plus Project conditions. Recommended improvements to mitigate these deficiencies are proposed in the concluding section of this report. Courtland and Grand Mix Use Pro1ect City of Arroyo Grande Page 23 R1923T/A002.docx Item 9.a. - Page 97 Project ~mpacts and Mitigatoons This sections presents intersection level of service deficiencies and recommended improvements to mitigate project impacts at the study intersections to LOS "C" or better. The City is currently considering revisions to the City's General Plan LOS policy, which may include allowing LOS "D" operations. Should the City adopt an LOS "D" acceptable operations threshold, these improvements would need to be revisited to determine their necessity. Existing Plus Project Conditions No intersection deficiencies or project impacts were identified in Existing Plus Project conditions. Cumulatnve Conditions Under buildout of the City's General Plan, Cumulative No Project conditions, slightly more traffic is generated than under the proposed project land uses (Cumulative Plus Project conditions). However, under either analysis scenario, the same intersection deficiencies are identified and the same improvements to mitigate these deficiencies are proposed. Intersection 4 -Brisco Road at E Grand A venue This intersection is projected to operated at LOS D during the PM peak hour. The following improvements are proposed to mitigate the deficiency expected to occur: • Restripe westbound approach to include a dedicated westbound right turn lane (will require two 11' travel lanes and a 1 O' turn lane) I Intersection 5 -Oak Park Boulevard at El Camino Real This intersection is projected to operate at LOS D during the PM peak hour. The following improvements are proposed to mitigate the deficiency expected to occur: • Restripe westbound left turn lane as a shared left/through lane; • Restripe westbound shared through/right lane to dedicated right turn lane; • Provide overlap phasing for westbound right turn movement; and, • Provide overlap phasing for eastbound right turn movement. TABLE 8: CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS: MITIGATED INTERSECTION LOS ~1:, tr:~~!~;~I'~;,a l~:q~~I~ ~liri~i=~~~~i~:,1 : 4 Brisco Rd & E Grand Ave 1WSC C 23.1 C ---,-,...-,---:-~~~~~ ' 5 Oak Park Blvd & El Camino Real Signal C 32.1 : C . !Notes. :1. TWSC =Too Way Stop Control ; 2 LOS -Delay based on worst minor street approach for TWSC intersections, average of all approaches for Signal ;3-warrant-,;Based0i1Cii1Tf0rnia Mi.JTCD Warrant 3 ·------·· ----------, Courtland and Grand Mtx Use Pro1ect City of Arroyo Grande Page 24 R1923TIA002.docx Item 9.a. - Page 98 , ATTACHMENT 14 WATIER CONSIERVATmN The Courtland and Grand Mixed-Use Project addresses outdoor and indoor water usage through a variety of water saving landscaping techniques and through the integration of current water conserving technologies. These include: Outdoor Indoor • Drought tolerant plantings • Dual flush toilets • No turf in yards • Water saving dishwasher and faucet devices • Minimized neighborhood common area turf • Pre-plumbed for gray water systems • Utilize high efficiency irrigation techniques • Amend soils to better retain moisture Neighborhood Common Turf Area WATIEIR CONS!ERVAllON COMPARiSON A comparison of outdoor Estimated Total Water Use (ETWU) between a typical existing Arroyo Grande residential lot and a Courtland and Grand lot reveals: Comparison • Typical existing Arroyo Grande residential lot= 49.98 ETWU • Typical Courtland and Grand lot= 8.27 ETWU With one (1) typical existing Arroyo Grande residential lot being the same size as three (3) typical Courtland and Grand lots, it is expected that three (3) Courtland and Grand lots will still only use half as much water as one (1) typical Arroyo Grande residential lot. Item 9.a. - Page 99 Average Water Use Comparison Table ~&©~ ~~~ ~~~ ~&:rn milll §:; {bc!n(roD mill)§? fu:ill ~ ~§?!kill~ ~'iit!frl.1am rt1ifi!li'ili) ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ MAWA (gallons) 37,481 33 26,772.38 6,296.86 175,577 92 MA~A_(um~~L-50.11 35_?~-------------8.42 234.73 --~ -~ -·-----------·-----------~----........... ---------------- ETWU (gallons) 36,639.91 26,504.65 6,18442 173,133.12 48.98 35.43 8.27 23146 ETWU (un~) ___ ----------------------------------------------- Landsape Areas 1750 1750 588 11390 Turf 700 350 0 2656 Low Water Plants 890 1190 441 6550 I Moderate Water 160 210 147 2184 (1) Typical water usage for a (SF) Single-Family lot prior to the Governor's requirements These calculation are based on a lot at 4.5 DU/AC per the municipal code= 7,000 SF lot Per the municipal code the minimum landscape/lawn/outdoor use is 40%. We assumed 25% of the lot 1s landscape, and the remaining 15% is outdoor use/driveway/flatwork * Assumed 15% shrubs (85% low water and 15% moderate water) * Assumed 10% turf (2) Typical water usage for a (SF) based on the current Governor requirements These calculation are based on a lot at 4.5 DU/AC per the municipal code= 7,000 SF lot We assumed 25% of the lot is landscape, and the remaining 15% 1s outdoor use/driveway/flatwork * Assumed 20% shrubs (85% low water and 15% moderate water) * Assumed 5% turf (3) Typical water usage for Grand & Courtland lots based on the current Governor requirements These calculation are based on the average Grand & Courtland lot size of 2,350 sf Per the SPA, the minimum landscape/open space is 35%. We assumed 25% of the lot 1s landscape, and the remaining 10% outdoor/driveway/flatwork * Assumed 25% shrubs (75% low water and 25% moderate water) (4) Estimated water usage for Grand & Courtland Common Areas based on the current Governor requirements Neighborhood open space landscape areas with smaller areas of turf for outdoor recreation and passive uses. Based on actual square footage from the Conceptual Landscape Plan * Assumed the following for shrub areas (75% low water and 25% moderate water) *Assumes smaller area for turf than shown on Conceptual Landscape Plan (2,655 sf) * Uses the "Special Landscape Area" factor for recreational turf areas (S) Estimated water usage for Grand & Courtland Common Areas based on the current Governor requirements Neighborhood open space landscape areas with artificial turf for outdoor recreation and passive uses. Based on actual square footage from the Conceptual Landscape Plan * Assumed the following for shrub areas (35% low water and 65% moderate water) *Assumes artificial turf for a portion of turf area shown on Conceptual Landscape Plan (2,655 sf) ~(JfHJ ~'ii't!Q (fl) ~~ 133,617.10 178.63 --~--------- 131,945 74 176.40 ------------ 8734 0 3057 5677 Item 9.a. - Page 100 / 200000 I 180000 160000 140000 120000 100000 80000 60000 40000 20000 0 --- - -I 7000 SF Lot (1) -------~--- -- -------------------·----------- - II 7000SF Lot (2) •-•-2350 SF Lot (3) Small Turf (4) Artificial Turf (S) • MAWA (gallons) • ETWU (gallons) ____________________J Item 9.a. - Page 101 '·' ,~ } 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, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-009, AND VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001; LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF EAST GRAND AVENUE AND SOUTH COURTLAND STREET; APPLIED FOR BY NKT COMMERCIAL ATIACHMENT 15 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 filed 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 filed 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 filed Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14-001 to subdivide Subarea 3 into forty-two (42) parcels, including three (3) commercial parcels, thirty-eight (38) residential parcels, and one (1) common area parcel.; and WHEREAS, the applicant has filed Conditional Use Permit 14-009 to develop three (3) commercial buildings of 3,600-6,500 square-feet, four (4) second-floor condominiums of approximately 1,000 square feet-each in a vertical mixed-use arrangement; and WHEREAS, the applicant and the City entered into a Memorandum of Understanding on February 10, 2015 for the negotiation of a development agreement for the subject property; and WHEREAS, the applicant has filed Development Agreement 15-002 in accordance with the executed Memorandum of Understanding; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Arroyo Grande reviewed the project at a duly noticed public hearing on August 18, 2015, recommending the City Council deny the project; 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 Rules and Procedures for Implementation of CEQA and has reviewed the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration; and Item 9.a. - Page 102 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE2 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande has reviewed the project at a duly noticed public hearing on September 8, 2015; 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 mu/ti-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, which was revised in July 2015, 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. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment would allow the development of Item 9.a. - Page 103 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE3 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 residential); 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. 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 Item 9.a. - Page 104 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE4 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-two (42) 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 mu/ti-family 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 high-density, 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 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 substantial environmental damage due to the implementation of mitigation measures identified in the draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project and revised in July 2015, 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. 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 Item 9.a. - Page 105 RESOLUTION NO. PAGES 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 95th percentile of water discharge on site and excess discharge will be directed to an existing infiltration basin across South Courtland 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 City. The proposed development for commercial, mixed-use condominium residential, and high-density, 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 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. Item 9.a. - Page 106 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE6 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 and revision 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 substantially 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 and was subsequently revised to include Development Agreement 15-002. 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 result of development of this project. Further, the City Council find that said Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the City's independent judgment and Item 9.a. - Page 107 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE7 analysis. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande hereby adopts the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration as set forth in Exhibit "B", a full copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department and directs the City Clerk to file a Notice of Determination, 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 set forth in 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 8th day of September, 2015. Item 9.a. - Page 108 RESOLUTION NO. PAGES JIM HILL, MAYOR ATTEST: KELLY WETMORE, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: DIANNE THOMPSON, CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: HEATHER K. WHITHAM, CITY ATTORNEY Item 9.a. - Page 109 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE9 EXHIBIT 'A' CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 15-002; 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. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 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 thirty-eight (38) single-family residences and three (3) commercial buildings of approximately 15,600 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 August 25, 2015. The applicant shall ascertain and comply with all Federal, State, County and City requirements as are applicable to this project. 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. This application shall automatically expire on August 25-2017 unless the final map is recorded or an extension is granted pursuant to Section 16.12.140 of the Development Code. Development shall conform to the Gateway Mixed-Use zoning district requirements except as otherwise approved. 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. 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.a. - Page 110 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 architecture and design and location of the trash enclosure(s) shall be Item 9.a. - Page 111 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE11 reviewed by the 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 9r 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 finaLoccupancy. 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.a. - Page 112 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.a. - Page 113 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.a. - Page 114 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 II.. 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. 41. Prior to final map recordation, the applicant shall deposit $250,000 with the City to Item 9.a. - Page 115 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE15 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 43. As an alternative to Conditions of Approval #39 through #42 above, Subarea 3a must be built prior to or concurrently with Subarea 3b. 44. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall reimburse the City for the proportionate costs associated with expansion of the Poplar Ponding Basin. BUILDING AND LIFE SAFETY DIVISION AND FIRE DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS CBC/CFC 45. 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 46. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall post designated fire lanes, per Section 22500.1 of the California Vehicle Code. 47. All fire lanes must be posted and enforced, per Police Department and Fire Department guidelines. FIRE FLOW/FIRE HYDRANTS 48. Project shall have a fire flow in accordance with the California Fire Code. 49. Fire hydrants shall be installed, per Fire Department and Public Works Department standards and per the California Fire Code. 50. 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. 51. The applicant shall install a new fire hydrant per City Standards approximately Item 9.a. - Page 116 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE16 halfway between East Grand Avenue and the residential project entrance, adjacent to South Courtland Street (at approximately Lot 9). 52. The developer shall install a new fire hydrant per City standards immediately south of the residential project entrance (at approximately Lot 18). SECURITY KEY BOX 53. The applicant must provide an approved "security key vault," per Building and Fire Department guidelines and per the California Fire Code. FIRE SPRINKLER 54. All buildings must be fully sprinklered per Building and Fire Department guidelines and per the California Fire Code. 55. Provide Fire Department approved access or sprinkler-system per National Fire Protection Association Standards. ABANDONMENT I NON-CONFORMING 56. 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 57. A d~molition 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 58. 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. 59. 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 Item 9.a. - Page 117 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE17 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. GENERAL CONDITIONS 60. 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. 61. 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. 62. Trash enclosure area(s) shall have a roof structure (grease trap) to reduce stormwater pollution runoff. 63. 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. 64. All residential units shall be designed to mitigate impacts from non-residential project noise, in compliance with the City's noise regulations. 65. All project improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the City of Arroyo Grande Standard Drawings and Specifications. 66. The property owner shall provide maintenance of all landscaping placed in and adjacent to the development, including in bulb outs. 67. 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. 68. Submit three (3) full-size paper copies and one (1) full-size mylar copy of approved improvement plans for inspection purposes during construction. Item 9.a. - Page 118 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE18 69. 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. 70. 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. 71. 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 72. 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) 73. The site plan shall include the following: a. The location and size of all existing and proposed water, sewer, and storm drainage facilities within the project site and abutting streets or alleys. b. The location, 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. 74. Landscape and irrigation plans are required within the public right-of-way, and shall be approved by the Public Works Director. 75. Improvement plans shall include plan and profile of existing and proposed utilities. Item 9.a. - Page 119 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE19 76. Submit all retaining wall calculations for review and approval by the Community Development Director for walls not constructed per City standards. 77. Prior to approval of an improvement plan the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City for inspection of the required improvements. 78. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining an encroachment permit for all work within a public right-of-way (City or Caltrans). STREET IMPROVEMENTS 79. 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. 80. All street repairs shall be constructed to City standards. 81. 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. 82. The developer shall show that emergency vehicles can negotiate streets through the several right angle turns. 83. All plans shall show the City's complete right-of-way on South Courtland Street and East Grand Avenue. 84. Guest parking shall be spread throughout the development due to street parking not being available on the project site. 85. The developer shall provide a striping plan to include a five foot (5') bike lane, turn lane and travel way on South Courtland Street. 86. The developer shall provide Type 2 Slurry Seal or Microsurfacing on full road width of South Courtland Street for the entire length of project frontage and on East Grand Avenue for the entire length of project frontage to the median. CURB. GUTTER, AND SIDEWALK 87. Install new concrete curb, gutter, and sidewalk as directed by the Community Development Director and Public Works Director. Item 9.a. - Page 120 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 20 88. 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 Community Development Director. 89. 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. 90. The applicant shall dedicate a pedestrian access easement(s) when the ADA sidewalk extension does not fall within the City's right-of-way. 91. Install tree wells with root barriers for all trees planted adjacent to curb, gutter and sidewalk to prevent damage due to root growth. 92. 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 93. A private/public (fire, water main, sewer, open space, drainage) easement shall be reserved on the map. 94. A Public Utility Easement (PUE) shall be dedicated a minimum 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. 95. A blanket Public Utility Easement (PUE) shall be dedicated over the project site. (CONDOMINIUM PROJECTS) 96. 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. 97. 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. 98. 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. 99. 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 Item 9.a. - Page 121 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 21 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. 100. The developer shall obtain agreement from Peoples' Self Help Housing for the disposition of Item No. 6 in the Title Report. 101. 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. GRADING AND DRAINAGE 102. 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. 103. All grading shall be performed in accordance with the City Grading Ordinance. 104. All drainage facilities shall be designed to accommodate a 100-year storm flow. Provide a complete drainage report. 105. 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. 106. 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. 107. 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. 108. The applicant shall: A) Provide on-site storm water retardation facilities designed and constructed to Public Works and Community Development requirements, and the following: Item 9.a. - Page 122 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 22 WATER a. The facilities shall be designed to reduce the peak flow rate from a post-development 100-year storm. b. The 100-year basin outflow shall not exceed the pre-development flow. c. The 100-year basin outflow shall be limited to a level which does not cause the capacity of existing downstream drainage facilities to be exceeded. d. The basin design shall include freeboard equal to 20 percent of the basin depth, to a minimum of 12 inches. e. The basin shall be fully constructed and functional prior to occupancy for any building permit within the project. f. The basin shall be maintained by the 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. 109. Whenever possible, all water mains shall be looped to prevent dead ends. The Public Works Director must grant permission to dead end water mains. 110. The applicant shall extend the public water main to adequately serve the project across the property frontage. 111. A Reduced Pressure Principle (RPP) backflow device is required on all water lines to the (structure and/or landscape irrigation). (Commercial development only). 112. 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. Item 9.a. - Page 123 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 23 113. 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. 114. Each parcel shall have separate water meters. 115. 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. 116. Existing water services to be abandoned shall be properly abandoned and capped at the main per the requirements of the Public Works Director. 117. 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 118. 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". 119. All sewer laterals within the public right-of-way must have a minimum slope of 2%. 120. Existing sewer laterals to be abandoned shall be properly abandoned and capped at the main per the requirements of the Public Works Director. 121. Each parcel shall be provided a separate sewer lateral. Laterals shall be sized for the appropriate use, minimum 4". 122. All sewer mains or laterals crossing or parallel to public water facilities shall be constructed in accordance with City standards. 123. Obtain approval from the South County Sanitation District for the development's impact to District facilities prior to permit issuance. 124. Obtain approval from the South County Sanitation District prior to relocation of any District facilities. 125. The developer shall evaluate the capacity of sewer lift station #7 to take the additional flow of the development. PUBLIC UTILITIES Item 9.a. - Page 124 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 24 126. 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. 127. Prior to approving any building permit within the project for occupancy, all public utilities shall be operational. 128. 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. 129. 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: 130. 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) 131. 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. Item 9.a. - Page 125 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 25 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 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. 132. 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. Item 9.a. - Page 126 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 26 133. 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 134. 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. 135. 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 136. Prior to issuance of building permit, applicant to submit exterior lighting plan for Police Department approval. 137. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall post Item 9.a. - Page 127 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 27 handicapped parking, per Police Department requirements. 138. 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. 139. 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. 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 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. • 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 Item 9.a. - Page 128 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 28 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 (APeD 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 APeD; • 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 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 Item 9.a. - Page 129 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 29 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 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. • 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. Item 9.a. - Page 130 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 30 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: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande -Public Works Dept., Building Division, Engineering Division Timing: 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 present. 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. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande -Engineering Division; Public Works Department Timing: 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 Item 9.a. - Page 131 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 31 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: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande -Engineering Division; Public Works Department Timing: 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 updated geotechnical study based on the study prepared for the project by GSI Soils Inc. dated April 2006. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande -Engineering Division; Public Works Department Timing: 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: Item 9.a. - Page 132 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 32 • 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. • Utilize low energy street lights (i.e. sodium). • Utilize energy efficient interior lighting. • Install energy-reducing programmable thermostats. • Use roofing material with a solar reflectance values meeting the EPA/DOE Energy Star® rating to reduce summer cooling needs. • Eliminate high water consumption landscape (e.g., plants and lawns) in residential design. Use native plants that do not require watering and are low ROG emitting. • Provide on-site bicycle parking both short term (racks) and long term (lockers, or a locked room with standard racks and access limited to bicyclist only) to meet peak season maximum demand. One bike rack space per 10 vehicle/employee space is recommended. • Require the installation of electrical hookups at loading docks and the connection of trucks equipped with electrical hookups to eliminate the need to operate diesel-powered TRUs at the loading docks. • Provide storage space in garage for bicycle and bicycle trailers, or covered racks I lockers to service the residential units. Item 9.a. - Page 133 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 33 Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande -CDD; Building Division; APCD Timing: 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 and 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. • 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. Item 9.a. - Page 134 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 34 • 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 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: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande -COD; Engineering Division; Building Division Timing: 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. Item 9.a. - Page 135 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 35 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: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande -COD; Engineering Division; Building Division Timing: 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: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande -Building Division Timing: 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. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande -COD; Engineering Division; Public Works Department Timing: Prior to issuance of a Building Permit Item 9.a. - Page 136 INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION EXHIBIT B (Full copy on file in the Community Development Department) Development Agreement 15-002, General Plan Amendment 14-002, Specific Plan Amendment 14-001, Conditional Use Permit 14-009 & Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14-001 Southwest Corner of East Grand Avenue and South Courtland Street November 2014 (Revised July 2015) Item 9.a. - Page 137 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.a. - Page 138 EXHIBIT "D" Ber:ry Gardens Specific Plan Amendment -Subareas 3a and 3b 07.15.15 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 Subareas 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 and/or office development of approximately 1.24 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 (South Courtland Street): Shall be a minimum of 0-5'. The street yard is that side which is closest to South Courtland Street (reference Exhibit 3-4.B). 3. Minimum Interior Side Yard Setback (City Limit Line and Subarea 3b): Shall be a minimum of O- S'. The interior side yard is that side which is closest to the City Limit Line and Subarea 3b (reference Exhibit 3-4.B). 4. Minimum Rear Yard Setback (along Subarea 3b): The primary commercial buildings shall be a minimum of 0-5'. 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'. 1 Item 9.a. - Page 139 8. Parking: Shall be provided at a minimum ratio of one (1) space for every 250 square-feet of commercial building area, with one (1) designated parking space required for each residential unit, and one (1) shared parking space for each residential unit. The shared spaces will be available for use by 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/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 entry-level/workforce housing residential development of approximately 3.12 acres. All development within Subarea 3b shall conform to the following standards: 1. Maximum Density: Shall be a maximum of 20 units per acre. 2. Minimum Lot Size: Shall be 2,000 square-feet. No subdivision resulting in lots less than this minimum size shall be allowed. 3. Project Boundary Setbacks: a. Minimum Project Front Yard Setback (South Courtland Street): Shall be a minimum of 10'. The front yard is that side which is closest to South 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). 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). 4. Interior Yard Setbacks: a. Courtyard/common open space area setback: Shall be a minimum of 8' b. Side yard setbacks: Shall be a minimum of 4' c. . Interior private drive setback: Shall be a minimum of 2' 2 Item 9.a. - Page 140 5. Maximum Lot Coverage: Shall be 65%, inclusive of all enclosed structures. 6. Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR): Shall be 1.25, inclusive of total floor area. 7. Maximum Building Height: Shall be 35' or two (2) stories, whichever is less. Total height including any appurtenances shall not exceed 40'. 8. Parking: 2 spaces shall be provided per unit within an enclosed garage and guest spaces shall be provided at a minimum ratio of 0.5 per unit. Two of the guest parking spaces may be provided in driveways where feasible 9. Minimum Open Space for Subarea 3b: Shall be 35%. 10. Signage: Shall comply with Municipal Code Section 16.60.040-A, Subsections A.1 (Single-family neighborhood identification) and be subject to discretionary review and approval. East G:rand 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 South 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. 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 South Courtland Street with connections to interior of the site. Pedestrian pathways shall be provided in Subarea 3b through the neighborhood green. Sidewalks are not required adjacent to the private drive. 5. South Courtland Street: The private access drive for Subarea 3b shall be aligned with the existing commercial development driveway across South Courtland Street. Development of each Subarea shall include widening of South Courtland Street to its ultimate width along that Subarea's frontage. The southwestern curb return at East Grand Avenue and South Courtland Street shall be rebuilt as a part of the South Courtland Street widening. 3 Item 9.a. - Page 141 6. Bicycle Lanes: Shall be provided on South Courtland Street along the project frontage. Street Trees and Landscaping Trees shall be provided along South 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 a_nd 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 4 and 23-27) and/or along western edge of property (lots 17-23) to buffer from large wall expanses of existing buildings. Fencing.located adjacent to commercial and/or along the western edge of the property shall be double sided. Perimeter fencing or walls along the East Grand Avenue and South Courtland Street frontages shall be limited to 3.5' in height unless the portion over 3.5', up to 6', is 75% 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 South Courtland Street to the Poplar Basin, which was designed and built to accommodate development of the Subareas. Architectural Design Guidelines Subarea3a 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 Garden Neighborhood. 4 Item 9.a. - Page 142 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.a. - Page 143 Exhibit 3-4.A -Subareas 1 : 100 Item 9.a. - Page 144 Exhibit 3-4.B -Allowed Project Boundary Setbacks 1 100 Item 9.a. - Page 145 EXHIBIT E Graphic Legend PORCH ~:~ SIDEWALK 0 COMMONYARD PRIVATE YARD Item 9.a. - Page 146 Section 1-Commercial West PROPOSED RESIDEtHIAL lOl P"CPCSED <:Cr,.W,EPCIAt 8U!LClNG Section 5-Commercial West/South Section ·2-Residential West Section 3-Commercial/Residentjal Section 4-Resjdential South COMMERCIAL LOT RESIDENTIAL LOT Item 9.a. - Page 147 -----------------------------------"·-' - ___ _J ' 'k. L_ __ ~BBB~A]Q~S· ROW RIGHT OF WAY FlHISHED SURF'AC':: ·-,i--"' EXISTINC ,. ANISHED GRADE PVT PRIVATE fF FINISHED FU>CR EAST GRAND A llENUE "" nPlCAL H? HGH P<XHT F>< FlRE H'l'tlRANT TO TCP OF' GRATE SS SANITARY"""' "' GRADE BREAK Sll STCllllDRAIN t """"""' ,. DJST!NG CRACE SI. STREET UGiT PROJECT INFO: ""' FLOOD ZCJiE. EXlSTING EASEMENTS. PROPOSED EASOIENlS. EX. ZOOING & !..'ND USE. PROP ZONING & LAND USE. TOT AL UNITS PROPOSED: llllOD-l/SE. RESOENTIAL. RESIDENTIAL. FLOOR AREA RA110- RESOENTIAL LOlS. COMMERQAL LOTS. APPLICANT INEO: 022-131-052 a: 54 ZONE')( -YAP No. 06079C1601C 100a12o' TEMPOAARY ACCESS EASEMENT 10' WIDE PUBLIC WATERLINE EASEMENT Q.IU (sP) GMU (SP) 4.J8 ao (189,819 1q-ft) 20 Om.LINGS PER AmE ;t.l.2.l DOISrTY UNITS PER Am :illl.59 DENSITY WllTS PER ACRE '2 !4) T'M>-BrDROCJM UNITS 38) nmEE-BtDROCl.I UNITS 2) fl111R-BtDROOM UNITS CClllM!RCIAL fAR • 0 33 1 998 1q-ft TO 4 207 sq-fl Ea. (38 TOTAL) 2"521 1q-ft 18,047 1q-fl lo.393 sq-ft (J TOTAL) pREPABER"S SIAJEMENI• COllPANY' Nl<T COMUERCIAL INC. CONTACT THIS PLAN S'E'T WAS PRfPARED BY RRU DESlc;H CRQIJP 3795 S. HIGUERA ST,. ST£. 102 SAN WIS 0BtSP0. CA 93401 Nia< TOMPICINS ee• HIGUERA S'tREET, SlJITE 9 SAN WIS OSISPO. CA 93401 PH(J<(£. (805) 541-9004 LEGAL DESCRIPTION• PH (805) 543-1794 UNDm lHt OIRECTION OF .nsHUA ROBERTS,. P.E. 81,795 A P~TION OF' BL.00< 88 CF THE TO~ OF' GROVER AS SHOVIN ON MAP rnED IN BOOK A AT PAGE 6, IH n£ QTY OF ARROYO GRANDE, COUNTY Of SAN WIS OBISPO. CAUFORNIA O'M:fER'S CERDEICAJE• WE HEREBY CONSENT TO 1l<E DE\nOPMENT OF R£M. PROPERTY stlO...... ON MS II~ ANO CEffllfY THAT~ ARE THE L£CA1. OM-ltRS NW ntAT m[ INFORMATION HEROO IS TRU£ ANO CORRECT TO THE BEST f# OUR KNO'M..EDGE AND BWEF' Nl<T COMMERCIAL INC. IH54 HIGUERA STREET, SUITE B SAN WlS CEISPO, CA 93401 ELEVAT\ON•82.117" PER TEC ENGINEERING (DATUM UHKND....,.) UTILITY SffiVICES• WA mt. QTY OF' ARROYO GR.ANOE SEv.£R: QTY 'Of ARROYO GR.AMlE PHONE. \'ERIZON El.EC" PAQFIC GAS & ElLCTRIC GAS SOUTHERN CAL. GAS COMPANY CABLE. OfARTER COMUUNlCATIONS I OT COVERAGE• LOCATION AREA (91qft) PERCENT PROJECT BOUNDARY PROPERTY LINE EXISTING WATER LINE D'JSTINO S£WER LINE EXISTING GAS LINE EXISTING FIR[ HYDRANT DISTINO STREET LICHT POPOSm SlREET IJQfT PRCFOSED e\111.DlNG ---- PRCJ'OSED WAU<WAY ~ PRCPOSED WIJJ.. PRCJ'OSED WATER PRCPOSED SEWER PRCPOSED STORM DRAIN PRCl'OSED SD INLET IJ!l1 PROPOSED FIRE HWRANT PRCPOSED UND£R~OIJHO 1-------l DETENTION STRUCTUR£ -------,; Item 9.a. - Page 148 I' ' '· EXISTING ( POPLAR BASIN TRAmC troEX, LICENSED SECTI~~~~ TO st OE~~J'J' :~REPORT ~~ ENGINEER. ANO ACCOU SIRE£! SECTION A-A GRANO AVENUE -NTS- OA'!E. Jlll...Y 14, 2015 DRAINAGE SUMMARY IFORNIA RWOCB) REJEHTION (SrATE OF' CAL STORMWATER TION COUMEROAl. LOT 1 PmCENlilL R\..tlCfF COEF' ~00 (cu-ft) ~ac) X9STH165(1n) X 060 ~MEROAI. ~TJp~~~ 065(.ac) X I 5( RUNOFF COEF' Ml RESIOtNTtAL ~~l~~Tll.E. ~itoc) X 1 65(1n) X RUNOfl' COO" 042 TOTAL REOl.llRfD STORAGE WiEliJl:.. PRO..ECT BOUNDARY PROPERTY UHE EXISTING WATER Ul'fE EXISTING SDtR LINE EXISTING GAS UN£ EXISTING FIRE HYCRAIH EXISTING SlREET UGHT POFOSED S1R£ET LIGHT PROPOSED BU!UHNG PROPOSED WA!X'llA.Y PROPOSED WALL PROPOSED WAlIR PROPOSED SEwm PROPOSED STORM DRAIN PROPOSED SD INLET PROPOSED FIRE Hl'tlRANT =~~~it:~ ACCESS!SLE PAnt --im-- " 1:-:-:-.::-:::::-~ e;a1;;:11::1 r.:rl:'lii::: ~~~~cu-n) • 11800 (cu-ft) Item 9.a. - Page 149 ----------;-------------------------------------___J ,' k '-------- ~----~ 4!;. ___ - UTILITY SERVICES WA~ QTY CF ARROlO GRANDE SEWER. QTY CF ARROYO CRANCE PHCliE.. 'IERIZON El.EC-PAC!flC GAS & El.ECTRIC: GAS. SOUTHERN CAL. GAS COMPANY CABLE. QlARTER COMMUNICATIOHS PRO..ECT BOUHOARY PROPERTY UNE EXISTING WATER UNE EXISTING SEVER LINE EXISTING GAS ltlE EXISTING RR£ HYDRANT EXISTING STREET LIGHT POPOSED STRtET LIGHT PROPOSED BUll.D~G PROPOSED YINJ<WAY PROPOSED WAU. PROPOSED WATER PROPOSED STORM ORNN PROPOSED SO ltf..ET [!l!I PROPOSED F1RE HYDRANT ~~~~~~ND c::::::J PROPOSED ~ LATERAL---- PROPOSED WAltR LA.TtRAL -- Al313BEYIADQ~S· ROW RIGHT Of' WAY FS FIMISKED SURFACE EX. EXISTING ,. FINISHED CRACE PVT ff FlNlstiED FLOOR "" H' HJQ-i POINT FH flRE H'ltlRANT ro TOP Cf" GRATE SS SANITARY SEYrm .. GRADE BREAK "' STOOM DRAIN t C<NlERUNE ,. EXISTING GRADE stREEf UQlT Item 9.a. - Page 150 -------___J I '------------- ''c== 0-C .. ~= ~ .. : ~ ~ ~ ~. > ~~ ~ ~~~ ~ = c:~· '-~='C=C: ::..::CC: --_ 1 i. ________ _ /°""-~~ r _____ " ___ ..,'."',.~--~---I N M"45'00-w m or :.~ --------~--~---r w m ---~ ~ r ,::....,.,./~-------------- !'."""/ ,-/,,/,,/ / / DEMAL~AtttS1 OOUl.OfACCDS <;; "\ • l/ / ([XC[PT.U[N111'tl) (o:C%J'fAfCl'tlllf:5) l. I f, (/ 1/1'7/ .. 7~77"7 ~ : Lm..J. LQI..2. -I /1 / ,,. / u ZW!sorT .-JPT ) f/ : ~' / ftltc:oo:N'ClM nllCIJC)CUIQll ' jj • / / / CPl.ff'OSDl-llllllt) (NPC15D1-IUJCTI) RO~ ~ / / ; ~I V " f ~.. w 11 I .j ~ " 7 I I ii r.-r r/'-/ "·-;7·· (, "; ~JRJ~usnJr' 1 / " • / ,. / / / ~OFO£D1c:.ancw. ,/ ,, t. llW'ID~~ .. , IJ'J r00 ·; 1 ~ { V• ,/ , ~ ·/ , I •> / / ,..1 I Dl5TDf<l f] 1 (y " • I ;,, .A I llOUKOAA't' / / :::>·" :'. ;,i " I ' I I: ·I (, ', / .... , ------~ ---------, ---sa II t / ,,,_'"l, Jo' / ~ ~/ : k ~ I UT J r" e'1-:,: ,o'I ; y 11n:,~ J 1 ! .~ ! /;, I fl II' ~ <;),. /; ,, . I ·/ , /,,7/ ~J I 11 ;, ~ ' / ' / // ) • I , II ( " v-~ """~=; I ' 'j r/ / -,; ::i: / 'I (lxtV'TATENmlCSt It: I v / ,.-;F?"/'.);'; ~a : I 1:1 :· v ;, ~ ~ -----II• . ·~ I: ~ ;,L'./L.L'.L dLL.L;L:LL.{, ~ ~ ' : l I~ II // ;!" Li.. e ir I "' " ,/;/-:t"/'/'//;./."_/!'_/(_L".'.:~/ ... 9".'.;~ ' __ µ._____ .sa !~ I ' ;7:7~-~z' ! ~ ~, PHASE II ----' r I'-' :I:~' 1·:;.p• ,,. ,, ;'.I I I I I' / /, ---------1 l ' , __ <· /1 . _,. ----t.m..!Z. i Ir -- ~ ;i : Lm..a ' 2• l'ttla~~· : ~' : -~ _:I, = " fT~""~-0~-_ / ,,! ----------' I I ', ::i ,--"-----.1 1,T .... / /' 11-r ~ I~~ : I ; / I ' l: I / :; I 'I I· -;. ~ '11' /,. -~ ' 11 ; / ///'~ JI --;.---»----, z I b~ --L J, .; ;~ I r -~ ._ ' --{r if ~l ,1 I I --;:_--;--.--j : --.16 --l ·;:-~=::-f1-=~-----:::-:;.--~:-T--:-"'-:-1 T~::-:·f~ -'r1 : ;~ ~I II jl 11 : 11 11 11 !llJlLI. 1 I ! ! 1 l I I I I I I J ,,....., ! I ~WT 11• 1' I I Ull...1A. I un.a LI LQUi.. I Ull..1.1. 1 Ull..11. I. I Lm..11. I LDI.Ja.. -........... ti' [ I ,, I ~l1l4:&QJ"fr 11111$1'$1' r ! 2'12JSTI r 111ua:n 111uSFTr 11111a:n ~ 111uRTr lZllt:la'TI [ A./. I I l_l_ ___ 1 _____ 1 ! ____ ~ I ~----J t _____ ~ ~----~ '----__ : LJ ____ : :J:t!f I ~~"::: ;'7' /,I I I I II 11 11 I ,1 11 !1 ![~ , -+ ,, I .sa .JI! ,, .Jll 1 rr-~~ -_ Nfll!l'45'33"'W 401.M° ~-"' ' I I, Ill! .~\::;',.;;,~ PEOPL.E"S SElF HELP HOUSING >-',,, (NOT A PARl) ~~~~:~~, u II U ~:m1,) ~1' I I I 11 1 irli ~~~G I 11----f-1!.~-- QWNEH:_ NKT COW.EROIJ.. lNC. 654 HIGUERA STIUrr SUITE B SAM WS OEISPO CA 9J.401 PHaiE. (805) ~1-11004 App! JCANT !Nm COMPANY" Hl<T COMMEROAL INC. CONTACT NlQC TOMF'J(INS 684 HIGUERA. STREET, SUITE B SAN uns OBISPO CA 93401 PHONE. (80!5) !541-9004 IIIl.t:.. FlOELITY NATlctlAL lln.E COMPANY 2222 SOUTH BROADWAY, SUlTE G SANTA MARIA. CA 934$4 PROJECT INFO• pREPARER'S SJATEMENT• THIS PLAN Sa' WAS PREPARED OY. RRU OESICN GROUP 37" S. KKilJERA ST .. S1L 102 SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA !lJ.401 PH (805) '43-1794 UNDER Tllt DIRECTION Of JOSHUA ROSERTS, PE. 81,798 ~ M!OiAEI.. S STANTON PLS 15702 3563 SUEl..DO ST, UNIT Q SAN WIS OSISPO, CA 93401 ~~~(~~~ .... ~~ ~ 2014 022-131-052 & 54 TOTAL UMTS PROPOSED- MIXED-USE. RESIDENTIAL. RESIDENTIAL.. FLOOR .AREA RA 110- RESIOENTIAL LOTS. COMMERCAL LOTS. LEGAi QESCBIPJJON• ZONE "!: -MAP No 06079C1601G 100 xl20' TEMPORARY ACCESS EASEMENT 10' WIDE PUBUC WATERLINE EASEMENT GUU (SP) GMU (SP) 4 38 oc (189 819 sq-fl) 20 o~cs PER ACRE :lJ 2J DENSITY Ul>aTS PER ACR Zl8.!5!l DENSITY UNITS PER ACRE " !4) TWO-BEDROOM UNITS 36) THREE-BEDROOM UNITS 2) FOUR-EEDROOU UNITS COMMEROAl. FAA "" 0 l3 2,060 s<i-ft TO 4,207 sq-ft Eo. (38 TOTAL) ~.521 oq-ft 18047 •q--fl ID.Jill mq-rt (3 TOTAL) A PORllctl Of Bl.00< 86 Of mt TOMI OF CROVER AS SHO'Mi ctl YAP FUD 11\1 B001C A AT PACE e, 1H THE CTY Of ARROYO GRANDE. COUNTY Of SAN WIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA BENCHMARK· THE BENO! MARK FOft THIS PRQ.£CT JS A FOtJNO BRASS CAP IN MONllMENT 'Mil.. AT lHE CENTERUNE EC Of COUR11..ANO SlRE£T AS SHOl'lff El..EVATlctl-82.97' PER TEC ENGINEElm!G (DAnJM UNKNO'ftt-1) um !TY SERVICES• WAlIR: arr Of ARROYO CRANDE SEWER: QTY OF ARROYO CRANOE PHctlE.VERfZOO El.EC-PACIRC c:AS & EILClRIC GAS: SOUTHERN CALFORNIA GAS COMPANY CABLE. CHARTER COMUUNICATIONS PHASE I ~-------, ~-- PHASE II pHASING DIAGRAM EASEMElilS. ~~~~~=s 'O' VARY ~ =~~U~TTY44) <9~~T~Ef~~~ ~ ~rusuc WATER UTR.JTY ~ ~t\JBUC SE'MR UTIUTY 0~~~U1TUT't <S> ~Rll/AlE ACCDS Item 9.a. - Page 151 N 0 3 (]) > (]) > ..... u (]) Vl .... (]) 0.... Item 9.a. - Page 152 Item 9.a. - Page 153 Perspective View of South Courtland Street I i '-,--~.: ,, .. I ' ---1 SCALE 1/8"=1 '--0' (24x36 sheet) SCALE 1/16"=1'--0" (12x18 sheet) ,,,.,,,,,,,...,_,,,,,,"""",,_.,n:--.,,,-.Tr"t:Tm:l,,,.-""'1r,' Item 9.a. - Page 154 Perspective View of Building 3 Item 9.a. - Page 155 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 15-002 FOR DEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF EAST GRAND AVENUE AND COURTLAND STREET WHEREAS, the Property Owner is the owner of real property consisting of approximately 4.47 acres identified as Subarea 3 of the Berry Gardens Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, the property has been the subject of several development applications in recent history; and WHEREAS, the Property Owner and City of Arroyo Grande desire to facilitate the development and construction of a mixed-use project on the property; and WHEREAS, the Property Owner and City of Arroyo Grande entered into a Memorandum of Understanding on February 10, 2015 to negotiate in good faith the terms and conditions of a Development Agreement ; and WHEREAS, a development agreement is a contractual agreement which specifies the intensity, timing and conditions of development of real property; and WHEREAS, development agreements are used to provide an enhanced degree of certainty in the development process for both the property owner/developer and the public agency; and WHEREAS, Municipal Code Section 16.16.150 addresses development agreements; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.16.150, a duly noticed public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on August 4, 2015; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.16.150, the Planning Commission, on August 4, 2015 adopted a resolution recommending that the City Council approve a development agreement for the proposed project; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.16.150, after consideration of all testimony and all relevant evidence, the City Council has determined that the following findings of fact can be made in an affirmative manner: 1. The development agreement is consistent with the goals, objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs of the General Plan and any applicable specific plan. Item 9.a. - Page 156 ORDINANCE NO. PAGE2 In conjunction with the proposed General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Amendment, the proposed Development Agreement is consistent with the goals, objectives, polices, general land uses, and programs of the Arroyo Grande General Plan and the Berry Gardens Specific Plan. 2. The development agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for, the land use district in which the real property is located; In conjunction with the proposed General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Amendment, the proposed Development Agreement is consistent with ihe uses authorized in the Gateway Mixed-Use (GMU) district, including commercial development and high-density, single-family detached residential development consistent with mixed-use and multifamily densities prescribed in the Arroyo Grande General Plan Land Use Element and Municipal Code. 3. The development agreement is in conformity with public convenience, general welfare, and good land use practice; In conjunction with the proposed General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Amendment, the proposed Development Agreement is in conformity with the uses authorized in the Gateway Mixed-Use (GMU) district, including commercial development and high-density, single-family detached residential development consistent with mixed-use and multifamily densities prescribed in the Arroyo Grande General Plan Land Use Element and Municipal Code, and therefore is in conformity with the public convenience, general welfare, and good land use practice. 4. The development agreement is will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare; In conjunction with the proposed General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Amendment, there is nothing contained within the proposed Development Agreement that will adversely affect the public health, safety or welfare, as the proposed development agreement is in conformity with the uses authorized in the Gateway Mixed-Use (GMU) district, including commercial development and high-density, single-family detached residential development consistent with mixed-use and multifamily densities prescribed in the Arroyo Grande General Plan Land Use Element and Municipal Code. 5. The development agreement will not, in respect to the subject property or any other property, adversely affect the orderly development thereof or the preservation of property values; Item 9.a. - Page 157 ORDINANCE NO. PAGE3 The proposed Development Agreement and subsequent permit approvals will complete development of the Berry Gardens Specific Plan Area and in conjunction with the proposed General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Amendment will not adversely affect the orderly development thereof or the preservation of property values as the resulting development is in conformity with the uses authorized in the Gateway Mixed-Use (GMU district, including commercial development and high-density, single-family detached residential development consistent with mixed-use and multifamily densities prescribed in the Arroyo Grande General Plan Land Use Element and Municipal Code. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: The above recitals and findings are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 2: The City Council hereby approves the Development Agreement with NKT Commercial, LLC as set forth in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 3: A summary of this Ordinance shall be published in a newspaper published and circulated in the City of Arroyo Grande at least five (5) days prior to the City Council meeting at which the proposed Ordinance is to be adopted. A certified copy of the full text of the proposed Ordinance shall be posted in the office of the City Clerk. Within fifteen (15) days after adoption of the Ordinance, the summary with the names of those City Council members voting for and against the Ordinance shall be published again, and the City Clerk shall post a certified copy of the full text of such adopted Ordinance. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its passage. SECTION 4: This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its passage. SECTION 5: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional. On motion by Council Member _____ , seconded by Council Member ____ _ and on the following roll call vote to wit: Item 9.a. - Page 158 ORDINANCE NO. PAGE4 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing Ordinance was adopted this __ day of _____ 2015. Item 9.a. - Page 159 ORDINANCE NO. PAGES JIM HILL, MAYOR ATTEST: KELLY WETMORE, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: DIANNE THOMPSON, CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: HEATHER WHITHAM, CITY ATTORNEY Item 9.a. - Page 160 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: City of Arroyo Grande Attn: City Clerk 300 E. Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93421 Space Above This Line For Recorder's Use EXHIBIT A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (Non Recording Fee -Exempt) THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (this "Agreement') dated as of this_ day of __ , 2015 (the "Effective Date"), by and between the City of Arroyo Grande ("City"), a municipal corporation, and NKT Commercial, LLC a California limited liability company ("Property Owner"). RECITALS WHEREAS, Property Owner is the owner of real property consisting of approximately 4.47 acres identified as Subarea 3 of the Berry Gardens Specific Plan located in the City of Arroyo Grande, State of California and legally described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (hereinafter referred to as the "Property"); and WHEREAS, Property Owner and City desire to facilitate the development and construction of a mixed use (commercial and office/residential) project on the property (the "Project") in order to accomplish three shared important goals: 1) Provide NKT with sufficient flexibility to induce investment related to the Project; 2) Generate economic revitalization of the Grand Avenue corridor through a high quality Gateway development project; and 3) Preserve the adjacent neighborhood's residential character; and WHEREAS, to strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation in comprehensive planning and reduce the economic risk of development, the Legislature of the State of California enacted California Government Code §65864; and WHEREAS, City, in order to accomplish the same, enacted Arroyo Grande Municipal Code § 16.16.150, setting forth the required process for reviewing, processing and approving development agreements; and WHEREAS, The City has determined that the Project is a development for which a development agreement is appropriate. A development agreement will eliminate uncertainty in 1 Item 9.a. - Page 161 the City's land use planning for, and secure orderly development of, the Project and otherwise achieve the goals and purposes of the city. In exchange for the public benefits and other benefits to the City and the public, Owner desires to receive vested rights, including, without limitation, legal assurances that the City will grant permits and approvals required for the development. Occupancy and use of the Project over the Project's estimated development period in accordance with the Existing City Laws (as defined in this Agreement), subject to the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. In order to effectuate these purposes, the City and Owner desire to enter into this Agreement; and WHEREAS, City published a notice of intention to consider adoption of this Agreement pursuant to Government Code Section §§65090 and 65091 and duly held a public hearing; and WHEREAS, the City finds the following: a. This Agreement is consistent with the goals, objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan. b. This Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for, the 2015 Specific Plan Amendment in which the Project is located. c. This Agreement is in conformity with public convenience, general welfare and good land use practice. d. This Agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare. e. This Agreement will not, in respect to the Property, or any other property, adversely affect the orderly development thereof or the preservation of property values; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. ___ , the City approved this Agreement with property Owner, setting forth the permitted uses of the Property, design guidelines, density and intensity of use, and the maximum height and size of building. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is acknowledged, City and Property Owner agree as follows: Section 1. Recitals. The above recitals are hereby incorporated into the body of this Agreement as though set forth in full herein. Section 2. Term and Periodic Review. This Agreement shall be effective immediately upon the Effective Date and shall expire five (5) years from said date, unless otherwise extended by City in writing pursuant to Section 7. 2 Item 9.a. - Page 162 a. City shall, not less than every twelve (12) months from the Effective Date, comprehensively review Property Owner's efforts to comply with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Section 3. Development Entitlements. The Property Owner agrees to develop and construct Alternative 2 described in the MOU between City and Property Owner dated February 10th, 2015, and as described in further detail in Exhibit "B" and by this reference hereby incorporated. For the term of this Agreement, the Project is hereby approved subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein and in the adopted Negative Declaration dated November 14, 2014 on file with the office of the City Clerk, located at 300 E. Branch Street, and as further set forth in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. The entitlements set forth above will include various additional conditions and requirements including, but not limited to additional discretionary and ministerial approvals, with which Property Owner will be required to comply in order to develop the Property and construct and operate the Project. Such approvals shall be reviewed and approved in accordance with the City of Arroyo Grande Municipal Code, California Environmental Quality Act and all other applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations. Section 4. Vested Right. Property Owner shall have a vested right to develop the Project in accordance with this Agreement. Section 5. Fees. Property Owner shall pay to City all fees, including, but not limited to building permit, plan check, inspection, water and sewer connection fees, encroachment permit, improvement plan, application and processing or other City development related fees. Development impact fees shall be payable at the time of the issuance of the permit for such construction activities on the site, as permitted in the City municipal code. Section 6. Referendum. The parties acknowledge that City's approval of this Agreement is a legislative act subject to referendum. Section 7. Amendment or Cancellation. This Agreement may be amended, or canceled in whole or in part, by mutual written consent of the parties subject to compliance with Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Section §16.16.150.F.2. Notice of intention to amend or cancel any portion of the Agreement shall be given in a manner provided by Government Code Section §65867. Section 8. Environmental Compliance. 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 dated 2015. Section 9. Attorneys' Fees, Costs, and Expenses. In any litigation, arbitration, or other proceeding in law or equity by which one party to the Agreement seeks to enforce its rights under the Agreement, to resolve any alleged dispute, breach, default, or misrepresentation in connection with any of the provisions of this Agreement, to seek a declaration of any rights or obligations under this Agreement, or to interpret the provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing 3 Item 9.a. - Page 163 party shall be entitled to recover from the losing party actual attorneys' fees incurred to resolve the dispute and to enforce the final judgment, award, decision, or order and such fees, costs; or expenses shall be in addition to any other relief to which the prevailing party may be entitled. Section 10. Notices. To be effective, all notices, requests, demands, and other communications required or permitted under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be delivered either in person or by certified mail, postage prepared, retqm receipt requested. Notice is deemed effective on delivery if served personally on the party to whom notice is to be given and delivery if served personally on the party to whom notice is to be given, by first class mail, registered or certified, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, and properly addressed as set forth below. Any correctly addressed notice that is refused, unclaimed, or undeliverable because of an act or omission of the party to be notified shall be deemed effective as of the first date that said notice was refused, unclaimed, or deemed undeliverable by the postal authorities. The addresses for purposes of giving notice are as set forth below but each party may change its address by written notice in accordance with this paragraph. If to Property Owner: lfto CITY: NKT Commerical, LLC Attn: Nicholas Tompkins 684 Higuera Suite B San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 City of Arroyo Grande Attn: City Manager 300 E. Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93421-0550 Section 11. Authorizations. All officers and individuals executing, this Agreement and other related documents on behalf of the respective parties do hereby certify and warrant that they have the capacity and have been duly authorized to so execute said documents on behalf of the entity so indicated. · Section 12. Headings and Captions. The captions and headings of this Agreement are inserted for convenience only and shall not be deemed a part of this Agreement and shall not be used in interpreting this Agreement or in determining any of the rights or obligations of the parties to this Agreement. Section 13. Severability. If any term, provision, covenant, or condition of this Agreement shall be or become illegal, invalid, null, void, unenforceable, or against public policy, in whole or in part, or shall be held by any court of competent jurisdiction to be illegal, invalid, null, void, unenforceable, or against public policy, in whole or in part, or shall be held by any court of competent jurisdiction to be illegal, invalid, null, or void, or against public policy, the term, provision, covenant, or condition shall be deemed severable, and the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect and shall not be affected, impaired, invalidated. The term, provision, covenant, or condition that is so invalidated, voided, or held to be unenforceable shall be modified or changed by the parties to the extent possible to carry out the intentions and directives set forth in this Agreement. 4 Item 9.a. - Page 164 Section 14. Countemart Execution. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. Section 15. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the final, complete, and exclusive statement of the terms of the agreement between the parties pertaining to the Agreement and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous agreements, promises, representations, warranties, understandings, or undertakings by either of the parties, either oral or written, of any character or nature. No party has been induced to enter into this Agreement by, nor is any party relying on, any representation or warranty outside those expressly set forth in this Agreement. Section 16. Ambiguities. Each party and its counsel have participated fully in the review and revision of this Lease. Any rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not apply in interpreting this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement which shall be deemed effective as of the first date set forth above. CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE NKT COMMERCIAL, LLC By: _____________ ~ By: _____________ ~ Jim Hill, Mayor Nicholas Tompkins, Managing Member Date: _____________ _ Date: -------------~ Attest: As Approved to Form: Kelly Wetmore, City Clerk Paul F. Ready Date: ·--------------Date: -------------- As Approved to Form: Heather K. Whitham, City Attorney Date: -------------- 5 Item 9.a. - Page 165 Exhibit "A" Legal Description 6 Item 9.a. - Page 166 Exhibit "B" For purposes of clarity, the Project is described as two separate areas; Subarea 3a and Subarea3b. Subarea 3a will refer to the mixed-use commercial portion of the Project fronting onto East Grand Avenue, while Subarea 3b will refer to the residential portion of the Project fronting onto South Courtland Street. a. Project Specifics: 1. Subarea 3a will include approximately 15,600 square feet of commercial or office space divided among three (3) separate buildings, representing a 5,000 square foot expansion froin the Project submitted to the City Council on December 9, 2014. The buildings will be located on three (3) separate lots ranging in size from approximately 10,000 square feet to approximately 26,000 square feet. The western building will front onto East Grand A venue and will include approximately 5,500 square feet of mixed-use commercial or office space with four (4) residential units located on the second story. The eastern building will front onto East Grand A venue and will include approximately 6,500 square feet of commercial or office space. The third building will be located along South Courtland Street and will include approximately 3,600 square feet of commercial or office space. Parking for Subarea 3a will be located behind and to the side of the two buildings fronting onto East Grand A venue. In addition, three (3) outdoor plaza/paseo spaces at ground-level will be incorporated within Subarea 3a and will provide opportunities for outdoor dining. Tue central plaza spaces located along the central driveway will incorporate planters, furnishings, and/or other features to separate the plaza spaces from the central driveway. The plaza space at the corner of East Grand A venue and South Courtland Street will incorporate a low wall feature to minimize noise and will include planters, furnishings, and/or other features. Front yard setbacks for the commercial buildings fronting East Grand A venue will be between zero (0) to five (5) feet. The side yard setbacks for the commercial buildings along South Courtland Street and the interior side yard setbacks along the City Limit Line will be a minimum of zero (0) to five (5) feet. Rear yard setbacks for the commercial buildings along Subarea 3b will be aminimum of zero (0) to five (5) feet. 11. Subarea 3b will include thirty-eight (38) single-family residential units in a small lot, detached format that includes driveways, on-and off-street parking, and a centrally located Neighborhood Green. This represents a reduction in area devoted to housing by three (3) units from the Project submitted to the City Council on December 9, 2014. The minimum lot size for the single-family residential parcels will be 2,000 square-feet. Front yard setbacks for residential units fronting onto South Courtland Street will be a minimum often (10) feet. Residential units adjacent to Subarea 3a parking areas will have a minimum setback of ten (10) feet. Units with a rear yard to the City Limit Line will have a minimum setback of ten (10) feet. Those units facing the private drive will 7 Item 9.a. - Page 167 have a minimum street setback of two (2) feet, with a minimum side yard setback of four (4) feet. Units fronting onto the Neighborhood Green will have a front yard, open space setback of eight (8) feet. b. Architecture and Design i. All buildings located within Subarea 3a will be designed in a contemporary architectural style. Building designs will include changes in wall planes, glazing at ground level, a variety of materials, awnings, and signage. Materials will include but are not limited to brick, plaster, steel, and aluminum. Street/Parking lot lighting and wall lighting will be incorporated within Subarea 3a. Signage will allow for up to one (1) wall sign per building face with the total area for each tenants sign on each building face not exceeding one and a half (1.5) square feet of sign area for each linear foot of building frontage for the business. The four ( 4) mixed-use residential units located above the western building will be accessed from the rear of the building. All mixed-use residential units will have a minimum of one (1) balcony. Perimeter fencing or walls along the East Grand Avenue and South Courtland Street frontages will be limited to three and a half (3 .5) feet in height unless the portion over three and a half (3.5) feet, up to six (6) feet, is 75% light emitting, or combined with a raised planter. All fences and walls will be subject to discretionary review. Maximum allowed building height for Subarea 3a, including all architectural features, will not exceed 40 feet in height. IL Subarea 3b will be designed in a contemporary, mid-century architectural style that complements Subarea 3a. Color and material selection will be consistent with the mid-century architectural style. Materials will include but are not limited to plaster, fiber cement siding, asphalt shingles, corrugated metal, and natural wood. Street/Parking lot lighting, bollard path lighting, and wall lighting will be incorporated within Subarea 3b. Those residential units facing onto South Courtland Street will include porches that address the street. Residential units facing the Neighborhood Green will address the common open space. Those units surrounding the Neighborhood Green and four (4) units fronting onto South Courtland Street will have a side yard reciprocal easement that creates a useable eight (8) foot patio space for said units. Units adjacent to Subarea 3a and the City Limit Line will include a maximum six ( 6) foot retaining wall with six ( 6) foot fences placed on top, for a maximum height of 12 feet, where appropriate. Fencing between Subarea 3a parking and Subarea 3b residential units will be double sided to buffer between parking areas and residences. Perimeter fencing or walls along the East Grand A venue and South Courtland Street frontages will be limited to three and a half (3 .5) feet in height unless the portion over three and a half (3 .5) feet, up to six ( 6) feet, is 7 5% light emitting, or combined with a raised planter. All fences and walls will be subject to discretionary review. Maximum allowed building height for Subarea 3b will not exceed 35 feet or two-stories, whichever is less. Total building height including all architectural features will not exceed 40 feet. 8 Item 9.a. - Page 168 c. Neighborhood Green i. The Neighborhood Green will be centrally located in Subarea 3b and will include a pavilion, sitting areas, play structure, flex spaces, and mailbox area. A mixture of hardscape and greenscape will be included with the landscape palette focused on drought tolerant plantings. Pedestrian pathways will be incorporated to provide access to the Neighborhood Green throughout Subarea 3b. d. Density 1. As calculated by AGMC Subsection 16.36.030.C, Subarea 3a will have 3.23 units per acre while Subarea 3b will have 18.59 units per acre. e. Circulation and Access Improvements to streets and intersections shall be generally limited to the proposed improvements associated with Proposed General Plan Amendment 14-002, Specific Plan Amendment 14-001, Conditional Use Permit 14-009 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14- 001. i. Subarea 3a will include three (3) access points, two (2) along East Grand Avenue and one (1) along South Courtland Street. The westernmost driveway along East Grand A venue will be designed to only allow vehicular egress in an eastbound manner. The center driveway along East Grand Avenue will be designed to allow two-way access but only in a right-ingress and right-egress configuration. The single driveway along South Courtland Street will allow full ingress and egress to Subarea 3a. 11. Subarea 3b will include two (2) access points, one (1) along South Courtland Street and one (1) emergency access from the People's Self Help Housing Development located to the south. The South Courtland Street private drive will allow full ingress and egress to Subarea 3b and will be aligned with the existing commercial driveway to the east. The private drive will allow shared use by vehicles, bicyclists, and pedestrians. The emergency access drive will only allow emergency vehicle access to and from the People's Self Help Housing Development and will be maintained as part of the Project. f Parking 1. Subarea 3a will include a total of seventy-seven (77) parking spaces. Sixty-nine (69) will be open, unassigned parking spaces for commercial use. Eight (8) additional parking spaces will be provided for the mixed-use residential units, of which four (4) spaces will be specifically signed and dedicated for use by said units. All parking spaces will be located to the rear and the side of Subarea 3a buildings. 1i. Subarea 3b will include a total of ninety-nine (99) parking spaces. Seventy-six (76) will be enclosed, off-street parking spaces, representing two (2) spaces per unit. In addition, twenty-three (23) guest parking spaces will be provided, representing 0.6 guest parking spaces per 9 Item 9.a. - Page 169 unit. Guest parking spaces will be dispersed throughout Subarea 3b with a majority located in the southwest comer. g. Pedestrian Improvements 1. Pedestrian improvements will include improved and widened sidewalks for the project frontage along East Grand Avenue and South Courtland Street. Street trees will be provided along East Grand A venue and South Courtland Street within ten (10) feet of curb edge where feasible. South Courtland Street will be widened and will allow for on-street parallel parking along the Project frontage. A Class II bicycle lane will be provided along the Project frontage on South Courtland Street. The Project's fair share of cross walk enhancements at the East Grand A venue and South Courtland Street will also be incorporated. h. Storm Drain 1. Each drainage subarea will incorporate post-construction storm water management measures consistent with Regional Water Quality Control Board standards. Project water quality measures will 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 will be directed to the east, across Courtland Street to the Poplar Basin, which was designed and built to accommodate development of the Subareas. j. Timing i. Property Owner will commence construction of both Subarea 3a and 3b within five ( 5) years of approval. 10 Item 9.a. - Page 170 EXHIBIT A Order Number: 4001-4741S19 (LI) Page Number: 6 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Real property in the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, described as follows: (Certificate of Compliance 2009-038S8S) (A.P.N.: 077-131-0S2 and 077-131-0S4) A portion of Block 86, Block 114 and Rockaway Avenue of the Town of Grover, in the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, according to map filed November 23, 1892 in Book A, Page 6 of Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County, and that portion of Remainder of Tract 2471, in the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, according to map filed August 16, 2004 in Book 24, Pages 9, 10 and 11 of Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County, and being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast Corner of Lot 1 of Tract 21S8, in the City of Grover Beach, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, according to map filed May 2, 1994 in Book 17, Page 23 of Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County; thence along the Easterly line thereof and along the East line of the land described in deed to John Bradley Forde and Anita Madeline Forde in Document No. 2003122906 filed October 22, 2003 in the office of the County Recorder of said County, South 03°14'S1" West, 64S.07 feet to the Northwest Comer of Lot 7 of said Tract 2471; thence along the Northerly line of said Tract 2471 and the Northerly line of Tract 2260 Phase I, in the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, according to map filed November 3, 2000 in Book 19, Page 43 of Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County thereof, South 86°4S'3S" East, 411.86 feet to a point on the Westerly line of an existing SO-foot Easement for Road Purposes, as shown on Parcel Map AG 00-301, in the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis Obispo, State of california, according to map filed June 2S, 2002 in Book S6, Page S4 of Parcel Maps, in the office of County Recorder of said County, which point is South 86°4S'3S" East, 7 .00 feet from the Northeast Comer of Lot 84 of said Tract 2260 Phase I; thence along the Westerly line of said SO-foot Easement for Road Purposes, North 03°14'46" East, 645.00 feet to a point along the Southerly Right-of-Way of East Grand Avenue; thence along said Southerly Right-of-Way line thereof, North 86°45'00" West, 411.84 feet to the Point of Beginning; EXCEPT the South 172.25 feet thereof. APN: 077-131-052 and 077-131-054 FirstAmerican 1itle Item 9.a. - Page 171 INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ATTACHMENT 16 Development Agreement 15-002, General Plan Amendment 14-002, Specific Plan Amendment 14-001, Conditional Use Permit 14-009 & Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14-001 Southwest Corner of East Grand Avenue and South Courtland Street November 2014 (Revised July 2015) Item 9.a. - Page 172 Item 9.a. - Page 173 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 Project: Development Agreement 15-002, 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 Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 • http://www.arroyogrande.org/ Project Description: 'j -~~, The proposed project involves entering into a Oe\telopment Agreement, a"fqeb,ding Arroyo Grande #"""'""""" '" -"~';l',,_ .. ," {~.:::"~~;;;;~ General Plan Land Use Element and the Berry Gardens~S~::~ifi~:~J~~telating to dev~t~~ment of Subarea 3 (4.47 acres). The amendments allq/ ~£.creation of ·g~!la.~~~?;3a for commerciar·;aevelopment with approximately 15,600 square-feet of bu,,Jiii@H.51,~e and fou·rt{~£tnixed-use residential condominiums of approximately 1,000 square-feet, as welr~];£ff~~afsqtion of sutia':f~a .. 3b for residential development with up to a maximum of thirty-eight (38) sing1~%fur.nilv:cf~~t~~mial unlt~~~~~nere is also a pending Conditional Use Permit (CUP 14-009) .a · !_on for Suti°~f~~a 3a aif··:: ·. ~~ting fiii"@!~!ive Tract Map (VTTM 14-001) I. . f b .· ·}X· •• .coi}i;, •.,·.·, •, app 1cat1on or Su area.a :;:···· -:,-::::::···:::..::... ·.:c ~iir t· ": · ~=~~;rAf~~f:};- summary Document Pre"ii~r:"'tion: ·r.,z~~~~~~~ ~~. Pursuant t9:;~@~f~t!ii.:!2~2.l ·:af.*h-~L.. ri~)~1J?,.9,Y.iron .. ~:~!al Quality Act, the City of Arroyo Grande (the 1r~"'""~~,,l'~'";;.,:.''"':~~ ....... ,.,. .... 'Yi> "" ~ .. ,.~~·~~ ~,.,.!>..,_..,.,.,,,,-...,,..,. {*"'"t" City) has.~ifit:1~·p"i:fn·ae·fitl~:ir.-evieweC:l§ar3d analyzea::;f -,. nitial~Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for ~~i>-~..''K~..;;~-,.f'y \f'l~~,r,,..;.~<·~ ·~:~~·:~: .. ;•~H~ '-»,. the prcf~§~~ .. d project an·a:-:t{~~;~:-.thaft~~~ .. docume .... fleet the independent judgment of the City. The City, as lea'.p.~~gency, also cori(L~ffis that;t!l~project mitigation measures detailed in these documents are ~'-";-,~,.·, -·.~.· "'.~?. y~~~~~·.l •• feasible and:Wilbbe implemente'S.~as state'd~'in::the Mitigated Negative Declaration. '<~~~~::... h. ..,:.='····.;:····~.~::;.:~,:j_.:J ... =·,! __ =;_ .. :~.i_ .. =1._.::··.~_.=~-~::_'.;.• ""¥' . ________ ;:_~11_~l~i..-:.}n=~J:"":: .. ---=-=: :;.;..;-==·· ·_~··_ 12 Nov 2014 20 July 2015 Teresa McClish, AICP ~:.q!f~Mif:: Community Development Dir~Hor Matthew Downing, AICP Associate Planner Date 12 Nov 2014 Date Revised 20 July 2015 Revised Page 3 of49 Item 9.a. - Page 174 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA lS-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 Table of Contents: lntroduction ............................................................ : ...................................................................................... 6 Introduction and Regulatory Guidance ..................................................................................................... 6 Lead Agency .............................................................................................................................................. 6 Purpose and Document Organization ....................................................................................................... 6 Summary of Findings ................................................................................................................................. 7 Project Description ................................................................................ , ....................................................... 8 lntroduction .................................................................................. !~-f~~~f. ................................................... 8 Location ··································: ......................................... ~i{o~~·····················································B Background and Need for Project .................................... 2~:;~~:~ ...... :·r~~~';::-.................................................... 9 Project Description ··:··········································~:jl,.::~: ............ ~'!f~{i,::·······································9 Other Required Public Agency Approvals ......... ~'{:~-·-0··:~~· ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• :;:~~~;:~~ .................................... 10 En:::~:e:::::~~;;~;:::::::::::::::::::::::~::::::::'.~~~::::::::::::~,:::::::::::::::::::::~~ Project Information ........................... .,.: • .-u •• · •• • •••.....••.•....••...... ,,,.w ............................................................. 11 • . ·~:~:f~:~;~::~~:;~~~~:;tH u~::~~~:~~::~~~~ Environmental Factors Potentially AffeGtetl .. :::-;:r.-::::;, •••••••••••••••••• ;.:,:.:;;~ ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••. 12 Determ.ination ····:········;t#.~;;::··········'.\;_;:~'~:.~~tt;············································12 Evaluation of Env1ronmental~lmr:,acts ........... ::.-;::·: ......... .::;.::::.~::.·.-;~.:;,~~:-;~ ......... ::·: .............................................. 13 · ~~@t;:r -. :-;;~~Wih-. ·-~~~tf::t§Mfi" -~~(::::f:j~~~~~~; Environmental Issues ·"'''·"···············''·'·: ................. ·.: .... :.~~~~···················"· ..................................................... 14 I. Aesthetics ............. ~~~{~~Hfh •......... J~t ................ '.:'.:!~K ........................................................................... 14 • AM-/T~~~~~-~~ ~~~~f:~~~:~». ,,5i;s~~f~~~f=~~~~~~-» . ···:si~~s~~~=~. 11. Agncu ltu~e:;~na::F.q restry ResQu r:ce:s·-:·:..-::::;-.:. _ ··--, ........ ·: .:::~~-...................................................................... 14 ~::~~~~~~~~~~~~~::::::-·::::::::::-::.::::::::::·.:::::::::.::-::_::.::::::::::::.::.:~~ VI. Geology ana;So1ls ................ ;t:-:.:;:.. ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••.••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 22 v11. Greenhous~·:~~~~~%ffi:~sion~::(1~~i········································································································23 v111 Hazards and Hazaraq~~~~~~~I~t1als .................................................................................................... 26 IX Hydrology and Water Qi:ii;\lify .............................................................................................................. 27 X. Land Use and Planning ........................................................................................................................ 30 XI. Mineral Resources .............................................................................................................................. 31 XII. Noise .................................................................................................................................................. 31 XIII. Population and Housing ................................................................................................................... 32 XIV. Public Services .................................................................................................................................. 33 XV. Recreation ......................................................................................................................................... 34 Page 4 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 175 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 XVI. Transportation/Traffic ...................................................................................................................... 34 XVII. Utilities and Service Systems .......................................................................................................... 37 Mandatory Findings of Significance ............................................................................................................ 39 Summary of Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................................... 41 References ................................................................................................................................................... 49 Documents & Maps ................................................................................................................................. 49 Consultations ........................................................................................................................................... 49 Page 5 of49 Item 9.a. - Page 176 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 Introduction Introduction and Regulatory Guidance The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) has been prepared by the City of Arroyo Grande (the City) to evaluate the potential environmental effects of the proposed project. This document has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code §21000 et seq., and the State CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations (CCR) §15000 et seq. ,.::::f ~;~~;;. An Initial Study is conducted by a lead agency to determine if ~-W~Ject may have a significant effect on ,,i;,."C,•,."i/;;~,""~ the environment [CEQA Guidelines §15063(a)]. If there is subsfilf.ixial evidence that a project may have a i. .. ; .. ~¥;zil-:,.:;,.:;.'.'.-" .. ;,. ·~~~ ~~s.,, significant effect on the environment, an EnvironmentaJ:~~~pact::~~gort (EIR) must be prepared, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines §15064(a). Howe~,~}~j{the lead ~l~~~ determines that revisions in the project plans or proposals made by or agreed to:"··· ::tfte applicant miti~te the potentially significant 4x-~ ,'i.~ -::-::<..:..:J. effects to a less-than-significant level, a Mitigat~~£N.~ ative Declaration m"a'i.i~~:~,prepared instead of an EIR [CEQA Guidelines §15070(b)]. The lead agency°$:f.epares a written statenie:tjt;:(;l_escribing the reasons · .. :;.., ~:; .. ~·~ ,•:\ "•-':"}:»: .. :~'\ a proposed project would not have a significant effea~eo the ~D:Y:!.f;gnment and;·::.t.~_ei:efore, why an EIR ,,. ..,.~.~ .. · ...... ~.,.,.,.,. ~;:-.. •Y.t • .. , need not be prepared. This IS/MND ... eonforms to the" ateat?;:r:equirements undef:~E:EQA Guidelines ~::~ency ~" '1. w The lead agency is the pub!!s.,agency with~::ef:irnary""a"j~g~~X~I autnotJ~¥·\over the proposed project. In ,.• !" • "'.'-." ~."~~ "-P~{",~" •.•'}It'.,,•.•" .. ";::,, "ii'•" ,.I',.~-." accordance with CEQA .. ~~i.(f~lih~~-. §15051(oJ'(~), "the.5 !e:~~1~g~pcy w1Jl.~normally be an agency with ~ .. ./''""", '•,..""-.1<n~ ~~•,/' ·~./' ... "•" •;/ii,." .. :.; .. ~ ~~ ..... ,,..il}' ·~~ .~ general governmentaJ;::~'.~wers, s"u~li~;~~ a city om49. _;j~~~~rather:::t@i:i~~rn agency with a single or limited ~ ~ '~~""'X"" ~ , .. ·~'ft,·; ".~ .. ~ .. ·~ i.""'"•~ .. ..,.,.,,... , .. ~"'~, ,.,'l',.·.·.• purpose." The lead agt("" .{or the p~9;e,_~sed proje}~ "·'the City of Af'royo Grande. The contact person for hid ... »-··· t e ea agency 1s: · -~~)i:~: ',, ...... .,.,.,, .~}<'\~:=:~w~~~~;z~-;7~, · ... ~-~ Maitt.leW:ID.o.W.rnin~, Asso _,..:D;~:...:"~~..,,_;:,.,"·" ~· "-"';:~~.;;":i-J·~y.r. ,.;i,€jW,;,Qf Arroyo· Giatide ~~:Oo~.:'.~' " -~~gt~ Branch Stree .. ::~~,,. Arre;t~·;fjrande, CA 93Zl,f.Q.,: .. , x~~,,!'"·,,,.~ ·"'·•· .. :·:~;.; ( 805 )'~7.B,:;5420 ·::::):"~~:~ ~:,.;·~}:~:~~::~ ·~~~~=~~. Purpose and D{if~l:ro.ent Org~lJization The purpose of this~·,a~~~~Jnent.A!?\;\~6 evaluate the potential environmental effects of the proposed project. Mitigation measq[ ~~:V~:··been identified and incorporated into the project to eliminate any potentially significant impa~· .. :.}f~duce them to a less-than-significant level. ,. .. ~.· This document is organized as follows: • Introduction This chapter provides an introduction to the project and describes the purpose and organization of this document. • Project Description This chapter describes the reasons for the project, scope of the project, and project objectives. Page 6of49 Item 9.a. - Page 177 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 • Environmental Setting, Potential Impacts and Mitigation Measures This chapter identifies the significance of potential environmental i111pacts, explains the environmental setting for each environmental issue, and evaluates the potential impacts identified in the CEQA Environmental (Initial Study) Checklist. Mitigation measures are incorporated, where appropriate, to reduce potentially significant impacts to a less-than- significant level. • Mandatory Findings of Significance This chapter identifies and summarizes the overall significance of any potential impacts to ·1·~·'.·X•, natural and cultural resources, cumulative impacts, and .. ;.\~~~ct to humans, as identified in the I . . I S d ··l'···~u>· rnt1a tu y. ..,,,·x:~Kn'·:· -:~=~t~rJ¥~~~~:: .. • Summary of Mitigation Measures t--*:x!:''' "'::~~;~~ .. ,, This chapter summarizes the mitigation meas!ir~~i~~orporat~'ci~ffito the project as a result of the Initial Study. ..:J.: ::;-:;" -:::;:~~l .. ,, .. ":£;~~~;;~~ ·-::;~~~~b: .. • References ·-,:.:7.:i:.·,. ,;.·. ··:::.::;::~··· This chapter identifies the references and so~~ti&,~;:µsed.Jn~iJi~ preparatio~~af~t.f:iis IS/MND. It also provides a list of those involvec(t:if:l'~the preparati~rl~6't::tfi'IWi~cument. ..~~W9 Summary of Findings ~:~~l~:~rfj1~~~1:~'.:;,;; . ., "::~~~~{~~\~:, Section 3 of this document contains the·~~fi:9vir6'ntn~tl~i!!l (lnitial 1:~~1:1,dy) Checklist that identifies the ~i::,-:z-..... ,..... ~ -~ .. ;f,,''," ~£,~,, .. ~"" .. ~ .. ,.~~.! potential environmental itnPC!~M ... (by environf.i;i'~.Qtal issUe:~~)aj.a brief~0i$.i;µssion of each impact resulting • • ~ .... ~~~; .. :,,~.:~ . .; .. ;~: ... :'>"""-:-:...., • .:;:,.z~: ... :-.!Vi,}:?":~;t:.:·v·,, "t.-:_.,:~~·~" from 1mplementat1on of<:tfie_,:pr.0J1?li5ed project:*;:;:.:;. ~?;:~.:$·,::::;::~f'.~,c:\). "·:=" tiirP;Y ·~,~~~f:i\. ·:v>· ··= .. ~;?;--·-::.:::~]~f~1$:!:; In accordance with §r~i~i~f) of t~~~CEQA Gu .:% ... A~es, a Mitigated Negative Declaration shall be prepared if the proposed pr;,qj~,st wil .•ii· ~ve a signifj~~nt effect.on the environment after the inclusion •,•.,,"/'~ ~ .. ~,. ........ ~... {»»,.,,,,~, of mitigatio .~a:sl!res in ··,:tfj· :~=~~;;;aased 'cfn:::::~the available project information and the environm1l'. · ah:~iWisl::~rese~t~ ~·11i" this ·ci~¥J'~·ept, im~·}e is no substantial evidence that, after the ....,.;,,;:~:•;»''.a~";':'· "·';•?:~~1'n~."*-'>t•: .. ;~ .. : ... ~.. ... .f~,.: .. :..i:~~;, :~"~. ' incorp~f:~µon of mitiga'tit!-i'\.~~measui:~:;:; . .:t;he prop·o:g~ti~project would have a significant effect on the environ·ffi'~~:;. It is propos~8$h~_t a r\/W(g~!~d Negati.~e Declaration be adopted in accordance with the CEQA G uid~iili\es. .,~~~~.:.. .,~~~~fa·, .. · · ··::t{~~J~:..\ ·~~ffek ":;(;~~s; Rev1s1ons ._.;.;,,.... .. ... ~~' ~ .. : .. :..:,,: .. ;;,~ :-•):."\\)<>~ This Mitigated Neg'a'fi:ve Declaratiaii~ was revised in July 2015 due to a revised project description. Previous circulation of~~he Mitig~t~:d Negative Declaration is acceptable due to the revised project description not creating atittttidt.Nif~~ignificant impacts nor requiring additional mitigation. ~,.:::;~~~:: .. ~ Page 7 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 178 '- INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 Project Description Introduction This Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) has been prepared by the City of Arroyo - Grande (the City) to evaluate the potential environmental effects of the proposed project. The 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 we.st (City of Grover Beach) and single- family residential to the south. ,-:ef:~;:;. ,;··}~:«~=~:::~:~" Location Page 8of49 Item 9.a. - Page 179 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 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 remainder of the project site. In 2011, the HGSP was amended to allpw Subarea 4 to be developed with a maximum of 45 affordable multi-family apartments, while Sub~£¢i:i31was designated as an unplanned subarea requiring a future specific plan amendment for dev17.i~J$[.f~iit. The development of Subarea 4 ,...-» ~w·,..~">"""''"" -has been completed and now the applicant is seeking to deye!.~~$j:i.l;>area 3 by amending the BGSP and .. ~"<"a:f'.:.f",,...;;_,. ~"' »~»',¥,."~".,.",.' securing entitlements to develop the site. Development o~(1l'6area:*~~:~ill complete development of the .... ,.". <'";Q>, ~~·~~~,.,/'~ Berry Gardens Specific Plan, refine the western gate~1t:~vto the City;·~P.f:~:¥:(~e entry-level and workforce housing and increase sales tax revenue. .. ·· ·.c.:::~:;:f:;{?, Project Description ., DA 15-002 ....... . . ., .......... , ~:~"' .. :~~" .. ,, -~ ~., "',.:::<~;:;.r.:o.r Following the City Council's consideratien .. of the projeciiK:i:>.eeern· er 2014, the Propef'it Owner and City entered into a Memorandum of Undef~t~Htling (MOU) on "p~gt~·~ry 10, 2015. The purpose of the MOU was to facilitate a Development Agr~~.t:n'~Wi~t>etween the::;~f!.iieperty Owner and the City for the construction of a mixed use (commerd~l~~:and":Hffi~e/residentf~1)~'.l:project on the property, with an increase in commercial sguare.,,footage of 5;000..sguar~~fi!~t::and red"il''i£fion of three (3) residential lots . .. /'11 "·~$tMjil~~~;~:~:.. ·:,~:~.:.. /i . . i~f~1~f i~~h}.. ··.::i;:· GPA 14-002 "·41,'.•.};. ... -;.f.:'>!N.;>' "ctJJ;:~·::;,;;:;:} . " •:"':<·~j:". ·~: :..,; .. :;..:.~~:.. {· .. ~~~ .... The proposed Genera1.:·H an. Amendri:Y~ht will amef:ltli~lmplementation Policy LU5-10.1 of the Land Use '"t; .. ;: .. ia:.~~~ v .... ~:1~ }~,,;~ .. :~ .. Element of the General Pi~ft::~~s it · ··. ~s specificaJL~~,~o the subject property. The Amendment will encourage .·:t~.~1{~~g~-:2~!~uctio~{~f;:.x;· ::l~~l~~ .... _com'ffi~~f.ial development with pedestrian oriented horizon.~~~k~l.¥eHifise~~~f.!~.0:~ntia"f(\~;v.e~opme·n~~~~~i~~fllqe high-density detached single-family housing as part~f~y:'m1xed-use de~~~5').~mert .. "· ~·~?>:;~r:t::i SPA 14-001 .. ~!~;}~::. ·~:(:(.;·~faj:;:. ~~~l~%~~~h:-. . The proposed':~~~~~ific Plan Ame~);lment wilP' amend the Berry Gardens Specific Plan -specifically, Subarea 3. The:~ij~f:J'.Y Gardens '~lJlcific Plan covers approximately forty-seven (47) acres along the western edge of Ari5~§.:;:~,rande. j~~Plan includes four (4) Subareas; Subarea 1 is developed with a mix of neo-traditional sirigf~l~~ .. ~l~fi~!ftd 'patio' homes, Subarea 2 is developed with single-family townhouses, and Subarea~~~~foeveloped with affordable multi-family apartments. The proposed amendment will establish all0wed uses and development standards for Subarea 3, consisting of the following: • Commercial/office with vertical mixed-use on the northernmost 1.24 acres (Subarea 3a) - approximately 15,600 square-feet commercial area and four (4) 1,000 square-foot condominiums; and • Residential use on the southernmost 3.13 acres (Subarea 3b} -maximum of thirty~eight (38) single-family residential townhomes. Page 9 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 180 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 CUP 14-009 The proposed Conditional Use Permit will develop Subarea 3a with three (3) commercial buildings totaling approximately 15,600 square-feet of commercial area and four (4) second-story condominiums of approximately 1,000 square-feet each, resulting in a vertical mixed-use development. VTTM 14-001 The proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map will subdivide Subarea 3b into thirty-nine (39) lots, including thirty-eight (38) single-family residential lots and one (1) common area lot, which would include a centrally located "neighborhood green". Other Required Public Agency Approvals .. :ff}: No other public agency approvals are required for the propose~~p:fm~ct. . . ... /~}i:m~~;;~ ... Related Pro1ects .:::,::~: . · ··'·~=~?:;::~.,, ~=:::H~t. ~· "~;?!.•"<..":.~~~) The proposed project is related to the larger Berrv.-:~G.araens SpeG!fi.(:::~· Plan (BGSP), which has been ,•,.?.NN. ._,,_.,-;,.,, developed over the last twelve {12) years with ~:::!nlSJo·f neo-tradition~'.k~.ingle-family homes, 'patio' homes and townhomes on approximately fort~~ . .9;V:e::=~(41) acres, generiffl~t~.C?unded by Boysenberry Avenue, Strawberry Avenue, Oak Park Boulevard ·~:ij=~~~sh Street. ··==:!i~~~f::~:. ·~'.~11~l1f:~j~~:::;:. ··~:::;;::i;::~~ Page 10 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 181 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGAlWE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 201S) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 Environmental Checklist Project Information Project Title: DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009 & VTTM 14-001 Page 11of49 Item 9.a. - Page 182 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact", as indicated by the checklist on the following pages: D Aesthetics D Agricultural Resources [8J Air Quality D Biological Resources [8J Cultural Resources [8J Geology/Soils [8J Greenhouse Gas Emissions D Hazards & Hazardous Materials D Hydrology/Water Quality D Land Use/Planning D Mineral Resources [8J Noise D Population/Housing [8J Public Services D Recreation [8J Transportation/Traffic D Utilities/Service Systems [8J Mandatory Findings of S1gnif1cance ~~!~~i::::!~~s initial evaluation: , , ( 0 I find that the proposed project COULD NOT ha¥.e a;;significan~reJfect on the environment and a ~it~"'}'\X,) ""::}}~:~$ NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared .. <~.::~~~::· -:::~:t.,, ~~" ;/ :· ·<;:(~)~\:::,,, [8J I find that, although the original scope o .. , .~ .. proposed project COtl~P.;~fiave had a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT··~·~~~.::~ignific.~:~!;:,£ffect beca~~~f:.~~isions/mitigations to the project have been ma.~:~i~:~Y or agreed·:(f~l~M!Il~~;J1pplicant. A IVif.ft~.~TED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepare·Gf·:f.~:;:;:;:;;;::... "4:;:;:c':;~:~::;Y •• ~~~~~~~~~~l~~~P:.,.. ~.(." ':;,, :.~. D I find that the proposed projecf~'~!'RV~Y·::..ffif¥:l~·i! .. significani\~ffect on the environment and an ..... x ... · ~, -~il,,~~"i?',""""",,.~.. ~ ......... ·~ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORn:{f.::its funeti0,i;ia,l,equivaleff.lt~~will be prepared. ·' -'• •' "~~f J~i~~~~~ ·~~~t.. ,;; J~~J~~%~~:~:i;;;,, ·.:::~~~~~ D I find that thei{tm~»posea·::~~qject MAY:~:f.i~~!:i.~~?.;:~potenli?.Uy:::~ignificant impact" or "potentially "}.~"'~ J',"' <:>"(',! »• ;> "i",."~".t~·./,S/',,'/'~",;;-~• ~»»f "~--,.,~. significant unle~~~stJ:litigated';i~rtlP.act" on i§;_~~~:r\vironment:~::.f-lowever, at least one impact has been adequate1{7afl~:lyzed in~~?~ earlier doG'~~f:nent, pursuant to applicable legal standards, and "{a,r,•_•»"I>~,., / ~,.~ ,ll t" /,. • ,. •,.».\»") •,. has b~ ,,a,c::l.dressed:~b.,.fi:~J!j~~1.q:6.~m!:iasures"::(~~ed on the earlier analysis, as described in the .,<~:>}-'r ; .. ~:;:~;.-~ _ 'r.~:"l.'.';~~»:•;it..!'-», ., .. ~,,"ir'-"'-' ~,."-;.~~ '•>~..:~:-~,,,~---~~ ~r,, "=~-~·» ~~~g\ .. _. · :~!,~~~~~nts. A~t~~.:VIRONNt~!.l·t:~,~IV(~fCT REPORT is required, but it must analyze ~~s;i:.!)J~:the 1mpactsP9?J.·.~uffic1en~!Y. addressefi~i~;~p,rev1ous documents. ~~==qfa~, ·:·{;~~~:;. »::~J;f~;:;., '<?.;'.·" D I ¥f~§:M~at, althougY\1l~-~ pr3pg~~e. project could have had a significant effect on the envir"6n):tt~.nt, because alJ_~p,otentiall~Jsignificant effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier Ei:~J~&J">legative D~#~r,ation, p·ursuant to applicable standards, and have been avoided or mitigated, ·,Pt!;~~~"ant to ~ijJ~?~~arlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon~t~:~.RroP2~~9;project, all impacts have been avoided or mitigated to a less-than- significant level an:4:~iJ~irQ}jfier action is required. '~,~~~r~;~:~;·· Matthew Downing, AICP Associate Planner Date Page 12 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 183 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 1. A brief explanation is required for all answers, except "No Impact", that are adequately supported by the information sources cited. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact does not apply to the project being evaluated (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on general or project-specific factors (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must consider the whole of the project-related effects, both direct and indirect, including off-site, cumulative, construction, and operational impacts. 3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular ph~~JG~I impact may occur, the checklist answers must indicate whether that impact is potentj.~!f~Jsig.nificant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Sig!Jif!J~~fi~J,r:npact" is appropriate when there is sufficient evidence that a substantial or potentiallY,:~"M"ShiHti'ifit .. adverse change may occur in any of the physical conditions within the area ~(~~i~a'' by th~::~t9J.~.ct that cannot be mitigated below a level of significance. If there are opgJof;?"ffiore "Potentiall~~~iKnificant Impact" entries, an ~ .. V..,,.,.aa,.",."="•" '•~•"»fV'/\ Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is reqah:-E!:a:·· ·-:~:::::::;~-- ~.e. d :r'.: ~" • w~ ',l",j'" 4. A "Mitigated Negative Declaration" (Nega~i.f~;:Declaration: Less Than.'sig(:tificant with Mitigation ,.,,,,,;,,}n~·.. ,•;•·, .. • .. ~ .. ~~:-.. :;..: Incorporated) applies where the incorporatioij~~()·~ mitig(l~!~Q measures,'"'fifti!i?L to declaration of project approval, has reduceq,.,!!tl effect from ttA'qk~.r.t#~'.fjy;,;5ignificant lmp~&ii?;:to a "Less Than ·~i.;:,,v.~~~} .. -., ..-...:.z .. ;.:!J.:-:::;.,,,,:~~/ •..-V Significant Impact with Mitigati~t!~{~:~h~ lead agency~t:ti:i;lst describe the mitigation measures and briefly explain how they reducel{~;~W~~!tJE,~ less th~i't:~!9:Uificant level. 5. Earlier analyses may be used wf@~~, pUr~]:l~D~ to the'·~i.~~~lpg, program EIR, or other CEQA .. ·~~~· n. "H ,.~~" .;:;. .. ::i., <!'"/J'J,.~-. ~ process, an effect hfl~."been adequat~l.¥ analyzei:j~~fJ:-~n earlfef:~E;l,R (including a General Plan) or ,<•:.;~;.: .. :$ .... ·~«·~ ~~ ....... ;.:i.,. ::,,.: .. :-: .. :-t~""-··., '"~:":~;..~$- Negative Decl~fW:1~-~tt~~~~!;:;._Guideline_if:::for t':1~iWv~l~~rn~~tati0.Fr" of CEQA, § 1S063(c)(3)(D)]. References tq;:clfi~:~arlier aii~lv~is should:':: . ,d~f,~~;;"' ·~:;:~#~:/(, ~.,,,"~[> .. '.. 'Jo~~~~~~ ,('\,>./'/',. .. ,........ .. .. .;:',,"•"" a) Identify the:.ieai;lier analy~is0?and state w · e·rre· it is available for review. ~,~'>..f::-~~r. )·~~~»' .. ::;:;;~<~~ b) Indicate which1~'.ffects f ? .... the enviro't'Jmental checklist were adequately analyzed in the ,.~~ .. ;-: .. :;.. ..;:.·~~...... : ·~ -=-~~~> J~ar.Jie .,..Q.cument~~~~~~f~~M.---.9J~:P..R.!icable·:~~~.s.al standards, and whether these effects were .. :·:i~a · :~f.Y.~address~a!Jl:>~'mitigatffit.ltfheasu~es~ncluded in that analysis. ~·,.1;.}:.,;.,~1·~,~-~ ·~~~~;~:"'~";.' "' .. ..;:~ .. ")>·~·, ·-'.'.1v•:>\f!"io:"~~~"· .. ·~· ,::~~)~~?)Describe tne~itigatio·n~ffle~sures in··n;·(~~apcument that were incorporated or refined from ·-.:·~· .. ·:·~.: . •,.;: .. ;~x-=-~-~."1-:<~·~ ""·: .. ,:.... -·~;;::?~)le earlier dod:it)~(e.Qt and:;iiii9Jf:ate to what extent they address site-specific conditions for ··:!~~:!2~ project. ··;:~~[~~:~:· ··;:;%~i§~:-. 6. Lead a@.I;i_c;:ies are encci~f:~ged to inc.Orporate references to information sources for potential impacts -.::j·~~~~~}he checki(~j~~;or app~ndix (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances, biological assessmentSJt~~~ference }~-Q.~~a previously prepared or outside document should include an indication of tffijj?.:qge or: s where the statement is substantiated. "''~ .... -,, , ·.;.· 7. A source list sho't11$:M· .... ;:a·ppended to this document. Sources used or individuals contacted should be listed in th1ffS'urce list and cited in the discussion. 8. Explanat.ion(s) of each issue should identify: a) the criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate the significance of the impact addressed by each question and b} the mitigation measures, if any, prescribed to reduce the impact below the level of significance. Page 13 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 184 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 Environmental Issues I. Aesthetics Environmental Setting 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. Less Than D D References: 2, 3, 15 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 14 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 185 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 Potentially 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 zoneaM;3:- Timberland Production (as defined by Goverrmf.~~£f::~:" Code section 51104(g))? ~-:.... . Impact D d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion· ..• Jj[j:;:}. D .-:::'::~~: ... forest land to non-forest use? "::::~;:~:-... ~:;1;.;:.·:.~:· e) Involve other changes in the existrrj~j:;~J)\fironment ··~~j~~[~:~]~~~;f7 which, due to their location or natur~;~ffi&ili~a~~i:esult in '"'~[:].~;~ .. ··;~~·= .. :' .. '*..~·:~:~,,>~;· ,. ~-... ~·r·>~ ,{:. conversion of Farmland to non-agricultura'!.:;~_se?:::.'i~~;;~~;~... "<2~~-::~:i .• Less Than Less Than Significant with Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact D D D D D D D D •:;t~;r::~. . ~:::~~~~~b:.::: .. ·. ··;:~;~;jJi:;r; .. * In determining whether impac;ts)t'/:J.~qgr;icultural resourc;es.._are signifi~fliJ'f{e,nvironmehtii/:·effects, lead agencies may refer to the ~·~~·"'""';,/>,..~~.,,,.,,.:: ,•o1·~'~',"'",':,; •• >-, .,.,.h,, ~""-~~ ~" ··~· .. ";"',,..~~ ... ,,,~. '~"~'-;;,, California Agncultural LancJ,<;,iqjiiatliiij;:::fl.Qd Site Asse~sfaent fy'lo(j~f.i(19,SJ,:J1;;._Preparea by the California Department of Conservation as an optiona_fi/f(ll~i for u;J:ihi~~~essing imp'ti~f?.qn:{{/fitf~~lturiff~'fiji,.l,qrmland. :::.:~~···":'41.! .. 1 .. *~-~.:.~ w ~t~Mr .. ·<'i . ..,;.,.;.;.. . 111. Air fi·u:~uty .. ~~~w.~;··=~':·: .. :~_::;_::: ... ::·" .. _:=·_.·: ... :·.:_.·;··, .. :-~·:.:_:.:· "'ft"' · Environm·;:{~~~~tting :. ·~~-~ . . ""~:;:?;i~~tY San Luis Obispo C~tiJ'.iW is in non-ci~ai.nment status for ozone (03 ), respireable particulate matter (PMlO) ''>r~"',/',,.,,•, •• ,,,,.,:;:,,,.~~ .. and vinyl chloride "ffft§!~r the c.~IJf,Ornia Air Resource Board (CARB) standards. The County is in attainment status for iilii"c?:~r.er .. ~~~Mitable CARB standards. The proposed project will construct thirty- eight (38) single-family .,fd~l(~ffi:~·~ homes, 15,600 square-feet of commercial area for currently unidentified commercial uses;~i:ff1d four (4) condominium units. Potentially Less Than Less Than Significant Significant with Significant No Impact Would the project: Impact Mitigation Impact a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the D D D applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality D D D violation? Page 15 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 186 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 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 D D D D D D ... ::-{if:~==· * Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air qqqJ!fYc~management or atr pollution control district may be relied on to make these determinations. .;::¢.~i~~;;:~;~~~- ~:~;~~:~~~~: .. :~:~!~~$; ... San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control Dis~f.~~'fi(~PCDfsii~~ific Comments ~~~==~~~~~~~~·~ ··::;~~~;%::::~. APCD reviewed the proposed project and sul;n#.ttf!>·ea a letter datea:~Q£!.;ober 21, 2014 outlining recommended mitigation measures. These ·~~~~ures have been inc5~H~ated into this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. APCD errG:pµrages a balance of resTaeJitial and commercial infill within the existing County URL/VRLs, as this ··r§~!~'.9.J?..sisten!~1@1th the lanci\:i~~::goals and policies of the APCD's Clean Air Plan. In.E.f:~~ng densiti'·=~~:.::~~~tice trips and tdtT.:~l~ distances and encourage the use of alternative form~~RW,;;i.nsportation:·:::~Mf ·~;~~t~~:~w:;:~~~~~;:~?.~::.:~:n~ -V~=~~;~~:~~~j:~~ APCD specifically commended the applit~pJ 0Ii:;t;q:~;if9Jlowing 'e1~~~nts of the project design: ~!;f:~~~7~~~ '-.:~;:::;~~~=~:::::v. ·~:~:;~!~~~;:>~ 1. The project pro~:!:~~~~~:~~ed use cf~~~1~pme~t~W~!W:~-.the 6i~~~jmits with, where people can walk to nearby,~sfoiies''fiar1ts.and wor"K~~:::: .<::~:~::~:=····:~;::;~:;;;:;~:-... ·h s.f~~f •' , ··::::~~~~:::. ~q~~~~a~j~~;::--'-'·;:~:=~~[~~:, 2. The project pro:y,j.);l.e.s devel<=?.p;pent witliiti,:1:J:!'le URL where such development is planned for and ct d . ··:::~;:::;:;.. ..:~:~;2; ~~;:~:~; expe e , ·.;:;.;.;.:.. .•:--..;v·........ -:·x·:·. ~·:~<:::~:::::::::;~::::M~.... ·-:~~~~;~;~~:: ... ::~:=~;~~~~J~~~@[*~~~!;::::~:·. ~~:~~~~~~;::., 3. The:~::fillxel;t:r:;us.e ... devel€>.pll'i'e"iit p'roV.itles.,.oppO:f.tunity for reduced traffic, making transit r:~:~~::~::;:::"J: .. ~· '•n~ .. :::::.:::~f.:;~· ' ~:~::-:~··· • .,,..':!~;~;:::{:;;::...... x~· ~{:~·~r:~1ces morffVJ.iil:W~. and ·eff~~t1ve. ··"':;7~:*~*-;;:;;;: . ·<~~£1~~~:~. ~;.:;:~]~~;}~:~.. ··.;r:~~~Y:~:~~ ··\ :~~:=· D1scuss1on:·>. ·~·: .. ;~·:·. ··:·r:·:,.·, . . -~~~,\::::{:::~ ··:~~~=~:;:$~ ~~::~~~~~~~. a. No impacts~ ... .;.. ~-:·:+:·. ··:·::;.>:·:·. "::;lj~~~~~::.. '::¥~~;~: ··.;:;:;::: b-d: Construction~~IBP..?Cts of th~?m.toposed project were estimated using the most recent CalEEMod computer model by ft:Wf~~lutio~:;f[grtrol District (APCD) staff. Based on the estimations, construction phase impacts will likeWi.~;~:~:~.~.~~{:~.tian significant when typical mitigation measures are included in the project. The proposed ··::~·f:'Ri#ct will also generate short-term emissions during construction . ..,,.:.:~;;-" Implementation of the following 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 49 Item 9.a. - Page 187 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 • 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. ~~P.~::~ .... MM 111-3: Signs must be posted in the designated queuii;ig~'.~ffy~as and job sites to remind drivers and operators of the State's 5 minute idling limit. ..::i=~~~~~,:-· -'..-"-•a ~ ~, .r:~· \.,. MM 111-4: The project applicant shall comply t®,{·. thes8more restrictive requirements to minimize impacts to nearby sensitive recepto ~·'.ijaj;~ent resi'J:fl~ial development): .r»' r;~~-,J -':~~~~i~:~:~\, • • • • Staging a queuing areas shall nor( .Q~ated within 1,000 f~~f~fas.ensitive receptors; Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of se'~s)tj~i;! recepto~.? .. ~hall not t>:::~~J:rriitted; t,...,7.X,:~., -1 .. ~,..,.:...-. "'.;'.._~ .. ~~"..;!:;~. Use of alternative fuele~. equipment is ~r~~~E~'Hl)..~.99fd; and ~-=:~,~:;*~'- Signs that specify no idfi<?:· .. reas must be'"µ'ti~t-'~~~~:fa:nd enforced at the '~it~ . .. -~~=~~;~:::: ·. :~:?::~:,-,. MM 111-5: The project shall impl&·m~n ··<B~~f9llowing .. %\ttg~tion measures to manage fugitive ... ,,-.·~·--·-"·~,r, » ,;•,,,· .. ~· 'i'rf .. , .. ~~ ..... dust emissions such that they do n~!:..exceea·~f.f.i.,.~::f\PCD's 2~.~::f>pacity limit (APCD Rule 401) or • • ~ .. v • "f,'.<,.X-:i: ... ,.~: ... * .. :..;:•"~", -{.._~~:-:;:·: .... prompt nu1sancex!~,!~.JJ~.D.~.(APCD Rul~~~p2): · ... ~:::,.,, ·.,-::~:?~t .J1i~~~f;~::-:·:.:.,:;;;,:~l~~[~;~ \~;t~~·> .,:3(: , =~=~~;~:~~-:.;~:~;>· ,;: .. • • Reduc~:~.~!; amounf;~!l!.he disturb.~}t~~r!=!a where possible; Use of wa:f~.r,,trucks Q''.t.'~prinkler syff~f:ns in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust f~9!11 leavi.if~~!h,~. sj~~ti.Q.;~.:;Jfe,m ex~~~~:!.,~g the APCD's limit of 20% opacity for greater ":~~?:~i inutes]~i~~Ql~n,t·60*®2gJ;~ pel!g:~· Increased watering frequency would be requi'f° hen wir.IEJ':.speeds ex'ceecfoas m'ph. Reclaimed (non-potable) water should be used whehg~er po~;lb1~:·, -·:&;;~;:~t~' ,.~~~~.., "f~,,~J,...,. • "::;~:~:~::; All dirt stoc·~=:rm1.~; .. areaS::~~~9.~ld be sprayed daily and covered with tarps or other dust .~.1,-.;~ ' ~ ,,.•,.\'..~"!,;, ,,~~·,...,...;_. • • ·-::;::~~:barriers as neeae(:f» •;;;:~~:· '!!>-;.z~:~~ ·--:..:~~!P:. !'l'":~;;'f. -.P.~:~m anent dust 'cG:f:i:trol mea·sures identified in the approved project revegetation and la-~tf~£~pe plans s~~l:i\ be implemented as soon as possible, following completion of any soil c:iift~tbing actJ~ltfes; ··::~;:::~~::-~ ,,,.;;:;..,.::,.:;r,;:;" Exposed ·g~9),;~D:$f5:.1i~eas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initia(i~~af~g should be shown with a fast germinating, non-invasive, grass seed »~ .... "- and watered until vegetation is established; • All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation should be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD; • All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed as soon as possible. In addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used; • Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site; Page 17 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 188 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 • All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with eve Section 23'114; • • • • Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site; Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers shall be used with reclaimed water should be used where feasible. Roads shall be pre-wetted prior to sweeping when feasible; A listing of all required mitigation measures should be included on grading and building plans; and, ,,,;;:;., The contractor or builder shall designate a per~Q~;@r persons to monitor the fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implemen.t~iW".of the measures as necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible..:fltiti~~~ahs below the APCD's limit of 20% it'>-:->::~·!*'~ ·...;..:+~..->~ opacity for greater than 3 minutes in ar~ijff minfft~~~;$riod. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods wh · ,)irk may noH~~;.;in progress. The name and telephone number of such perso_n{ .),.:rr be provided t~~i§'.~:;~~PCD Compliance Division ... "="~ .... ~~><:<»~~ ~~·.~-.",," 4h' prior to the start of any grading, ~~b,work or demolition. ';,~::: . ".~..; .. :::..-.r,., " ~:,,, MM 111-6: Prior to the start of the project,··:~{j~~P.Pliq:i,i~f~~all obtain a·i~~~i~e~sary permits for equipment to be used during #ils~.r;1,1ction by co.~¥~~1jP,"g~~the APCD Engineedfi·g;ibivision at (805) 181-5912 , · .,. ··=::~:1:::;r . . ":}:~~::, ::~~~~t. '.·:·.. .... »:~tit~h::-~ MM 111-7: Prior to any grading a~ef!yities~ · :~:*p.roject spQi;l.~or shall ensure that a geologic evaluation i~ co~.g:~~]~g:~~g.?etermi~~~t!~r,atur;f!l~~~Mf{!_ng ~ffi~s (NOA) is present within the area that will b.e;:t:l1sft:1rBed~:~lf NOA 1s riht~prese!Jff<:·an·:e:}.(emptior'f request must be filed with the ... z~·:.Jo .. >:":'" --"-·:~:~:"'* -;:~~ .. »,,.,,. ~, }"~b;~;»,.,·:·~· . ..,,~i.:~~~.,, .. ;;,,~b~~ APCD. If NO~t{~f9.und at tli~;~~!te, the a7@.U§~:ff·(must ccirriP.I~ with all requirements outlined in the Air Resourc'fi~~$Q~rd (AR··:·:.;:. ir Toxics·';(l:{(jT,itrol Measure (ATCM) for Construction, Grading, ',·J~·-",,,~--.. ~,, ·~~ .~-'\ Quarrying and surface~Mini . · r.ations. !:~n~~ .. . ;;~,~~==~~~~~~~~~;~:~~:;~',>, ·~~:: :~s:~~ ~~r,~}·B~ . ··4~'ftit~~l[~gj~g},Qf vege . e materi~t~~fo.tti~¥B~telopment site shall be prohibited. ~~-=~:=::=.::;. ""·-r::~wt~:,... ., ·"·} ;:~.:;... ..,~~~irf· Ml!l~m-9: Should hy<:l·!(.¢)~arbon~~9)~~~~minated soil be encountered during construction activities, • "~>~~ '~' ,~. a~~~~-~.~,r.,, ',1,,',,•~~ •.•,. the '~,~~R shall be no~W~:? withi . . rty-eight (48) hours of such contaminated soil being discove·r~~l*P determine l~~):l APCD permit is required. In addition, the following measures shall -~~ ... ;<:?:\,~"~ ~¥"~~~0~d- be implemented immediate1¥,, after contaminated soil is discovered: <~:~~~~lb~.. .it~ii~ • • • • Covers orli'~~~Qf~g~~fPiles shall be maintained in place at all times in areas ·not actively rl'•,,w,...-";',,fo, .. ,.",.-~"..f,."~-' involved in'semaotlition or removal. Contaminated:::::·~oil 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. Page 18 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 189 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 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: •• ;);~!-,,. Each delivery vehicle's engine shall be shut off trr:ltti'.~Oiately after arrival in the loading dock or loading area, unless the vehicle is actiY;~i§Jffi~i~;~euvering. • ,.~ .. ~~ .... <:.,,•,:•.;,. The scheduling of deliveries shall be stagger:eClffo'tne.,maximum extent feasible . Vehicle operators shall be made awar~ ... ?fl~mf 'nd;~i!~L zone, including notification by • • letter to all delivery companies. A;~~5~~ "*. ·· .. Prominently lettered signs shall b.e:::;.;;~§t~ci in the recei~ing:{~'Q.Ck area to remind drivers to shut off their engines. ,,. ··<~:~k::: .. • Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sen .:ni:e recepto~s..)s not per;JffitCl .. ~-:..,:¥~:::·'::"~ .(;..:..-~~~~-. ,_..,;.~;::":~: .. 9 • • Use of alternative-fuel:..~>vehicles is rec~:mm~~:i!~:~£¥tlenever possil:){~h. • Staging and queuing a~~~~$h.2.11 not be locat~~:;,~ithin 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors. Refe~nces: _ 10, 11, 15, 24, B '"'\~ ~~ · .. · ·~, ·IV B10log1cal Resourc ·;···· · »=·.;;-:.. "=·::-.::-:·=~~·. .,.:::.;.?: .. . . A .. ·· iffji~~t·~·:., "=:~~J~.. -:~f~fg~;~~t{~l~:~,, '~~:~~~: Environmental Settm ,· '·:':';·;.:·. «:·:;;.; ••• ~;·;·;·;;~. ·•;·}.·:·."'·'· The site is devoid of fld~~~~? fauna··~~]r the exc~~ll~~::~~f invasiv~-~~~~sses/weeds that are mowed twice a year in accordance witn:~J,tl}~ City'~;~~~~d Abaterilen~. Program. Existing development on all four (4) ~} ~ ~.~$.~ ~~ >"~",.°',.'.'»\>x~M >~» "~ • '?,.",.~~"'~"'\ sides of the Rf:0jeet.site preclffdesJts~use~a's~a&wildlife c6i:f.idor. '\,~ ~,, Page 19 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 190 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modification, on any species identified as a sensitive, candidate, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the Potentially Significant Impact D Less Than Significant with Mitigation D U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian ,.;:(ilfilt~· habitat or other sensitive natural community identified .. ~ff ,.. in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by .Af;~;· the California Department of Fish and Game or the~:·.· ::;-~~[f:{-· . . . . -~*=:~~:5; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? .. ::::~{!i~:!::;::" c) Have a substantial adverse effect on fed~t.~_u~;;:-··· 1-:-0:~·-: .... .,.,,,, protected wetlands, as defined by §404 of the '"Gle:Q.n Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, v~Vii~t:::.. D ,..<:::'.·. pool, coastal, etc.) through direct r~.moval, filling~t~@~~~~::.. ..l~~t~~f=· h d I . I . . h "' .. : .. :,.!,~ -'\;.:~-: .. :·~ ;:~:~:,.:·:·}~·· y ro og1ca interruption, or ot er mearn~~-'.::::... ·'.,.::~:::::::::::=::;::· ~: .. : .. ~:..:-~~~:·:~:-:.. ~· .. ·:·: .. :::-::-:~ d) Interfere substantially with the mox@:i:1e:~:~::i.O.f any ··.::~~:;h D D native resident or migratory fish or wildllf~}.sp-~€1~~::.2.r ··:;:;§jih~ with established native resident or migr~f61v wii'~liif~'.1t::·~:· D 't:~~:j~~::., D ·~~:~;;~. "<&::.-:::::~:=:;;"" ~:"(~::::=?~ corridors, or impede the us.e;~0:fo:iative wildlife~i:wrsery .,~?{:$~;:;::::::-;. "·;.:i::f~· sites? /dlWf~::~::~~=:;:~~~~~~~~~=~> ~~t~~<:.. .. dfl~~~w~:~~=~~~lb::=~~-'".:;~, .. e) Conflict with anW~:i'ft>'cal poliCies:::· .. or ordina:fi¢:@~§:::" ···~:~::~~:· n•:•}•..J!•:•~ •,.;~~·:-. "•>:~:;.:•.•:•:•~ protecting biological te:sRJ-!rces, ~~~h as a t.t~~ . 1 · d . ~~~;>~~=-~~-? ::-:;:,,:..: ·..-;~ .. :::-: .. preservation ~~}.~y-~x or ma·Q.~;~;..: .. ;:~~~~~t~::~:~~:=:·:·. ·:::t~h f) conflict_.:;~tt~~~~:~]~IBQ~isions~:8tt~it~a·aopt~ScqJ:J.R.bitat:~~~¥. Co nse ry;~{\9,@:::-p·ia·n:·····j~j'~~~~~~.L Co riiWm~i:i jty Co ns:ei\i~tl9.Jl. ·:.,:;::? D ~ .. "; ,? •"~"""~~ -.•,. ~·~•.•.n,."~ "~·~ • ,p~ , ' ,.•.., ~~" .t,,•,.- PI an, o·f.{~:f!ier approved lo'c~i:f!~~r.~gion,a!ff~~ state hab"itat' "~~~~:~~>;;r I ? n,.;;::~:~:;. "•~:-::*~~~., conservatum);J) an. ·,:::::~::·. ..;.:~::.~ .. ~~~~~~:~ 't\ ,, References: 15 16 19 ··~::~::::... . ... ;:::::::::::·· ' I ··~:=~~tJ~~~~~~~~~i~f ;.- V, Cultural Resources ··:::::;:::·· D D D Environmental Setting Less Than Significant No Impact Impact D D D D D 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 49 Item 9.a. - Page 191 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 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. Potentially Less Than Less Than Significant Significant with Significant No Impact Would the project: Impact Mitigation Impact a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § D lg] D D 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique .. ~ paleontological resource or site or unique geolo i~~f?::~ feature? ,.< "'~~~:;:,·· d) Disturb any human remains, including interred outside of formal cemeteries? D D D D D Discussion f;· ~::., · ,,. . a-d: The presence of isolated prehisto·=· · .. "itbr.al materials inijrfates the potential for significant impacts j.}~i::· ... , ';,:"·:""_?~~...: .. .>'. ".r,:;1>.;,,_~~~·· to cultural resources should more inta'-C!k.e!":;5~&~!'.~r1tial depos~~"~;~e present within the project s!te. Implementation of the following mitigationsmeasTifiei:tvm,reduce t~:ese impacts to a less than significant >.:-: .. :"":•. "..'>;!+;·: .. :~}",Jo.. ~ .. ~~}~.::,;'·~""' level. Less than significant with.,mitigation ·::~;~~:~. ··:-;:;~:;:~: · ··=:~;~f~~:- .. ;:;:?.(:[~l§~:i§:~~~~~r:i(.. ··::~i~:·. ..x~$~t. ·~.)(;:·.~·. ··====~~:,. MM V-1: Aiivi~~feas wHe~~J-.native (n~Q;;~f~~piledf'saiJi~)ivill be disturbed by construction ~,"i'•"~>"" •.,*.~"-17, ....... ~4;..:~,.;:..,':r.~.,J,' "~"-" ' activities (gradiiig~:~;fqotings, ~yi!ities, etc.r:~ij~Jl first be inspected by a qualified archeologist to determine if any -~~~it!:Jr.al re .:;'~1='.q~s are pr~gg~t. Prior to con'struction activities and if cultural resq~r;,~~~~=~~-f:~.;.pres~'.>~WJ~~t-~:IL. tf}~~g;~~rche6l~g[~al study shall be conducted by a qualified ~ ·:··''Wi3·iagi~fa~~~~tY.!"!he/~~f'"'.'':ation rii:~~@.r~~,~~de'.~fified and im.plemented. f;~ .~\ 1 ~<:~==~gli:~::~. . ~~~. ~~~~~::~%~r~~~ ~MM::·.,V-2: If a pdt~otially ig:f.iif.icant cultural resource is· encountered during subsurface J,_•~\~,~~~-•,•,.".,"'».•~•,,.-.~..J."'•r,.,',",. eartW~~f.k activities, if11¥~9.-~structl~nt~.ctivities within a 100-foot radius of the find shall cease until a·-::.r@,~J.ified archaeqJ.ijg,ist determines whether the uncovered resource requires further -:,r>~"~·l"•»FV~~ ~~·,,.•,,¥/' study. N::~t<!.ridard inad.g~.i;tent discovery clause shall be included in every grading and constructio~tE~pJract to JnfQ.'.rm contractors of this requirement. Any previously undiscovered resources foun·~i~:b;;J.ng.;IFW~huction shall be recorded on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recre~tf:~·-·::-=·'~pPR) forms and evaluated for significance in terms of California Environmental Qua lit"-· ¥\ct 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. Page 21of49 Item 9.a. - Page 192 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 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. · References: 15, 16, 19 VI. Geology and Soils Environmental Setting .<:!;~~,, In general, the project site slopes to the south with an average ;:,!£:~~fif)"n of approximately ninety (90) feet above mean sea level. The south side of the site is gene£~!~~~:P, (10) feet below the north side in elevation. Near surface soils generally consist of silty san~f~~<,:if~!h.:-~f 4-5 feet in a slightly moist to moist state and in a loose to medium-dense condition. ··:::~~;::·' ·-z::S.tf}~ .. Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk o~%fi~~~:;:j_gjury, or • • ·~:!-!M;:f,~ "•J::~:~~·;::.~~--.; .. death mvolvmg: ~~~1~i:_-.;·,:;~~:~§.~~::::;.? i) Rupture of a known earthqual<~~?:;faulf)~:;~~~~:--.. _ delineated on the most recent Alqtiist-Priol" ~ Earthquake Fault Zqo{~~~AAf~~~issued b/~f.fo~state.~~:::~ ~~ .. z~~...,t'm•? -~ • ...,.,. ".!';.~ .. }~;;:,.:?.::. ~:d;..;.:,.:~ .,.i.~>·~lf(< ~ Geologist for tbe~?';!a'tea, or.::::~~oased on··~;:Q.the't-;::::~;;.;-· "'\~ .... ~.~-~,.... ·.t'J.',."..,.-'-{' ',.'"l.,'f'i."9'~"1." .. '(,."'I}'\.• substantial eviden·ce?io.f a knmAin~'fault? (Refg:~io:/ "-..~,::o;,:·~ik~, 3:':<:;:~ ~>t,;1"1,11,,.;• Division of Mines and·~pe,plogy ~pe'cial PublicafiQ:I;\:, ~2 ·l ,.;:;,;;;:t~w~~?~=:::~::y. ·-:::~~i~'.:: · xtrw~1~~~;~:~-~. :;~~~rt:~~- 11) Str.emg::se1sm1Q;gre.und sha ng·: ···:::;~;::::~~::>~:-. ··;~:::~:~ iii) ·'":'.1~§fuic-relat~~~~~~!~~~:2.unl~~~~~J]:~re, i~21rl~{~~~ w Ii q u ef.acti o n? ··:;~::;;~;~;-··~.::::~::.. ... iv i La ~:~~i~~:s? ·-:~w~rfa~ ,~},~~~i~~~;::::, .. b) Result in ·stil:istantial soil etb~ion or tfie:~: loss of topsoil? -,,,~~~%:\ · .. ;:., .. . ·~=~~t?~~~- c) Be located on a geo.l:Ogic unit or,:§Q:ll that is unstable, • .. :b:,,:.J.· -~,,:~:·:">~ or that would become:~~ur;istabl~i~~~s a result of the ~d'..;:~:):,,., /.;»:v: .. ; .. ;."'~,,~~ project and potentially ::i~~~S!!~~1:;;1n on-or off-site landslide, lateral spreading;-::;stibsidence, 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? -.,:;:~~J~1~fa .. Less:'nfan. , •. w.. Less Than SignificanF';.. . . • . h <.. _51gmficant No Impact Wit ··-Impact/;::;~:. M' . . pact _,;.~'.::';.::$~ 1t1gat1on ...... ~ .. ,.. .. ~~;:·· D D D D D D D D D D D D D D Page 22 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 193 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 Discussion 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~.:)f the original conclusions and recommendations are not valid, includes updated con.sJrt~J:l~hs and recommendations where necessary .. ::;:~,:;;:::;::·· . ..:d~~~~ll~i:~;: .. MM Vl-2: All construction plans shall incorptrf$~~,, th:~~~~~f:ommendations of an updated geotechnical study based on the study pre8~f:~~' f~r the prbJi~!:._by GSI Soils Inc. dated April b-e: No impacts. .,.~:;~~5::~ :~:::~::use Gas Emissions~;,, Environmental Settmg _ .. ,.,..... ·,~~~1::.. '··:~::~:,:~~=~~:i::::-.·. -~::~:~~~:::~ The project site is locateq·@gJ.~:Q.~.t:!!Jo existing:;~:g_rnmercJ#!;;M§.m~sidenti_?.IJdevelopment, along the City's . . . ~·:~~~~:::-","···:·~ .. ·~y .. ·.:h:·:·:·:~,. "•:·.:-:·:~.. ,,.~~:·:·:·:·za• ~.z.:-:~~ .. x-~Q~ ----.. ~ ma in com me rc1a I com cl.e:r::;(East G r:a ntl. Avenue):::::~~:~, ...::::~~;::::::·· ····::::~::::::·:=:•;·. ~%\~j~iii}::.. ··:;~l~l~~:. :{~i~i!!~~'.~?·· . '··:·::;~;~t Less Than »:·:·:·;·:·. .:-;._.,, ••.•• ;.-... Potentially Less Than would the pfJj~m~ft~iMti~;:~;.;.. ··=:l~~~~tjf~f ~~~~~@jt~~~~;~~~~k~:·.· ·:;;~~~l~~j~~i~~i;~~nt :~:;~~:~ si~~i;~~nt No impact a) Genef.f.f~;;,g~eenh~ .. ~-~~~i~~s .. emi~°§rJT.is, either .. dl~;g;~H~.: ;-,· or indi~Ef6i)'y:,_ that may haJi~~~~;&ignifi2:~tit.;:~ffect on tW~· 0 l3'l 0 D environ m ~r~tl~~'.~~:·. '::(~rf:\\ .,;::1~~l~b~ .. b) Conflict wifff~~f:i:"applicable plan·;{P,olicy or•T;~gulation adopted for the"Wffti:iose of redu·~mg the emissions of D l3'J D D "·~·~,:-:~:-. \: .. : .. : .. ~~;{< greenhouse gases?·~·::~;::::::-. :::::::~'.; Discussion . ":~;~~~~~J~J~~t:~:i~i[~~1? a-b: Greenhouse Gas (GHGf%~)Tiissions are said to result in an increase in the earth's average surface temperature. This is commonly 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 49 Item 9.a. - Page 194 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 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: ,,~:::::,.-1' • Qualitative GHG Reduction Strategies (e.g. Climate Actio8l)nl~:ns): A qualitative threshold that is consistent with AB 32 Scoping Plan measures and goal~;,:f~~)j~it· A1t~~~"··'~~ _.:: .. • Bright-Line Threshold: Numerical value to dete~r.,r,rfitf~::'fhe slglt;fipnce of a project's annual GHG emissions; or, ' "\'} ··::;. ·. ~;::§-~ ». .. .. "'!. ?.S:i:~~~ • Efficiency-Based Threshold: Assesses thli!~~.G impacts of a projecf:~~~;~n emissions per capita b . ··::;;:*~:·, ' ··;i;i;:~;:;;,;, as1s. v:·:-1,::.. '"" ":v;,,,,,.,' ,.. ~}.~;.~fa:,, .d~}t~~;; · .. ;:~;~i~~?: For most projects the Bright-Line Thr~m~J:g: ?f 1,1so Me\[~~'.[gfis co2/year (MT cOze/yr) will be the most applicable threshold. In addition tg;:rn·e: · .... ~i~ential/cortYQ;l~~rcial threshold options proposed above, ' '.,~,", ·~•,r,.-!•w.•~ '\."~~a"•'• a bright-line numerical value threshold::~ .. '"· :Of~Jl,0;: MT C02e1.'1}::,was adopted for stationary source t~~..-.. ;:,.·~~ .. ,,.. ... ,;?-~-,.~;,~.-,,, ~ ~ (industrial) projects ·:~:::::'::. "· .. :;,:?~ .. · ·., . ,.;,;~~~~=:~:::~h-. ""e;:l:i~~:;. •':' .. \~:-,' . -.:,;::;:~: .. It should be noted that~lfi:B'J~:tttg~~that gene·~lfte. less::~. :ari~tM:;above""'fuentioned thresholds will also ..<·:0~ ~f>!v" v~x-;~~·::v .:::~·:.::"1;~. .~:/1 ·X..z .. :::~i' -.·~;:..~;>};:·}}J·-... .. ~ participate in emissioQ:~f~]uctions 6~£~ . .use air ei:tii.~jgps, includi'ngt~HGs, are under the purview of the California Air Resources~:ia°Q"ard (or d'.t:h~r regulat6~~~gencies) and will be "regulated" either by CARB, ·>.: .. :,,:<j~,, ,'{i.~ .. ~,,r.1 \~~-,V,~., the Federal Government, cii(;:;other eatities .. For exafij);?le, new vehicles will be subject to increased fuel econo~t~!!~U.9.9J,2.s and":~~!~~t[Jlr~~ij~~~t!.9.f.!.(>, lafij~::~and small ap~liances will be subject to more ~.,¥,;J,il',.&l>-••n"il\r~.?~IA."»""~" ""~"~}~"'~"'\.I" ,,.. ''/',.~,~" ,./\,,,,, • .._ strict em~~leHs"··--sfanll{ajtq~, anar;:.~nergy "'deltiie:i;e_d"~;;,fo consumers will increasingly come from 11:: .. z..:~t>::;:·" "':~-t,,.Z:f:t~}~ ··:·!~·"·:~" ~ .... ~~ ... ~~;;:/>:·~~ renewabJe'·sources. Othe~r.~13.regram·s::t~at are intenClecVto reduce the overall GHG emissions include Low -....~~~~x··~.. ~ .. i.e·:~:,,:;;.~. ·,;.;.->:·:it_,,, , Carbon Fu~J}~tandards, RerieW.~ble Pc:frey~li,Q standards and the Clean Car standards. As a result, even the emissi~'~4i!:~:~~ result fro~~µ;&}:~cts tKU~fk~~~duce fewer emissions than the threshold will be subject to emission reductions. '=.:::~:ri~:, "*:;·· ::· > ·:~~t.if~ Under CEQA, an indi' .,j:lj:i[ projec .: HG emissions will generally not result in direct significant impacts. This is because the cli~~!~t:1f~~-9g~2·:jssue is global in nature. However, an individual project could be found to contribute to a ~8tg'fl'tl~fly significant cumulative impact. Projects that have GHG emissions above the noted thresholds rri:~~-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 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: Page 24 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 195 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 • 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 q~~jgned to han.dle dead weight loads of standard solar-heated water and photovo!.!z:faii~~i:mels. Roof design shall include sufficient south-facing roof surface, based Ol};:~tf~pfures size and use, to accommodate -:·: .. :-~;!:.~·N·$~. adequate solar panels. For south facing ro<;>;t~~!tcli~!i,_ the closest standard roof pitch to {X':J,, .. ,.'>,,H,,}-•" ~A~~•:•,..l'~" the ideal average solar exposure shall b~}.fs~a-:· ~<;:~£j~:::; .. . <~~~. ~.... ..-/'~~~ .. ·····~ • Increase the building energy rating l?Y.~°?.Q% above Title"'2*F~y._~quirements. Measures used to reach the 20% rating cannot b~~~@~:ti1~ counted. \:.@~:::. • Plant drought tolerant, native ~~-~'.~~-trees along southerri:*&:~P.9.sures of buildings to reduce energy used to cool building~i;@~.~mmer. ·-'=*:::.. ··::::~f~t:: .. • Utilize green building rpaterials (mate=li~i.~:·.w~ifilii~~-fe resource ~'fffq'!~nt, recycled, and sustainable) available 1~l~J!Y.J.f possible. '',i:!~~f~mw==" '"·=~::::' <.::7·.:::--: .. :~:;;-:;: .. :~ .. ' '~;:'~~~:--::::: • Install high efficiency he~Y.i_gg~:f:!.~:£ooling system~.;. • Design building to includ~f~~pf":6~~r~~.~-~gs that'°"if~~~~.~fficient to block the high summer sun, but not the lower winf~f~.un, fromf P.enetratin'g~fo:ith facing windows (passive solar d e~'.gn) · .. :t:~il~~~rtt&;:~:; ~::~~~~!:.. ..~;;~§J~~lt{~::~'}.~ ';.~i~~: • Ut1hz~,;!j[g~:=effic1~r:r~:Y::;gas or solar;::~a}~r;::n~·ate'rs::~;~::.:;;;:::: ... :-~ ~~·:·:·~·<'• ··:-.... ;~:.·.· ~ ·~·:~~ ....... ~'ti'..;::.;.: .. :,,;.:,• " .. -..,.~J,,,. }~o0;•~ • Utilize·1 ~.\4H~-in energy~gfficient app}i~!i~e·s (i.e. Energy"Star®). • Utilize ddQl~,panedmi:~dows. ::tl~, • lJ.tW.~e low ~ritfgy .!i~iiWlgh~_(i.e. sdai~rn). --~ .. :~~ .. :·:~:·: ~·· "~:·:;-..~·" •• ;~; .. : .. ;4:•:<":';.~-...... <~"!; .. ; .. ~ .. :·: .. :~:.,.:~... • .. ·.: .. :·:-·\ •. .:. ~ filiie::·energy effi(ffent inte-fiof;:'.jjghting.'':~;~~::i ~~~~;~~~~:, · I nst~"W:~~WmM:-red'j:&j~~-g;progra ;;w;f ey}~~th~ rm ostats . • ,. --..J '1 ~,,~·",."ij.'~ r",.f"•;•",,•, •,•,.t1,•,1i" "9"~:~~~:,. Use roofingt~m·aterial wif,i;l;.a solar reflectance values meeting the EPA/DOE Energy Star® 'r.Jo}:":•>, '•'\,:=:·:·:... -",,.\,~ .. :;..; .. ,:. ·-:~·:.:~:::: .. rating to reduce:Summer:co.oling needs. •,,::;:'{~;~;~~ ··::::::=~~~., ·,.·:=:~:~::: ... Q • ··::?f.J!Hminate high Wat~r consU{l'l"ption landscape (e.g., plants and lawns) in residential ·a:~~lgn. Use nativ~im~nts that do not require watering and are low ROG emitting. ~,.",," .. "•"~".. , .. ,,..;;:_~~.~ • Provi'~fe;:;.on-site bJ:G,Y.cle parking both short term (racks) and long term (lockers, or a locke<f~~~!TI wj~jjj~,¥f'andard racks and access limited to bicyclist only) to meet peak season rri'~~Jm~mNiemand. One bike rack space per 10 vehicle/employee space is ~ .. ~.-:•;•~";<i;••:a" recommendeti~::" • Require the installation of electrical hookups at loading docks and the connection of trucks equipped with electrical hookups to eliminate the need to operate diesel- powered TRUs at the loading docks. • Provide storage space in garage for bicycle and bicycle trailers, or covered racks / lockers to service the residential units. References: 10, 11, B Page 25 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 196 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 VIII Hazards and Hazardous Materials Environmental Setting 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? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and/or accident conditions involving the release o ,if'}:;. hazardous materials, substances, or waste into · · , environment? Potentially Significant Impact c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous. ·T:·,.. •. Less Than Significant with Mitigation D 'v·Z~·:-:",, .. ~·;·,:.~, a~ut~ly hazardous m~terials, sub~t~~~es, or waste'W~::: .. Q·:$~@~· D w1thm one-quarter mile of an ex1st~rn8:~9.! proposed "",;~~~~~;:;;~~;~~;.' school? ~~k.;;:::~:~;:;:; . ., ";~;~;;;~}' . ~=t~~!;:::::~:r . ' > ·"~:~~~~;~M' d) Be located on a site which is include'El:~on·· . st; .. of '·.~~::.:;~:; .. ~.:<i-~..;..,-., "'-&~'r~~:-.z:;::~,.~~ v~..µi;:,,:.,:3:· .. hazardous materials sites, compiled pl;ir~.uanf'Y.40~1::-,., D ·:::~:,:~~:··. ·"i\l".;X.1 1\'\W'~* ........ '1J>.,~ <· ~.· • Government Code §65962~;::@f.lQ, as a result~~reate <t-::~5;;:,::-:::;c . .::.,, ··:·· significant hazard to the.1~m~iiMfrf~·m1ironme~l~~~~. . . .-· .i."f~~:;,. /-:-<;:~~·}':-;:~~ -;.: .. z,.>z..;.,~ ·,:;4~:,..1' ...... ~i.;(J;;;:·::-1;;":·:.~ e) Be located within a"tt~~ifport lanff~~~~ plan or, ·~\e ··•.Ji~~f:~~i:~ such a plan has not b~·~:~~attopted, ~i"fiin two mif~~;Q .... >"::;.:~·-~...:·~~.. ,•ty,,<.~.:. ;.::;r,.t~;.. a public airport or public iiS,¢~@.i_rpory;-"f,~f;,;Sq, would t~~>, D D • • ...... '"~a-~,.,~»:~; .. :.. h..:;.(>.:,..:~::;:.;:r:>:<;.: .. "~"i'~ • • "-:,.'X'"i-~ pro 1ect res.l,!l~~J~~.~~AA!.~!Y haza[9@l~~~¢epl~~~,~~2.! ng or:~m:-"",/' i::,_~·>~"1d"it~ .. ~i.l:·~·,.~ ~ ... ;,:r~,~ r.~~·1>..,,"'i.•?,~ .. ~°'" ,,.~,.ri''>i''./;\,>f-~""°'J'.. ...,,_. "~::...:; ... WO rki ng Jtj;it~!e·:pro jeetlctf.~i'!J »;~:;:::;:~;.. ···:~.~:::~::':~$:.-... ·'.:;if' . ,r"°J+~i;;._,,:;y t,~~~.1. """~t<1Xtf},.. ~.:»!•:•;.:..:~~ '· .. : ... ~: .. ~;:ji'?,;,• .. f) Be 10~~~~-d in the vicim~~~~9t. a pr'i'i~1~.;.~irstrip? lf''(ct·~· would tfi~~Jifo9ject result in·~~~f!=!tY ha:Z~~~-for people D D l'_,,~ /, .,.,.,·' '"..-}:·:-?~. "~~~ •,.:··· ... residing or wo~~lng in the proje~}a.rea? ·~~~::~~:. . .... ,. .. :}• .• ,/',._..,. "'{"'.~.·:·:" '.~_.?:--::~~") g) Impair impl~.i:l)~.~tation of dt~~hysicalfy".:~interfere 6., ><'J'~"L i'J'.~x with an adoptea;~~je_mergency ;;{f.e:Sponse plan or D D ~:::=~~·:~t !·:":'~~~ emergency evacuatioi:j;:pJcin? ·*;::1i;:1 ....• ;.?'"'?.. ~i.}; .. ~,.y h) Expose people or strtf£~1:1.!.:e.~;;~!l:~:~r significant risk of loss, injury, or death frorit;1~~~~fand fires, including D D areas where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Discussion a, c-h: No impacts. 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 49 Item 9.a. - Page 197 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 IX Hydrology and Water Quality Environmental Setting 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 Less Than Potentially &.,.,. "f" S. "f" tl~:;;::~1gm 1cant 1gm 1ca~ .. :~%;~;:i{ with Significant lmpa~q;:~~~?.;e' . . . Impact Would the project: ,;;:;~'.;:;'.::;~:( M1t1gat1on a~ Violate any water quality standards or waste . .tdlil~~;::]t11~~?i;:,, D discharge requirements? . {'l';:;::.:::·, '-::?:::J:'."!:·, .. , .. , " -~.,,. -~~< .. ~"~· - b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies .Q.tJ:W~:. ··.;;~)?.~~:?::: ... ,,,.,,.,;;.;,./>~-~~'< ;,:...,, .. ,. .. ,, .. :;.D interfere substantially with groundwater rech.r,if~ej~:;:." ··;:~:~·~:·: such that there would be a net deficit in a~:~l~fr .. ,.;:~~~~;;;~ volume or a lowering of the local groundwater ta:~.!.~::~'·· D .-:~::.. D "":t~J.!~4; .. l;gj 1eve1 (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearov~r*~~.. .·:'::~W~f~; «:::~~&";· wells would drop to a level that wo.cifao;;.;not support -~~~~:.::x:~~W~~?· "';::~~~ ~~:~::x~~~:·.;,. · ... :::~~:~::::·::::i"j"·" ~ }" existing land uses or planned uses fop;~~f.iic~;~permits ··::::~~~:;\ have been granted)? 'W~;:~·,;=~=~f~~k:;;... ·-.~~~;~~:~::, c) Substantially alter the existing drainag~~~att~fijf~f;~;.;.. ··:::f:N!E~}1::.. > ~ ...,·~..;<·~ ....... z .. ;.: " T • .. ~·:·if'V-:t,.- the site or area, includi~.~:;::1t1J~~~h alteratio;rhpf the·:::: ··::f{~~~ course of a stream or r:i\letj~;jfi;~ii;iJi:ianner whict;i;:SWould,; ·;;;~ · result in substantial of:f~jt6~;~ff-sit~:~f~~ion or silf~~on~t~~· -~:"',»:::'):::;,. ">(:<,:':~:;t '>(,,~tt~~~ )l/'.,"~' d) Substantially alter ttffl[.)e}.<isting d~iP.age pattern~o:t \d .. -.,.,..:..,.,,,,.,, .. ,.,,~ .... •.,!>: .. !>~",."• the site or area, includiri'g~ttu:ou h.}a1ieration of t~:e·:::-~.~ ... · ;-~·>~ .. ,:,.,:::: .. : ... ~ .. ;-},;..}&..,.. x .. ..-=~·~·~ course of a .. ,stt:eal'tt':t.er river,., .. , ''fitiaJJY,~~increase:~~:~.. D ~i.".?;>; .. ,:..:-.:..):,,....:» ... z ... ;..;.~~< ... ;.,.,. ... • ··"{ .. ,....: .. :,,.:-;~:-~~~ "..,'~;w:•:·;, the rate n~t~affioffrtr=~~~~~H,~ac . :~::,,~ff in a:::~tJi!?;,~;~f ·:.~~:= which J;1i:lltl result in on'.:t6r~off-site·'.f:toading? ··-:'i':;~:~;;} e) Cre;(~~~i5r. contribute ·;fitart: wat~:~1;1Mhich wou.ld ?~~,.~~~·:,.; .. " v,.;..:..;-;i-: "·Z·~~;..z...~ .. exceed the caJflcitv of existing~Ci>:B:plannea:?.S:tormwater ~ ......... w;~ .. ·.. •,.•,. • .. :. ,;,. "-"~" -,.<,,";? drainage systeif!~~~:,~r provide s"u'ostantial '•''aoditional sources of pollut~Ci:~f:~;r..off? 't. ~ f) Substantially degr'i!H~'.iW.ater qu~l~tY,,? ':-.. z~" .. -,,'. ,§_..,,,·;: ... r g) Place housing within"fijN!9~~,)f~~~Jflood hazard area, as mapped on a federa('E:\~~~JWtazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map, '"or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place stru~tures 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 D D D D D No Impact D D D D D D Page 27 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 198 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 Discussion 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 gra,u~H~ater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge since the project will comply with w"' W's Post Construction Stormwater Requirements. Discussion of water supply is covered in Se.~dii?,h;. I. Utilities and Service Systems. Less than significant impact ~t~~~~~~:-· , ·· ·~~"·-,.. -- ,,.;:;~~~f~i -~,;.. ,, .;a::::-. f: The State Water Quality Control Board requirEl,s ':::~-·~lCipalities, via tW~~~,j:ltional Pollutant Discharge Elimination System {NPDES) Permit, to minirFf , negative impacts ;;:ff~~l'J.Uatic ecosystems and ~..;~~·<(.}.. • .:,.·~v .. degradation of water quality to the maximum e~~~! practicab,i~· Permittee:~t9J..ust implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) that reduce pollutant~~h~§itor~if:{lter runoff to'~t9,~:~~~chnology-based standard of Maximum Extent Practica~!~~~tt,E.P) to prote&j~~~~;~~·uality. The goals ·af~pbst-construction BMPs are to prevent and control er'(;>ffi<:iti5$~~n~ sedimenfa~{~~"' provide source control of potential ·;,,...:,,.··~ ~.-.~"i' .. ".-:.:;;.t';,-"!",/'Y"~,,'· .pollutants, control and treat runoff, at]h 'pr.Q;t~§.:t wetlands·;;~M. water quality resources. Post- construction BMPs are required to actli~~~ st~~;;:W~J_7r qual~M~?~~~andards through site-planning measures. Vegetative s"'f.aJ.~~~~et. other biofi!l~.r.:s are ·re-5~mw.ended~~:~~~1~e preferred choice for post- constru~ion BMPs fo~'"~J:!~J:0j~'C~l~1~}~ suitabl~@.nds~·~R:~~r~~~fa~:~ai:ige·-these measures are relatively economical and req~u~e?f'llmited j:ijal.ntenance. . :;tojects"'"\1'\{l;i~re landscape based treatment is ~"'t.'.~ .. '•'.;(, -~~,...»,.•"• ···~,.~~ impracticable, or insuffr6i~!;lt to mee~;if~quired des,1grycriteria, other post-construction BMPs should be -vl' .... v,. .,,.""'' ... :.t,1.r incorporated. All post-coffs}rt~ctio ·:T must be-·R:l~j[ltained to operate effectively. Implementation of the BMPsAtstetl~:Qelow ~ifi~!ed. , _ . :.G:t~ntial iR/~acts to water quality to a less than significant A<h~"~'~,,:-·v:•:.~:~:·:~~·~..:-..: .. ~-~ '"•i,"!<~;..:;;-_,.;..:,,.<i)' ~ ~:..:-;.<.;:·:~:-.. :-,,.,, ·~v:<·> .. level. Lessm:t'aifsignifii::ar:i:t with m1tigation -·-~ .. :::;;*~:~t1~:·.,. ·i~v- f~~~~;X-1: .,,~~!~f~_~J.!i'_,.·:~'!" ... ·~,,P .. :s shall·:::~!:orporated into the project: ~~~·~:;~:~:.~,{ , ~ :; :' --~::;:~;~~::~-~~;~i~~~=?~~ "~. -~n ' • ·:::Roof Downspout~Sy.stem._ Direct roof drains to pervious areas to allow infiltration prior -~.~· .. ,;-.~. ,.;~~"'·"~~~ to:iq}~charging to "?:~:~7r bodies or the municipal storm drain system. '"=: ... »;·.. A~~~; • Run-off''Eontrol~W:~intain post-development peak runoff rate and average volume of runoff at 1'Ef¥t~tl~!f~:f 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 washing by removing hose bibs and installing signs prohibiting such uses. Vehicle/equipment washing areas shall be paved Page 28 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 199 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 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. • 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 9.r:.the storm drain system . .. :il~~}~;. • Food Service Facilities. Design food service fa~11i:ties (including restaurants and grocery stores) to have a sink or other area for cle.~nMii.fi!~·~r. mats, containers, and equipments that is connected to a grease intercem~:~jj[~fior ·m;~~j~f..harging to the sanitary sewer system. The cleaning area should b.~:~!~);~e enough tcFq!~~-~ the largest mat or piece of • d .~.•n"~'•"•~~..:•r ~<,."',.~,.".;.~. equipment to be cleane . ..::~:~::::::::.-. ·,:;:::~=~:-. ·~~~~j1;;:~:. ·:·:::%~~~:::: .. • Refuse Areas. Trash compactors, e"r'1gJS?.~-~res and_.s;!.~mpster arec!:~;~.ball be covered and protected from roof and surface drain=ag·~:::.Jnstf!1l~f~:~gelf-contained·~a.f:~J.i:iage system that discharges to the sani~~~®.;;~~~er if water'·t®~h~~f;~tdiverted from th~::~f~as. "'.'f~~pi~k~~:-;· ~·-::{~@.;::::. • Outdoor Storage ControJs~:~~Oils~:~~ij~Js, solvents;:;;;eoolants, and other chemicals stored .~."\•;·~ ~ .. "~~·~-~~~"~'.. ~·~·~~~.;::i; ... ,, outdoors shall be in contai'n~t~, and'·'pr_g1\T.:~ted from·i~-~~j_~age by secondary containment structures.sucl:i::as.berms, linefs;Naults aT.::r-C:>o.f,covers~·ana{.or drain to the sanitary sewer • ..:;i:-:~x~:·.:;~~=~:~:::-=:::::~ ":::: ... ::::~~ .... :::.::::~:::?::::;:"t;y.,,.." ·~:::::~ .. • system:q.~~lBi:Jll<··--mat~r:ials storei:l:~o.utd_op~s;:;sfiall::~jilpo be "'protected from drainage with o•:•:b~·:n:":•:,,:r-.?.;.:..;~;",.•~ •:•:•:+:' ~~~=~·:•:•H":•~' •=-.:~~ ... ~,;..;~,:..;...,, berms:@JW. covers. \°Et9.cess equi~.m.§.iW"stored otit~oors shall be inspected for proper functioil"r~~:C:l,.leaks, sf!;>f;~d on imp.~f.i:B'.~able surfaces and covered. Implement a regular program 6N~W:!i?.epi_o~f~.i:t.~t:.!.!tter c~-~~~g_! and develop a spill cleanup plan for storage ~.'T'' ·~~::~:::. Cleaning,-:::~aintem:fr1€e::·,and Processing Controls. Areas used for washing, steam -;:::::~~~~~-. cleaning, m;'i:rf~~~nanc~~~*~~pair or processing shall have impermeable surfaces and ·,;-;~~~~~ggntainment ti~~1:D.~, ro~.f:~~~)!~rs, recycled water wash facility, and discharge to the ··-:·~~~.i~ary sewer. ';~t~charges''f(, the sanitary sewer may require pretreatment systems :;;..~ ..... ~<.-... 4 ·-~~~~·-·~~ anflt~r:.~pproval of:~a:ti industrial waste discharge permit. ---;q~i~~*:::.. A~~~~1~*: • Loading"t:f&k .ee·nfrols. Design loading docks to be covered, surrounded by berms or curbs, or .,c~~o:sftficted to prevent drainage onto or from the area. Position roof downspouts tg:Y 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. • 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 49 Item 9.a. - Page 200 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 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-SP),ifl:i: .. the City's Land Use Element and l~"~ .. :~:~;-; .. :_J_ zoned Gateway Mixed-Use Specific Plan (GMU-SP). The propose,g_~~~pe and scale of development will be consistent with both the MU-SP land use category and GMU.::S<~;;-:·;:rr;ing district with the adoption of the ~ -..;;;; <~'\.~ General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Amendment. · .;::1fJ;&, .. ~~.·K ~U::::~.-=.t.~:.: ... ~ .. ~~~~~:f~~==~ ~ -~ ~-/a:?.;;::~??:.:"°Pote ntia lly l: .. :;. ;.P,.~n Less Than •• ·l'' Sign' .ci:li:it .. · Significant wit~;?;:::~~.. S1grnf1cant Impact Mitigati~';" ·· '.·.-. Impact Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with the applicable land us~~p~~n, policy, or regulation of any agency with juris81Att~f:fa::Qver the -.."} ·~~.· ....... ,,~ ......... ~.._ .... ;~. project (including, but not limited to, cf~~e·ne@t~i;?lan, • ~ {1"• • .. :i,~"i:"' ~ .... ~ .... ' specific plan, local coastal program,'l:(J?r z"(ff.l]l:}g;.; .... ordinance) adopted for t~-~-"}J?..~.rpose of ~X~jping '·3,~:~~tfo~~~--. . . . • .·t,.:cl~ .. ~·~~;:: .. :-~9. 1-XY.:: ?~~·:u:•;:: .. ~;:<· .. m1t1gatmg an envrronmep,~ ~~1:1~P~:·:·. ";;:~;~:·. ..::::~~:S~=:=~:--.::;:::?;~ ..... D ··:~~~~~~~~, "~" .. "' D • ~";,"..'>'·"·:<-·;/' -_,.,,_, ·,,;;~·~:,:~:·: .. { ·K:•:,.~ .. ;;. •• ·;,: .. ~ .. ~~:•;."... ~ ",.!rx<~ .. >'f»· c) Conflict with any ~R~li'cable ·n~eJt~t conse~~tio~~~;?r 0 ~~~~:~~~;, D plan or natural commLinlt~~s!Jnservati9:~;plan? ' f:'' ·~.· D No Impact D ~i~~;;~lt1*~'~' b: The -t>~{:!f!osed project ii'i'~l:li.t;l.~s arriej:j'aments to bdtli the General Plan and Berry Gardens Specific Plan to ensur~:ll{~~.d.evelopment cif.lGesubj:a[;~pt_gperty is consistent with all applicable land use plans, _,.,.~~~,",."..-'~ ".0 0<.·~~D..,~ '.fo"~..-,:r~,,~ .. policies, and feg'~.!;:itions. Less tfian::Significa·n:t::impact ~~~~~i%~=~:·~ ~~~1{~j;, ..... References: 1, 2, 4, 1'$;;;17, 18 ::::};;; ,,,, Page 30 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 201 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 XI. Mineral Resources 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 Significant Impact b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated:;§:;:;::. ,»;.:~~1ov,?:,.>;,:" on a local general plan, specific plan, or other landA;i~e:~:·· ~~~;};,.~!'~? p I an? ·~i:;:;.C,;'.•:" ~·;·:~f-. Discussion a-b: No impacts. ~,/<~--:.,..,, References: 5 \\~~ November 2014 {Revised July 2015) Less Than Significant with Mitigation D Less Than Significant Impact D D No Impact The project site is sui;rqj:l.riaed by c~ij\!Jlercial use:~:j.tQ~~~e east, n~i;tll and west, and residential uses to ~'~<',\',.,', •"'~..,.· ... ~~'\,,_ ";•Yn»Jo>" .. "~V'~·:» \,> ~ "•" the south. The propose:aXp.r_oject incig:ges new refsJ~~htial uses on the southern portion of the project '»",. .... ~.~ ..... ,,,~,'"t ,!' .;,;~"f., site, with mixed-use comm€!'iGial spate:;,and residen'fiaL condominiums on the northern portion of the project(~~~.~.'~~,',:;,~:~ ~,:~-~:::. i;~~;:::, No lmP'ct Would the proj~~fa'3";,.. ·:::;~~@, ··i~;:;;{i~i~~~f~s~::: Impact Mi;:~ion Impact a) Generate or"E!~·R.Q.se people to·:n·~Jse levels"'in excess of standards est~fii)~.tt~d in a l~~l~ general plan or noise ordinance, or iW~;?,~~.er apP,li~~·~le local, state, or federal standards? ·::;:~:~J~~;.:. .. i:i ·:'' · b) Generate or expos:e~I@P.·e·aple to excessive ground borne vibrations or gro'li"ndborne noise levels? c) Create a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project (above levels without the project)? d) Create a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project, in excess of noise levels existing without the project? D D D D D D D D D D D D Page 31of49 Item 9.a. - Page 202 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 e) Be located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport? If so, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) Be in the vicinity of a private airstrip? If so, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Discussion D D D D D D a: Residential uses are considered to be noise sensitive, and aq.w:tiQre loading dock will expose both existing and proposed residential uses to elevated noise leveJ~;~jji~W-acoustic report was prepared by .. ·~~:-x~:J:~~~:~· David Dubbink Associates (2010) to analyze acoustical issuessi:.ela~~d to a previous project on the site. The report concludes that without mitigation, the previousf cip6g~p~.project will exceed City standards for noise exposure to residential uses. The curre11Nt>~ri1ect pro~B~~!:~_!ncludes significantly reduced ~11...-~~ ... ,..,.~1 ~~~ .. q~ commercial intensity and it is reasonable to conclud~~bat implementatlon:;of recommended mitigation measures .from the previous study will reduce #ff!~rJiihpact to a less th~:~~~~pificant level. Less than . "fi . h . . . ·~'i':·)·:•.c ~·Jo:-,;:::·:·. s1grn 1cant wit m1t1gat1on ":;;::;~::;.:,,_ --·:f<-i:~:}. · .. :~~~~f~:::;.. ..:4~~~ ·~;~~t":::.·:.. MM Xll-1: All store deliveries shall be restricted::t'ci>~be1wi;e'tr the hours of i: · }A.M to 10:00 PM, ~'!';'/·:~;~~~;;-... ~~~~=:~:=~::;::::~:j"~>:'.;; "~<~=·· and the current parking limitattO:ijs::Or.i,,either side or~S:@_th Courtland Street shall be maintained. ·-:~8'... ~:::.{~It~k}.. -.::~~i~~i(~:::: .. MM Xll-2: Any residential strucf .)~? ffiat:!.W.c:>1,-1ld have ·-:a~~i.rect line of sight to store delivery ~~~,~,.~~·· ~p~».,,~'f'>/, ~"'~'\ "~","t'~af"z> areas shall includ: .. :.~-rn~~.tical treatfl\~9.:! to ren~~;k~~~erior>~~1~~ levels by thirty (30) decibels, th t f h. h "i:..""·1 1·i..::. ... b b th"·;;.i· I "•'··~·k·· .~._,,. e cos o w 1c_.};~1:~'."~f!_:{~! ... erne y e~~§lye op_~f~J;::~-:s-~~:~?::; .. ,. ·~~:;~:-· :t~M;:w· '-.$,~*!it~~---~~f.t~}4tf?1i~y--~e~:t~l~%;; MM Xll-3: Delivei;M truck driV.ers shall be·:(in·structed to turh' off diesel engines when trucks are ~.:>~~·::~ . ."~". ·~:;:":J.;:;, ''{: .. ;;:(:l,~~ parked or being urm:>aded. .. '"" '~~~;;:~; .. ,<,:;(~::~:~1~~~:~:~?~---'·:'.;;:t . " . ,_ _::::;;;~~~::::::~.. ..\~1~1:,} b & d: s~2:~tr;f!Gtil;5_fl:l~~f:1;:!P.e pl'Cifil,tt~d proje·~t~~.!}.J:_ge\~rate temporary groundborne vibrations and increa~~~:rfioient noise<le;~~!§; how~~~~'-the days~a(i·ij?~_lmes of construction activities shall be limited per ..,...;~ ... ~ .. 1.~,, '""' "; ~ .. 'l',,. >:,~.~,,.· ~.,,.,,.~ ",,'l .,,. City stanfot~~g;~." T~e~efore/:~i~~~~mpo~'%·{~crease is'not anticipated to exceed the City's thresholds for noise. Less·ffian significant impact . ._ "::~::'.:f~:: .• ·<~~~b~:-. \~~fa. '>:;~~~::; c: Operation oflf1~1;pr,~posed proj~~ will create a permanent increase in ambient noise levels; however, this permanent incr:S~~~ is not anlltflpated to exceed the City's thresholds for noise in Municipal Code -~"~:,:~~::;,., ./· ... ::-:;.: .. ::. Chapter 9.16. Less than·'s@nificaotc:1mpact e-f: No impacts. ·z~~~;WJ1~~~~j~:f· References: 1, 2, 3, 15, 21 XIII. Population and Housing Environmental Setting The project site is vacant. The parcel to the south of the project site had been identified in the City's Housing Element as an 'opportunity site' to provide additional housing to the City's housing stock and has been constructed with a 36-unit affordable multi-family apartment complex. Page 32 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 203 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? 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? Potentially Significant Impact D D less Than Less Than Significant with S1gnif1cant No Impact Mitigation Impact D D D D D D Discussion . . .. ,1~~:;~1~t) -:~b~: .... a: The proposed project is ant1c1pated to house a.PP.t:Q~1mately 100 pers·o:ns.~:;. The proposed density and anticipated population growth are consistent ©.ifh::;{he City's General fi'i~~i~(Land Use and Housing Elements) and the residential type will be consist" " ,. )th the City's General ··f:ifl;.IJI~nd the BGSP due to amendments to these documents being proposed ifi:~!!:i~ pr9j~~~ji:.description:·;:;;i{li~ss than significant impact ··::~~~~ll~~ti1~'.~~:"·· ·-,~:~f ;:. "•;}oj~'I' .,, b-c: No impacts. Environmental Setting·.~;~i:;b::.. .#;i? ·::;@::. Public service~J.Q ... ,tie projet(4iJ~~ ?Ji· ...... tfiJy._provide~ij~~¥ the City of Arroyo Grande and the Lucia Mar School Distr:l~(~rois~}>· ·~~~~:~~:=~: -::t:::=~:=::;,... \~~~:::. <~~,~1:''~:~~~ ~~:;, ;.;;~~~ Would the proJect./·.·Z·. ·:-:.·:·:v. .,.;. Mitigation :OS:~,'""~"'-." k~• .-:o~~~'V',."• a) Result in signif~fant environm~ntal impacts from "~:~~ ;-:~;.~ .: ... :.::<·:,. construction associafea:,with the .~~fovision of new or physically altered gov~:i~i;TI~ntaJ:::~'.~fities, or the need -(,N,.'o". N.".".'N." for new or physically altere9~M:~~f.nmental facilities, to maintain acceptable servic~"·l'~fi"os, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? Police protection: Schools? Parks? Other public facilities? D D D D ~ D D ~ D ~ D D D ~ D D ~ No Impact D D D D D D Page 33 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 204 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 Discussion a: The construction of thirty-eight (38) single-family residences is expected to add approximately twenty-seven (27) school-aged children to the Lucia Mar Unified School District based on a student yield factor of 0.7. As allowed by State Law, the Lucia Mar Unified School District has a development impact fee established by the school district for new residential and commercial construction to finance any new classrooms. Less than significant with mitigation MM XIV-1: The applicant shall pay the mandated Lucia Mar Unified School District impact fee. References: 5, 15 XVI. Transportation/Traffic Environmental Setting The project site is located at the southwest corner of East Grand Avenue and Courtland Street, which is a signalized intersection and approximately 250 feet from East Grand Avenue and Oak Park Boulevard, which is also a signalized intersection. Page 34 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 205 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 Based upon the updated project description of 5,000 square-feet of additional commercial space in Subarea 3a and change in number of residential dwellings to thirty-eight (38) Subarea 3b, the traffic study prepared by Omni-Means in 2014 was updated and finalized. While changes were made to trip distribution and peak hour trips as a result of the modified project description, overall impacts were the same as those identified in the previously circulated Mitigated Negative Declaration and proposed mitigation measures did not change. 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!.:'P:r~~~i~; congestion at intersections)? /;;:· ~· b) Exceed, individually or cumulatively, the le'~ .. service standards established by the county conges 10rl;:;,. ~.;;, ....... ='~ management agency for designated roads of·~:(~~~'.·. <fv:,..... ";,;~. -, • highways? $;:::~:~:;:;"' · !>!:~';'.::~" .~);;~':}.:~:_:~ ........ c) Cause a change in air traffic patf$.~ms~~jh~\1,1ding ... "),~ _. ~. \. ~""-~ .......... either an increase in traffic levels or ~ia~t(:~a:r.\g~~,~~ri o·=::::~::~;;,. JZI D location, that results in substantial safety ri~@g -·..;;::~;;~~~~~~~?~"::,;-.. ··:;::}f~~-. d) Contain a design featur:e'.:Ue~g., sharp c~~k.s or a··"~~lf@?i"·· .. :,;;~:]~~x-.. . . ,.»~;:~1~;::!(~::;::::~,,: .. h~~,,· • "·=~::~=~.. ,. :::=1~*?,.'5~;", ... '\:;f~~~:,.. dangerous mtersect1g .:·· r;"1ht:ettmf!.t1ble use~iM~· .. ·at~!::!;~:;.... D farm equipment) th:" ~ould sub~:i_iil:ritially in.~&· .. / '·"·<;~~~r:~· ~ ~~:~~i:~ -~~=:~~l::.?~ hazards? ... :-.;N; ''·:·'"'"'· • "=" "~ r-~"c.Y.~* ~ .... "'~v::· e) Result in in~~,;~~ate enie'r~~i:}~Y.~~~~~~&J~:,~-;... :,~~J~~r... D f) Result in itfa'aei'iaate·narking··f~at.i'acit"'?''-::1$:::.~:i: . .,. :::::~"/;·. D ,.,.;,;:;.~ ~.";~ ~1~:1fi~:;::;;;a~~;::Y..:\~ ·'\:: ~. ~ ,,, ., . ~-<:::~;~~;!~ .. ~~. "~:~:~:~ g) Conm~1bi\!V1fh adoptel:h:R91icie ~ .ns, or progfi~!Jl~ ":·:·· J<. ~,,~..i ... ·»·t~'~· ,,,,,.,., · .. ~ .. ~~· ' .... : .. ,. ·~ ...... ~-.~ .. ~·!'-,, supportw~~;; .. alternative -~*~~:~:~_port ri~!§~. (e.g., 'ous' turnouts,·'oi~Y:~le racks)? ~:;::::::~::, »:~:::~:~~::. .. "'·:;;?;it~:::.. ..:=w~~~~::;, "'.:~~@?:::~; Discussion ·{·: .. -:·:·:·. -,:.,.;..... ·::.;.;.· D D D D Less Than Significant Impact D D D No Impact D D D D D ·z;~~;!~=:=~-~ ·~:::~::~~ ~~ a-b: The traffic''i\~~\l.QY prepare~U~by Omni-Means (2015), evaluated the operation of seven (7) intersections in the ~iafm~ of the~f:g]ect. Existing AM and PM peak-hour traffic volumes were collected by Omni-Means specifit~Il¥~/~r~£~ff study. The existing AM and PM peak-hour intersection levels of service and delays current1'1:~£;~~f.ate within acceptable limits (LOS C or better). The analysis includes signalized intersections in the''eity of Grover Beach. The study utilized the trip generation rate data derived from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Generation Manual 9th Edition, consistent with the City's Draft Traffic Impact Study Guidelines. Applying the ITE trip generation rates to the project land uses, the project is anticipated to generate 69 new AM peak hour trips and 121 new PM peak hour trips. To evaluate the potential project impacts, the project traffic volumes were distributed to the study area intersections and the intersection levels of service were recalculated. Based on this analysis, the traffic study showed that the addition of project traffic did not significantly change the existing intersection Page 35 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 206 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 levels of service and does not result in a significant increase in peak-hour delays. No project specific significant impacts were identified for the existing plus project analysis conditions. A cumulative analysis was conducted for this project to determine the potential future impacts that the project may have when other approved and pending projects are assumed to be constructed. The traffic study utilized a list of approved and pending projects and formed the baseline for the cumulative traffic analysis. The cumulative 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 .~eal. .. · The traffic study showed that the project traffic, when a"'ct~~~J.· ~ the cumulative traffic volumes, continues to operate the two deficient intersections at un~gi;~~f~~.J.~ levels. The traffic study identified mitigation measures, including striping and signal phasing1~t"l1id1'~~~.~ld reduce these impacts to less than significant. Less than significant with mitigation /~:~is~ ,,.. '·~wA~;, ,~~~f; ;?.~::·~ "·~~~~1~b MM XVl-1: For the intersection of Bri~~~; .;·~ad and East Grand;:~~~.Q~ue, the applicant shall restripe the westbound approach to inclu ~~~.:::dedicated yyestbound rig_l:i!y!urn lane, which will '".,l\,.iXf.;~• ,1,;,,•~1>~>, ~},;o..t~'",.:a~ require two 11' travel lanes and a 10' turn lane:.:.···· ·?tgs(i;;0: ··::~~~~:1::::,, <~~~~;~::;~~· ~ ~-· ... v :tr~:~.. ·H==::g~1 MM XVl-2: For the intersectiorr~P.~k~.?!Jk Boulevarff .. Q: El Camino Real, the applicant shall: ~~~~i~:~~~~Wf ' ··:;%ff:~~:~ I • Restripe the westbound left:lM;~n la .•. ~~~.,~haredTe':ft4~Rrough lane; Restripe the;.,westbound sharecP.througfliif · ,, ane to··a::aedicated right turn lane; d~~~;=~27~~:~»:=·~:::~ ...... ~ ·~:;;:;~ ;;~~= " '\ '"<::;::.:!$" • • Provid~~g¥:~.flap'1)~~~~·.ng for th~~:~.st~S?.g!!_... · :;!~!,~!.~ movement; and • Providl~~y~rlap ph·*gfijg forthe E!r: -:~:&tici rightT~'Fii'.rmovement. . ·;:;:~~~~j~::::.. ~·"•>>.• • '" c: No impacts. '·~~:i";J~~:·. v;<.r-::· .;o ~ »'-~~~~r~~. /;::.~~~~ =:::¥t:~if;9.;>., '~:~~?{ •; ~~~;r.~v. ~:..v;:;.;, d: Th;.:~~&~tfre· stu-ay·::-Ej~~:1~~ted 't~~~~Rropose :::sF tifi'ftor site access alternatives from East Grand Avenue~lf~):I Courtl~md Stre'.~t~ .. Optr6'.(l;;~~A" include wo driveways on East Grand Avenue: a right turn ~ ... ;.·~~-"* ~ .. ~·i»lVv· ",•,..•,,io&v•,. only one~W.~¥:· ingress and a<;~gg~rate 'rigflt_turn only one-way egress west of the ingress. Option "B" would allow:~&P:~h ingress and ]gf"~~s and"i;w~~jd be restricted to right turns only. Under either Option, v°?,.,"""""~"~ ,.~·»::-,.~"'~~ '"irt>_",."•" - two full-accessll:'Qf:ll1.~ways would~qg~iprovideff off South Courtland Street; one serving Subarea 3a and ~·X·X.'.!,, ·:·:".;-:"~ one serving Subarea.~~JJ .. There woUl(il be no vehicular access between Subarea 3a and Subarea 3b. ~~f~t;;:,., ·' . ., The traffic study indicatet;l)~.h.9~~~jther site access option would be acceptable from an intersection operations standpoint, but~~~~tf8ffvers may be confused under Option "A" once onsite, as they would {: .. :~:·:.·~- not be able to leave the site via the entrance they entered. However, this potential confusion is not a significant impact that would substantially increase hazards and onsite pavement treatments and signage is anticipated to address this impact. Less than significant impact e: Complete emergency access for Subarea 3a and Subarea 3b is provided. The proposed project includes emergency access between Subarea 3b and adjacent Subarea 4 (Peoples' Self Help Housing project). Changing the existing emergency access for Subarea 4 from a prepared hammerhead turnaround on an undeveloped site to a through access through Subarea 3b will impact the existing operation but the complete access to South Courtland Street will not be a significant change. Less than significant impact Page 36 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 207 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 f: Parking requirements by land use are identified in Municipal Code Section 16.56.060. The proposed development requires fifty-two (52) spaces in Subarea 3a and 103 spaces on Subarea 3b, including .twenty-one (21) guest parking spaces. Subarea 3a is proposed to include sixty-one (61) spaces to meet the requirement. Subarea 3b contains 102 parking spaces, with eighty-two (82) of those spaces in enclosed, two-car garages and twenty (20) open guest parking spaces. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment includes the request 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. ., ,,, .. ,, :;:~;~:i::::~:~ :::i:e Systems ~,, Environmental Setting '·:::;~::i:::·. ::i::::;:;;;;; .. The project site is located within the incorporated CH:y}~Jrnits of ~i;r-9yo Grande·:::~[WJiJJties will be served by both the City and other regional entit)!=!S. "\Wf~i::: ... ,-.:dtgt::· ·::::;:~fo:: .. ~~.. :!t. Le;,·Th'" Le;~h'" ,,>:-:·. ··v:.~:•"":::;~ s· ·t .·'f·k. Stgntftcant s· f »:~x~:· ~-:t.'"(.::::::Z:;•;·. 1gn1 1can.:?;..')l;:;.. "th 1gn1 1cant Would the project: .;:::.~:~;;r.~:'~:-;, ··::;~~~~h .. , .. ;~i¥~)~~~~~:~~ct ·,~-~ifj'.~.lfiation Impact a) Exceed wastewater::f~:fre'iJ.:tr;tte.i::it restrictl().i;ls or.-:~~~~:::::::M~~;... ·:·::.:::::. standards of the apRll:~~t5'i~·· R~gmna1 Water lil~ali¥~lt:::: .. [i:~~fh:~, D ·=::::::::;:. '"•:::::.::}~ ... ~;::;:~::;:::~.:-}.::~~ '~·":·:f>f Control Board? ··::::::::::~ "~::~:~. ~·i;:·:~·::~:::·· · . ~ .. :::::i;:~~l ·~::~.::; ·$;:~::;:, b) Require or result in tlie·~~Q.11strudiiJ;}J;\ of new wa~e.~~ or wastewate~:;;tr:eatment lc{dil.i:tieftJW;~~~~P.a.nsion 6-ii. D existing J~.g{!~it~?.f~~1l~~~~~1%~, ·~=?w~~~1;~:··· ... ~:~:::::~~~lttt~=~·;,, ~~~~~)~, Would~;:f~~:r· construct1or.f:#L~f:.. thestEt:f'.c~c1ht1es ·cai;(~t: significant~environmental effects? »::~;::::;: ..• "·~:?:.;k,.,,,, "•!"~~··~·},. ~~;";,:.i;:·~~· .. c) Require ·o'i:iEesult in the ccin"st'r:uction··m{;new storm water drain;~~:t~facilities or ·1~~ansion -.::af}existing • .. :..-:...:~:.-:;..,. ·.; ... ~~:b:..:;, facilities? ··Y·:·=·:·. -.;:-:-:-::· . ~::::::::~::~.. ·~=~=~~==:~ d) Have sufficient wat_~f:::?upplies ~Y~llable to serve the project from existing·.;~·nli~lemE!nf~fand resources or are new or expanded entWl~m.@'.bi~:iheeded? e) Result in a determinaflo~n·~·· by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project, that it has adequate capacity to service the project's anticipated demand, in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations as they relate to solid waste? D D D D D D D D D D D D D No Impact D D D D D D D D Page 37 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 208 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 Discussion a & e: Wastewater generated by the proposed project will be treated by the South County Sanitation District, which has adequate capacity to accommodate the increase. Less than significant impact b: The BGSP area is served by 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 ... . ~:~f:~~~~~*:; c: The Poplar Ponding Basin, which is adjacent to the projeq~~~~lt~; was designed and constructed to accommodate the additional stormwater discharge from d.~i.~I9~fut~nt of the project site as part of the original approval of the Berry Gardens Specific Plan (BG~Pf:~~~J:He d~~~l9.l?ment of affordable multi-family apartments on Subarea 4 of the BGSP area resulted 1Q;i~:-?.i1e modificatl~fa~;~o the sources of stormwater entering the Basin, but these modifications were .iml$1e'illented on a one~to:-one ratio. Therefore, it is r::";.·::-.'${. .. :;,,; .. ~ ·-::,;:::;;~. anticipated that the Basin will continue to have~~e;t(uate capacity for the···Rf:qppsed project. Less than . . . ··:•x~~ .. ·~~ ··::7.:,_;:;»:Y~ , significant impact ·~lf:ta:.... ···:S3~f'.::-: -~~{j~fi~::::;. ..li~i~l};;: · .. ·~:;~~~~~\,:, . d: The 2012 Water System Master Pla_!;]~~r;<?vides water Cl~QJ.~ti~@fcictors based on larif;IJuse. The project site is located in the Mixed-Use Land G~~t~~~~_gqry, which R~-~~~~~emand factor of 1,788 gallons per day per acre (gpd/acre). The project site is 4:;~~.··~:~ft~~}~;Which resu"it~%'..Ylfater demand of 7,992.36 gpd. This amount of demand is covered by existi~~Weso~:~~~~~~tl?I .. the praj'f;t1:e_d build-out population of 20,000 ·~: .. :->~tt~ .. ,,_ ... :.:~:-:-:....:~:·. .. .. =~:~:-~-~ '· residents. Subarea 3b CO!)~~.i.Q~_,~mall-lot, sif@.e-familf:~~:~J~~nces af}~:::bigher density than the Single-·:F'-·~~,. .... '~!'·;•"'• ,.,,..,....... .·.~ ·:·"·· .. : ~:•">; ............ ..,. • ·.•;_ •• ••• • Family Medium Densitv..:{MPJ)~J:ti~fr.efore, using~the cor.r.f!~p"On"q!hg.~water::aemand factor would provide a ~-;·:","~~:{·:~~·J "~·-:~:~:-;-~... ···..:·:·:.. ~:·:~:.:~:..:v· ·~·-:;:•.A";(}~>,•, conservative water demand. The·~;water demaf.lt;K.JaraCir for Siiigle:£Family Medium Density Land Use .•:~~"»"~ ·~-'•:n,.n ''I,,• ~;-,,•~•:,(~~ 'th";";" '',~.;:/' Category is 1,672 gpd/aG,;~;:;.yvhich to'(*J~ 5,551.04':i6fl?of water demand for the 3.32 acres of residential development on Subarea"3fi~~~~:J;tie re~lhi.i.r:ig 1.15 aci~~~pf mixed-use development on Subarea 3a would • ~·~.;: .. :·&·~·-:-}~.J'~~::.,-i:·:~;-:~Y·.·~.... X·',.: ... ~ .. result in a w.atf!!'.:(Cl~r:rnmd of 21QB.6:~2!:(gpc;B:~:Jlte.';two Suoa):~as combined would have a water demand of 7,607.24;.:gp~j'il~~~;tfi~~~B~~ antf~iP.%~~d und·~:~~W~1G~ri:f.~j) Plan build out scenario. Additionally, all new develo6IB~~t in the City~:i~%ef!uireiHfa~~ither impi~tt}~nt a water neutralization program or pay a water ""'·~·~·:·>',. ~ .. ~,,~O~»:A:·.1~ "~·~,,~~":'~',; ~ neutralifatiD!l. fee to offsefln~neased'W.a'ter demand generated by the development. Therefore, there are suffici;~f~~~.ter supplies ~~4J!!=!ble t~<:;~;~'.~~ the project, even in light of current drought conditions. Less than sig~i"tm~nt impact \~I1::-'·~~::t:· ::,:::.:·.· •. ~=:.=::.·.. "::::::~::. ·~,.:~::::::~" :~::*~:: The revised projecdleshiption, il~fel't:iaing expansion of land area proposed for mixed-use development to 1.34 acres and redudl~'h,.of laci1:mrrea proposed for residential use changes the water demand for the 4.47 acre site. Utilizing tH~~,~~Wf\?"water demand factors outlined above, the project is anticipated to have the following water dem:-~:rid: Use Area Water Demand Factor Total Mixed-Use 1.34 acres 1,788 gpdLacre 2,395.92 gpd SFMD Residential 3.13 acres 1,672 gpdLacre 5,233.36 gpd Total 4.47 acres f;i,~ilt-"'f:lt"\~~~;f»('>":~J;,§1l"1'!> t~~-\?lt~~;~ •. ~:.-fi~{'{1~-~'H-;:~1l.;-t:~IH. 7,629.28 gpd Based upon the water demand factors for the revised project description, the anticipated water demand is increased from 7,607.24 gpd to 7,629.28 gpd. However, this increase remains below the 7,992.36 gpd Page 38 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 209 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 water demand anticipated under the General Plan build out scenario. Therefore, the project will continue to have a less than significant impact on water supplies. f-g: The proposed project will be served by the Cold Canyon Landfill, which has adequate permitted capacity to serve the project. Less than significant impact References: 1, 3, 6, 8, 15, 19 Mandatory Findings of Significance 4fi~~1~~;- ·:=:: .. "::,::;·:·' Less Than Potentially:f . . . /·:-~:.; .. ; .. ;.,.;.,,, S1gmf1cant S1gliif1da lit:::·, .. ,, ·;1\ilit~ct ·;:~~~h... with Would the project: ..... ""·:;:·>p ··::.:;M1t1gat1on a) Substantially degrade the quality of th€]~11~ib ·-:=(t:=:•. ·····-~ .. ··· ~--~~. environment, substantially reduce the habitat of_.f..W{W::·· ·-~==ti):;., Less Than S1gnif1cant Impact or wildlife species; cause a fish or wildlife popJl~~igp ··::;~~jfa?::~ to drop below self-sustaining levels; threaten~:;~~~:~:>. ..:i:§:::.. ··:::;i~~t::'. eliminate a plant or animal community; substantially~:;~;:~:=:·. 0{:~;~;~;~~~:: D ··=::;~:~~!8l .. ·~·;~;". ••;•:•:;:•~•. .<•:;:::~:·~,.:,.:·· ••:•~n:•:<•, reduce the number or restrict th,e:!;:~tange of an ··:::;~::::~~:=::::;:~r ·-:::;::-- "'·~~ .. : .. ;n:·:·: .. ;.--:~.v-·.: .. :~!-~;·:·"-' endangered, rare or threatened specie$f:~9r:::1~1.imJnate ··=~:!@:::·:. examples of the major periods of Califof~f~: . .h"rnf~[:y~Qr ··~::;~~::t;:-. prehistory? . . '.-. ··-. '=:~~~~~~h . ···:~:;w~~~t~~==~::•. <:i{~~~~~:; .. b) Have the potent1al·~::i:~~g;:~:~~ch1eve st:j~·~-term .:::;:;::::::~::::·~"· ·::@:;;.. e nviro nmenta I goa Is tq;'~lj@ai'§~fj"~~:J!l.tage of l~:ng~t.erm:~~W~~~-:-::@j~~~;~:::::'.... ··:::ti environmental goalsi?~~~~~~~~{:. \~~j\ \:~~\~~~l~~~l)?" -.~;~:;::~ft:: c) Have possible envir~.tim.ental :¥.:f:f~cts that ··~~1.~ individually li'!.l~~-~d but ·c:n:JU:!:!J.atix.~J~~'.::~9f~~iderabi~]~t-,.,,,. ..... ~ .. ~.,:~1>···~-~.·.-. -"· )l ... ·.·~·· -..·.~· ·..;:;:· .. ;:,.!"~ ·l'~.~,F,,.• ..... ;."-·.·,,. •••• "',.•.· ... "Cum u lativety::;:~;:::::ccrnsid era b le'~:~::::~:;:means··r~::::;tfiat.-. the:::::::::: . .. ·:-:".":~~" • .:~:.$»~~;:~j;:·}~:·:~~:..;:-· ... > "~:=:~::~~;.:;:.~ -~~·:z<~:~:::~·=--· ~~:::::::;. incremeritat:;:::effects·:·;$6f:li:}an indi~ii:lual proji:!Gt::i~a:r.e ·-: ... · D • • • ::::~:::: .. :=:~:.:.!' • "·>:·:::~~~~::~~·. 't:!~:~=:~~~=·· . ~,~~:~;~:::~:~::~-s1gmf 1caf,)~}'1Vh en viewed m::~·~nnect1ot1:;:W.t.th the effects of past p/fi)~:!';~S, the effecti=tfff:R.,ther '2ti~f:~J}~ projects, ~,"~ W~·,:~ 'Do•,.•,.>\.\. .... ~ .. ·.~.·.·~ and the effec$gf possible futufegprojects:·:::::;i:~~:::. ~ ..... ,.,.~,.,,, ... .,~. ~ .. •;.•..:-·~~-·" .. ~4 ... 7 d) Cause substifft~!~J. adverse effe~~~; .. on huma·n beings, either directly or iWal'r.~~tly? W~~~~: D D D D No Impact D D D Discussion ·~;:\f t~~~j~~::::._ ,:/~j~ji~1!~f~~ a: Although undeveloped,'"tf:@P.:f:o]ect site does not contain any significant flora or fauna, and because it is surrounded by urban devei"~pfuent, the site does n~t have any potential to serve as a wildlife corridor. Isolated prehistoric materials may be present on the project site; however, the site does not serve as an example of a major period of California history or prehistory. b: There are no short-term environmental goals, either in the project description or the identified mitigation measures, that will be achieved to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals. c: The proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan as it relates to future growth, both in general terms and specifically as it relates to the project site. While the proposed project will cumulatively increase traffic and demand for public services and utilities, with implementation of the Page 39 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 210 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 proposed mitigation measures, it will not result in any cumulatively considerable environmental impacts. d: With implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, the proposed project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Page 40 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 211 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 ~ummary of 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 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. . .~&:::.. • Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary pow~t;;~Y,.Stem (APS) to power a heater, air conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on tl;l:iif~~~l1icle during sleeping or resting in a sleeper berth for greater that 5 minutes.eitl~~1i§.~~tion when within 1,000 feet of a restricted area. ~:!;~~~:-· ·.;;;~~~:~=· /;;:.?~~~~ " '*~~i®l~,,. MM 111-2: Off-road diesel equipment sh~~.!~fi!if81v with the 5 mi~·dm~t~,ling restriction identified in Section 2449(d)(2) of the California Air'{F(i5::~:urces Board's In-Use O'ff~~~~d Diesel regulation . ..;:~~~=~~ ,,'·';(-~ ~~: MM 111-3: Signs must be posted in the desig~}t~'.tkgue A~~eas and job Si ~$~J:o remind drivers ,{J'•-:,.,. ~ .. :>'f:•:v~ " ,1,'J.. • .. ;,.:~"\.-;:;.-,. and operators of the State's 5 .minute idling limit.··:;:::"'· ' ··::::Y "(;~~~!~4i~:~~:f:(,., · ...... 2f1~).; .• MM 111-4: The project applicari:t:i~J:taW.5:~6;h;lply with tt:l~~~ more restrictive requirements to ~.:~~x:r,, ~::..;.:..;::~" ~,.~:i,.,. ~ ·>'; .:,.'.x~ minimize impacts to nearby sensitiv~.f:~ceptcfr~~i?.9Jacent re'si~~t.'tial development): ,:f.~rfl~'-~~~~~:... ·:. :;.. ·:;;~l~~ ... ., -;~~-. '»;:~;,~~~1 • Stagin_g{~·~·~eUihg:~f.~;~s shall not; .. ~ Ip.~~~~-· w 'l;ljf:l.:4,POff feet of sensitive receptors; ~11: .... '"-,""\"11'," 'cXv··."~ .. .,..,,.,/;')i.A .,. .. ~,.,. •• •~»-!I,, -.;~;."V'.(',f~~.r.t'. • Diesel?'lgJffug within l$~Q.0 feet of se"7''.·:.-:·:'v~ recepto'fs(snall not be permitted; ~ .... ·!~!:.,.' ',. ~--.r~,,,.~,.. ·} • Use of altef;~a_tive fu~)~ equipmen . . ecommended; and Jg!:JS that ~'~l~~.... .;&:r:·:;· • .,._: .as muff~~:~, posted and enforced at the site . .. ;;~. . :m~~~~$~,;~;~,. ·"~::~ . ·)~~:;.,.,~ ·~~1;;rtt, .~00:~"'111-5: The:~p,~~~-:~t sh ·.: lemenPt:lii:~~1l~Jldwing mitigation measures to manage fugitive ·!-:ay:st, emissions su'Cl\~~j;\;;it the ·~-,.IA .. not exceecVthe APCD's 20% opacity limit (APCD Rule 401) or <,.·Xv.~. *~~~,.·~"'"',,:-';•7--1.·~~·> pr6R.!'.i?.!. nuisance viola~:@ns (APC~ji,,~µ..[e 402): «i;'.~{~~~;::,. ~~=~f ~~~~~ ·-;~~~~@~ • R~qµ~e the amout.1;t::<>f the disturbed area where possible; • u~if'~~ater true~~)" sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust ii.;'. ~"J'j'~ .o:~d" ' .~, from le~~fog th~.~t~ and from exceeding the APCD's limit of 20% opacity for greater P-..'r.'u:O~~.~. ..~.."},\~,."=~~ than 3 mftj~~~~~~tf any 60 minute period. Increased watering frequency would be required wfi~"JW~W-f~d 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; Page 41of49 Item 9.a. - Page 212 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 • 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 eve Section 2~;~:!14; • Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and ~~:~~j~~f~~aved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site; .. d@~r ~·li'n"•"~<"." ... H ·~ 'io • Sweep streets at the end of each day if :Y.i~i~IE!:;~li.iJ. material is carried onto adjacent lo~a:'11~·~ .. :~:n"•' \,~.'~",.~"'~°'¥ paved roads. Water sweepers shall be !-!.:;.eCl·~:with recl'~)ffi~d water should be used where feasible. Roads shall be pre-wetted .R-~f~ttlto sweeping''W@.~._teasible; • A listing of all required mitigatio_g;:m~$-giJres should be iri8lQ.~P on grading and building I . d ::;::,.:;:;::~:;.· ·-:~:::::~:;. p ans, an , ··.~·~:·:r. ··:·:., .... :·., ":·,·:·::::·. ··=<·=·=····· • The contractor or builder shall des1gna;te a perso.JJ. or persons·~:to::~rnonitor the fugitive ·~:::-;~:~~~-... ...-: .. : .. ;..:..:-~:... ~->~~·:·z'" dust emissions and el'Jhance the impl~i;n7nt?.f1.~ti·5~of the measi:ii:~~.:::.as necessary to minimize dust compl~.i'~~~~:~.:reduce visib"i~~~~'.~~j$5ions below the APQO's limit of 20% ··:··~~·':·'.J.~·:·:·:~ .. ~·.. v.~.:·?:·:~.} opacity for greater tha'fi:):?.iftitfi~t~s in any 60~1f!J.nute period. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend p~]!.ed§~~tl~J;t. work rTi-~~~l~net be in progress. The name and telephone number of such":'.1):~:~son!t';sH~lJ:::~,!:! proviil~ef}1p the APCD Compliance Division .,.-,-.. ':": .. " .. "~ "'.~::;;,.: .... ., .. :::·~·>.. ....~~·~:·!·:·~ prior to th.eSSf!l.tt~:of any grading*:earthwdf;~:2t;t,~d.emoliti(!f.I;~ . .. ~:d1.~~~~~;:::::::::;~:%~~~~~~it. ·::;~~ih. ..:=::f ~~f~~;:;:::::;~~~j~~~j!b;~~::.. -.w' MM 111-6: PriOf;r;±!:?. the starf{Q~~.the proje'tt;;~the~·applicanf:sna·11 obtain all necessary permits for equipment to be;:i;tt~~.9 during}=~&nstruction::;@~~ontacting the APCD Engineering Division at {805) 1 :~att .. -~ · ~' /.®~r:::iU-7: ·rf.io·~~f.tP any"·:gfai;ling activitfe~J~~;tbe'~l>roject sponsor shall ensure that a geologic .:·:;;;:·~"'~ .. :~~:·"" ·~:·~·:~:~; .. ~ .. ~A '\" .. :M:~:»:•,,, "~".-: .. :•nit:J·:·~:~~ ":::e~V,aluation is condi:ict:Sd to dete:r:mine if natui:~i'lly occurring asbestos (NOA) is present within the ",..:.··.;;..: ·:·* .. ~:·: .... ,,.::,,~ ..... -'.:;;.;-:..::·:·~ are~:i:t):lat will be disftif.~~cj. If N0:~·'.is not present, an exemption request must be filed with the ~~ {,"'~"-;",."• <•il'.t .. ·."..;; ,, ,-"r_ .. ~···· APCmi~M .. NOA is found":at~:the site~::~t:fe_.applicant must comply with all requirements outlined in ..... ·,,·:::,.•,, .,,. ...... ~~·~ ~.-,, .. ,,•,,• the Air":·R·e·source Board '(ARB) Air Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) for Construction, Grading, QuarryinglB~~~urface Mi~M~ Operations. ":::~r~~t:=:.. j~1~~~[W MM 111-8: Burnin·g:'~~:~~g~t~tive material on the development site shall be prohibited. MM 111-9: Should ~:J~g~~~·~bon-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 42 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 213 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 • 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 wit!)::·:~ loading area shall include the establishment of a 'no idle' zone for diesel-powered d~!it~W·vehicles. Vehicle idling shall be minimized to the maximum extent feasible using the f~@'.~°f~g techniques: .~t.{~~$r~:::;~~~=:·., • Each delivery vehicle's engine shall be .. §.rti{~~·ft: imm~P!~_tely after arrival in the loading dock or loading area, unless the vehiqlg~J~iactively mari'~ij~~ring. ,,1.:;.:: .. :·:·~~~i::.·· --~-=--:·: .. ~~: .... • The scheduling of deliveries shall J?.:~~~!aggered to the maxif:i1~.W extent feasible. • Vehicle operators shall be madJ°4.i'.W~.re of the 'no idle' zo-~~~~llJlc;:luding notification by letter to all delivery companies. '·~:~h:::.. _,.:::::.. '·=wk::: .. ~-~::·:·: .. :•:·.. /,·>~ ... K~:~ ..-.:·:•:~:·:~. • Prominently lettered signs shall be po'sted:;.in ttie~teceiving dock area~:to remind drivers '.l,,.:.... • ~·:-:i-:-: .. :·. ~.:-·:·:~~~:·:·~,.3~ ,,._..~.z~~·:~ to shut off their engines~:::::::.... "$::::::::.:~:::;:~:}}· ~;-w ·-~~~:~i:~~==:~::-. ~ ·--... ::~:::~;;~:::4~ • Diesel idling within 1,00Q~We~~~fl§.~_nsitive rece'@~-~s is not permitted. • Use of alternative-fueled"t°@hicm~;1~1~te.commend"@·if;~henever possible. ~...:~;i.z. "·•1.: .. :~·~:·:~x... , .. -..~~~)·.;~ • Staging and qH_~uing areas s~!U .. not Be~{8,~~:t~d withift:@~gpo feet of sensitive receptors. ,.:;::~::~~~lfM~~~~~;~====·· \f~~:}. . .. $;i(~if f ~~~:~:;,.. '~=%?.: Responsible Party.::::::·~ .. Develop.er.-... ~:-:::::::=:·:··· ·-:,_:.:::::::::::;.~. !>}:•:4:•"·~<·" "•:·:·.::~-~ .. ,, ~-;·:·:;;•, ... -~·:·=~~·:·:~:~.. "·~:-;~::·:·:~:-:J ... Monito:f:io_g Agency:·~:~~~; City of /\l;f.&:Y:P'.i~Grande -P'aolic Works Dept., Building Division, P,,",."~~ .. -,. •"•~.!,/'~~ '>•"•~ •'•"•\, ··:::;::~=~:.. ~;::'.~i~EngineeringiQivision ~ .. ~::::~:~-~ :=~:::~> ~-=-~~:·:·· .NI.i.n:i_ing: ... ,~~~;;:::: ... 4~:1::;~l{{4~r.Jo issua·T.J:4'~:of Grading Permit and during construction .. /::~:~~ ~~rnBl~~~f?:~~~l;.,. ···::::~~1fo~j~f l='>;.-~:-::::~t@~~~::::.;. .. '=;~r~fa .~~.!~V'V-1: An\?:~~!h~~~ w"fi"~~~;!,pative {nti'Q"~~~£;cRpiled) soil will be disturbed by construction ·-:;~;~!xities (grading>;f:~9.-~ngs, "tit.iJQ!J!i!s, etc) sna'll first be inspected by a qualified archeologist to -d~t~f:r:nine if any cuffG'?~kresoJ'(C'gs:.,are present. Prior to construction activities and if cultural res~m~~-:t.are presenr:=~~~~jmhase "·t~&~::.archeological study shall be conducted by a qualified archeologi~hrnd further n'.Ut!gation measures identified and implemented. ··:==w~b. ll@~ Responsible Par-W~~:::::· Monito~Ifig~~g~i~~? ··:=z~~ir~::::·· Timing: Developer City of Arroyo Department Grande -Engineering Division; Public Works 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 43 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 214 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 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 ea!'lij~~!Sturbing activities, all work in the adjacent area shall stop immediately and the San Luis.~t>:6i5~l'o County Coroner's office shall be notified immediately. If the remains are determin~.~:i{~t~i]D!.~tive American in origin, the Native American Heritage Commission shall be notified '&~~~~m···ia¢;titify the Most Likely Descendent, .~ ,,.., -...···:::· who will be consulted for recommendations fg~ft~atment of t~~9.tscovered remains . . .;{f.i~l~i/f•" ·:0{~t$:., Develope ··:::;;::~:~(, Responsible Party: h "~);r;"'~l<~.t>~i.') City of A ·e¥'.p. Grande -.. Engineering:~JPJ~ision; Public Works Department '•;:;;3~~~~:~.. .d~)j~: ··;,~~~~~~;:;;; Monitoring Agency: Timing: .;::~P,.r,ior to issuan'feilof;~~a~irading permit af:ia~> during grading ·~::: .,_ -~~~-.. MM Vl-1: Prior to grading perrTI:{~§:~issu·ailq%~Hbe proj~C:t3fJ?JOponent shall submit a revised geotechnical studx.:9.1$:~9-~.~ndum tolti~-}~rigi~~i~}.!}:~:v.:.~hat eit[~I: .. states that all conclusions and recommendatior1~~:%}fi~::~~Be::::·,original 'f~~"Ort ai~;~t;~~lift~~er, ir~~fhe original conclusions and ;'.•:;;:~:H,. ';~'"",.""~3 ·~·:::;,;.!·~~~.. ~ ... g..;:x ~:·~~: .. ;.-.c.:_,.:.." ~,.: .. ~Hiv,',~~s.' _ recommendatiof.!S-::Yare noN&aJid, include·~· ·"aa'fed coriarosions and recommendations where \~~~~:::;;.::~~" ""1::~;2A~:._ ~ :;~,.,,~ '",.Z•'" necessary ... .: .. w. ·:. .. .,,... ,. • (·~::;t{~!~?;!:::., ~:il?r.;:;?;;•.-. W<·"-'• M~:'~~!r:g:}~~;:~! consti;~~li~~tj?~~·1an(~~~!J~J.I incor:P.Q!ate the recommendations of and updated .. .ff;. .. »/•'?•'fl"'?:»!~'h•J< .... ~-,,~ ..... ,.·~ »"'>';;•).,, '-:,~,,v?.",,..,, .... ? .... ,."-,,'" n •• .. "'·:~>I;, ",,',/\»,.~~,,, ge.<#~'Cti'niciff:~~(.i.d.¥,. basea.f.~:Q. the stiitl~?t?~e.eare~Mor the project by GSI Soils Inc. dated April ~;, ,,,A ... ''·;:;@:'l:Responsible Pa~V.: D"~ile'Joper ~:·).,'l!;;_.;:~,: .. ,. ~:;:.t;:;:*'~ .... t::0~~. - ,.~~Mcmitoring Agericy!·, City·.i.0f Arroyo Grande -Engineering Division; Public Works "':i{: , ' ~ ~::~';r,::;~. ~::'.Si'.: Department J~f:n Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit -.. ::~~Jt~;:~ .. ii~f.~r w MM Vll-1: All con~tJ::@tjon plans shall reflect the following GHG-reducing measures where applicable. Prior to~~~-~=s-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 44 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 215 INITIAL-STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 • Provide employee lockers and showers. One shower and 5 lockers for every 25 employees are recommended. • Trusses for south-facing portions of roofs shall be designed to handle dead weight loads of standard solar-heated water and photovoltaic panels. Roof design shall include sufficient south-facing roof surface, based on structures size and use, to accommodate adequate solar panels. For south facing roof pitches, the closest standard roof pitch to the ideal average solar exposure shall be used. • Increase the building energy rating by 20% above Title 24 requirements. Measures used to reach the 20% rating cannot be double counted. • • • • • • • • • • • • Plant drought tolerant, native shade trees along g~uthern exposures of buildings to reduce energy used to cool buildings in summer..,>~~~i~q}?' Utilize green building materials (materials w.JJJ~Rf'.[~:~e resource efficient, recycled, and . ) . I I "f . b I ~--:;;-~:: .. ~~~~~:~:·~;;,, sustainable available ocal y 1 poss1 e. .~:;::.;~~:;:;:~:·'·::i::~~~;;:., .;: ... ,r:,"',.o;;,,•1 ~ .. \",.,"'"!/' ... Install high efficiency heating and cooliQg. sy~t~ms. ··::~~.f:::i~: Design building to include roof over.!:1~~fs that are sufflg!~.nt to block the high summer • --~";;'~"'},:~:d: .. ,~--~~ .. : .. : .. ~ .. ;<).. • sun, but not the lower winter su --.. "·'penetrating soutn:=f~-~!i;ig windows (passive solar d . ) ' . -.;:~~=>;: es1gn . · ... :::;~:;.. ··.;~i~\ Utilize high efficiency gas or solar wat:~~'.~_eaters .. ,~;:~~:,. "'::;:~?~~:· Utilize built-in energy efticient applianc~1.!t~e. ~~tgy"'Star®). ··.~:t '- Utilize double-paned '4Jn~&~~-··:::;~~tr ·?· · Utilize low energy street;\~Jif -~:.sodium). ··~:,. ~->. Utilize energy efficient inffi~)b f.i"rfig. ·-=.~~?,~:~.s ·~;;y:~~~ ~~:t~. .. . ~ "»t;~~~~:~· ..... Install energy:-reducing pro~j:pmable · ,r;nostats.·1~::=;.:::: .. ,.-~v,/i':.:,.•~,)'"il'~ ,{": .. ,_,,} ,.""V>>. .'!',,,"":$"-..."};, Use rooti;r;fg@:il'(~tla.I with a soJ~r:: reflecy~-~-~~~~)1,1es rrie~ing the EPA/DOE Energy Star® • .._;.~:,"1~c::'.1y~--">=...,.;:~;:::~=-!"';> • •-t:~-;;!:~k ,.:!fX~:;:.;;·· • ... :~.:~~""~/;:~~.. · rating,tfl;<r:educe s1:11nmer coolmg::rreeds;-:.;,,;.=--·-0.~;~:.;:;~::-, .»:";~.:.~;,'¥ "":::~,,;.;~·,, .. ~..;~~~;;i\~'Q.(',,"S·~~:· i'•.:&"•'$<·~·;..: Eliminiit~'.~high wat~f:~~onsumptlof!£!~:ndscape (e.:g'.; plants and lawns) in residential "\.,, ..... ~:i(-~.-... ''"·~~'\ ~ ....... ~ \>.:O design. U's~n~_tive p ·:· · that do nd\~€.quire watering and are low ROG emitting. ~ .. ..:~:::,.:-<~~ .... ~,. ~ ~ .. :,,;..~v~ • ,,.;l"~::~;f;;}.~~1~.e on-51(. · ·· ;. ::~t:~'~.~. botn~~~~rt term (racks) and long term (lockers, or a /: -~·>"@'f~~loef<~~~W~~.m w .. ~1~!~ndarff·:T.~~~~~:;~~d::?.fip:ess limited to bicyclist only) to meet peak f seasori'";iii~f!.['um··:q~J)1.~nd. One·=a~j~~:: rack space per 10 vehicle/employee space is . recommen·aeo·;;. ··:;, ' .. :.l:·.. • .. ::::::~$;., ~·~ • ":<:!~~~;:~Require the ifi$~J)ation · .. :~~l_ectrical hookups at loading docks and the connection of "',!{• .;-~~ .. »,, ~:· ,. "7»1'. 'I.,~ .~,,.4"~~ • ·-:z~~J:\Jcks equipped~~~jth elecff:fcal hookups to eliminate the need to operate diesel- ~tifuered TRUs at tf~,loading docks. ~-"J;::>:<~:::~,.' ~::;;;~~:·: Provf,;t~~~storage ~p~¢e in garage for bicycle and bicycle trailers, or covered racks I .."/,it»~~>, ,~~~ ,,.,. lockerft(:··--ervicef"<·'·: residential units. Responsible-Warty: 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. Page 45 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 216 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 • 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 50 units or greater should either provide a covered, bermed area for washing activities or discourage vehicle/equipment_.,w~shing by removing hose bibs and installing signs prohibiting such uses. Vehicle/e,g~Jpffient washing areas shall be paved designed to prevent run-on or run off from::if.i~~~~:~ea, and plumbed to drain to the . ..f:;~~,.:~: .. :~ .~'::·~ sanitary sewer. A:::r.:: .• ,;;:: · 'E==~~:::::;: ••• • ' ·~~: ,,.~::-~. '":::~~=~· _, ::: .. " • Car Washing. Commercial car washJ.i@Uties shall be· C:l~~Jgned and operated such that no runoff from the facility is discha,tg~:~;t~ the storm draiW:~yst.em. Wastewater from the ... ::>~:J-.t::~... <:{;:_:.;~-...::. facility shall discharge to the sanit~:R{:;~ewer or wastewater recl~(n;i.ation system. ':.;~;~~~it~~>. .,,r;.*. ':~;~~~~}~:, • Common Area Litter Control. lmple'ri'1ef.lt. trasn:~management antt::~litter control for .. ·····":····· •.••. ·.·.·.z.· .. ,.. ... ;.·. commercial and indu5$~!~~~-Ef?jects or la'rg~i~£~Je···residential develo"prffents to prevent litter and debris from tieHr.igfoar::r:ied to water't)Gfaies or the storm drain system. ··i:ii~~::·:::~w~l~~::~:-:-. "$~~!:%~;~~~-- • Food Service Facilities. Desigb: .. food'::se)~i.£~ facilitie-#(1gcluding restaurants and grocery .. ,..;,,.; .. :.. ..... ~·,,~:~~:-:..;:..:.. r=-:.x"'~'*=· .. stores) to,.hiJ\1,e~a:,sink or other.~:area for Cleanrmg floor'i:nats, containers, and equipments that iJ~~~z:9:R~tt~{l]l~~&J~a greas~:~~tfa;~?~~J$~~w~·~~~1E:::~i~tharging to the sanitary. sewer system.~:~;I_he clearn"'g~:~.rea shoulc!}B~;;J~rge enougfi·~to clean the largest mat or piece of equipm-~¥.(Ht_o be cle~t'i~c:I. \f~~~~- .,,., ........ _ ·~::;;~~~~ik. .-: w.· ::.~-·,:-:·:•:-.·. "~~j%1~~=~. • .. ;~:::~[~R~fose.-Areas. ·tra·s;· ·~·pa·ctoi:s1-.enclc'fsi:i'l:es and dumpster areas should be covered and /·41~~:~:~:~:;;-.pr'C)l~ff@i*pm-·~g~{;~rid surf~~~;~~·r·~in~g:~~: Install a self-contained drainage system that ~~, · discharg·~Wt~~it_he s~~t~rw sewer if·';fj~:f~r cannot be diverted from the areas. ··-~:?{~;%-::... "•;;:,~t~\~~:::~ 'o)~:~~[i~:1:;:. • -... ::~~~:0utdoor Storage:~Gontrols::;(QJls, fuels, solvents, coolants, and other chemicals stored ·-:~~G~.9.oors must be~~focontain-~f~ and protected from drainage by secondary containment stM~~\:ffes such as~~~rms, liners, vaults or roof covers and/or drain to the sanitary sewer syst~·Jitt:Bulk m_a~~~lals stored outdoors must also be protected from drainage with ·.;~:~·~ .. :.,,, ..... ·~-:::-::',:;.':><:· berms aii'i:l.:'.C:o_v.e~s:::;f Process equipment stored outdoors must be inspected for proper function a~:a:~!@IK 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. Page 46 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 217 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA lS-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 • 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 and collected tg;,prevent entry into the storm drain system. Wash water containing any cleaning ag~~~~ibr degreaser should be collected and discharged to the sanitary sewer. ::!:~M~:<-'- Responsible Party: , .. .. . ).ff{~~:~:<:-.. Developer «·:•:·.·' ·,:.;-;.~:·.-,{'~:~:~~ ··:-:~·.. "·:~;;::::::~~ Monitoring Agency: City of ArroY:Q'.j:~Grande -CDQJ?.~_ijJ1gineering Division; Building Division /A@W>v" ··::~~~~th Timing: Prior to iSsl:iilrice of a Building Permit::?.:~~:·, -~~~~~~l~~k::-. ..;:;:~. ··:::~~1~~h::-. MM Xll-1: All store deliveries shall be restricteCl:it0 between;the hours ofY::oo AM to 10:00 PM, ~~" ·~ • .z:;:::~!-~ =·t;:::::;~~;-.:.~~;·¥ ··-~·:::=:~" •. and the current parking limita~!.~fi~'.:~;~ either side"-Qf~§.@W3Courtland Street sliaU:be maintained. \~~~~~~=~~i~~~::::~.-. ··=::*~;~E;~:= » MM Xll-Z: Any residential structi:!r:e·s:::t~}\t,_ .. would have~~:::direct line of sight to store delivery ~ .. :.; ... ·,.:... ; ... : .... .;~·::;~:~~ .. ? "~:")~~:~;' areas shall include acoustical trear6Y~.nt toStm~.~-s:.e exteriot:~~P,ise levels by thirty (30) decibels, • ;..:~<'!·:~.., "'•:~':"~..;·:·;::.~ -~.;-:~~,.~·:· .. the cost of which -~-~-~-!.!~&.©: .. borne by tli~~gevelope~~1.~=~~::::::-.. ··::~~~h. ~Al=iW:t==:1=:==~t~m~::~.. ·-~\filt::. .-:=~~:.~~m~t:=~;~;;_~~r~~t;h:,.. ··=::::·· MM Xll-3: D~E~~fY truck a'f;_!~:~rs shall B·&J~!.n~!.tzµcted to ·wr:1roff diesel engines when trucks are parked or being"ri"iiloaded. w~~ :::~:~:~:r· ·"•~i~~-.1:~ . . .. :)::::.::~::;;::~··· Mon·1tc:m.ng Agency;;;:~:-. City of:~~~fi.q:XP ··Grande -CDD; Engineering Division; Building -;~i~)j)f{:'.'.'" 't·~:;~t~~11~:~.. .,'.~~~~~f:~~R!vision ":>,::~::~:~l ·i·~:::~i~~;;. Timing: "~~:~~:~~':: ·":~;!?:f:~.0! to issuance of a Building Permit ·:·:.;~i~~f.7~~ ··~:~(@~\ ··\~~~~):; MM Xl\Z~!~:::.Ihe applican(§J:i~ll pay tffe· mandated Lucia Mar Unified School District impact fee. "}~Wk.. ffa Respo"il"sible Part\i:::~~:~: • · ... :~=~:::::~ .·:-;~::::::;; Mon1tor111g:~g~r•~w: Timing: ··~:{~~J.~~~~r:::: 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-Z: 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 Page 47 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 218 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, GPA 14-002, SPA 14-001, CUP 14-009, & VTTM 14-001 • Provide overlap phasing for the eastbound right turn movement. Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Developer City of Arroyo Grande -CDD; Engineering Division; Public Works Department Prior to issuance of a Building Permit Page 48 of 49 Item 9.a. - Page 219 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 2014 (Revised July 2015) DA 15-002, 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 5. Arroyo Grande Existing Settings Report & Draft Arroyo Grande Existing Settings Report (2010) 6. Arroyo Grande Urban Water Management Plan .-4~€~~jt. 7. Arroyo Grande Water System Master Plan (2012) AS:~iiiilt~:=:=·· .;.: .... ,.. 8. Arroyo Grande Wastewater Master Plan (2012) .A~;,::~:=;:~;};y,:., 9. San Luis Obispo Important Farmland Map (Californ'f~~~:~y;~·~f&:e.r:it of Conservation, 2006) 10. CEQA & Climate Change White Paper (CAPCOA;::Wcf8} ·:·::;tit~:-. 11. Air Quality Handbook (SLO APCD, 2012) .~:J1i~f~~~f"' '·::;fb:: .. 12. Arroyo Grande Multi-Jurisdictional Local ~-~i~Wj Mitigation Plan (20!-i):;:,.-.. ··;;::•:!t~iJ}. ~.!.~:~:~:;:~ .. ,, 13. Arroyo Grande Bicycle & Trails Master PlarHf.:Z~3.2) ''.;;~;;~'.:::: .. ·)·.·.·.-.·. . " ·:.;;·.•...-. 14 Arroyo Grande Climate Action Plan (2013) ··~~:::::<::~. ,.-::::~~;;. *::::::~=~. . . -~~~=~===·· -:::~:~~=~~:~~=~~----::~~~~~:::~~- 15. Project Plans 4.t.f.:~-~~:.·:~_:::.· .. -.. :::~::::::::.;:~=-~~:~:~:·· ··::;~::' 16. Site Inspection ··:t~:;:::~:~1:::::::::~:-.-. ·~~~@~{ · 17. Design Guidelines for Mixed-Use·:Qist'.fiiifs~~*; .. _ :::::::::~~;-. ··:-:~~:=~ ""'=~~~"~~:;~=:~:tt" ':~~~;~;>.:;., 18. East Grand Avenue Enhancement RJi:ir.i ···~:=:l!::::;::::;;;. ·::~;:;~:~::; .. s:-:•:•:•, 4~"~'"~·:,.~-: .. :~~ , ·~· ~:==-·:·:" .. 19. Final Berry Garden!i.S.p~c;:ific Plan -Tta_i;;t_ 2260 'Et\il,ih;m_mental'Jmpact Report (FIRMA, 1998) ,. .. ;.:-~..;,-,a:D:•:-:-:-~. "-:·:·:·:·... <"":~:·:··-:;.:.····· ~·-:~.;~:-:·. 20 Geotechnical lnv.e'stigatisti~(GSI Soils 2006) .-:~:=:::::~::fo::::·:· '"-;,:::P • ... ~;·;:,..:.~..-::.:•T ..... -•. ~:=::: ... v;"i'.o 1 -«·:::·:., ~.,,_;;;.~::~=~:;:i.;::·· '°··~::::~:=:~~::::~"-_ · 21. Acoustic Repq~m:l"avid Dlio!:Hn~ Associa't~~~:,iO.~~r' -.:.:;?::~~:~:~:;:;. 22. Phase I Enviro·~:iij~~l:ltal Site A~'.~:~$sment R~·~Mi:i;ifsuena Res~:~:~ces, Inc., 2007) """'i1~: ... >:U~ )>"<~"":' ... ,.; ; .. :,i.-: 23. Drainage and Wafe~Ayality !(~~Qrt (RRM De~jgr:i Group, 2015) ·~ ...... :·~·"-.,..,, .... ,."~ ',. ~"=·,.·~·,.·· -.,.,, .. ,,_•;:-.•_ 24. Dies.~J;:~M::.?.H~ening H\i~~!QJEJ~W.~~!@.~~-Tent (l'i?J.~.rine Research Specialists, 2010) .1.,.-.~-,;-.. :,/,.=./',.•.· .. ••• .. ·-: .... ·.:-~.--·-· ... ·.:.~.·f.•.-:.,'t -•,;•,.·~·.•.·,~. ... • --.:-,!~~:.. 25. T£~9§P-c»rt:at1qn:;.!mpact Ai:i.~.!y~1s Repott::(Q.i:P..r.i.1:-ME;~ils, 2015) t~f~M~~-·-···=$~~~~)~:. "::;:i~i!J~t:::.,. '··~~~~l~J Consultations -.~:~:=:=::) "11:-:"x:· '-';•0v~•,,hw •.:,~::=•!•:". ··~·.:·~~==:= A. Ge0f;f;;-S.traw, San Luis 0.J~j~po Regi9.8.9.l Transit Authority (SLORTA) -.. ~~-:v:-··:-: .. ~~=·~ -. ·»: .. :-:·:·:· B. Gary ~f;;~~E!lont, San Luis'1Q.9,,!spo Air"Pi§.llution Control Board (SLO APCD) c. Marty lr1&.uY.~~ Omni-MeaW$i~.~ TD. ~\) Page 49of49 Item 9.a. - Page 220 From: To: Subject: Date: Teresa McCllsh Matt Downing FW: Concerns about planned development at Grand & Courtland Tuesday, August 18, 2015 4:45:12 PM Teresa McC!tsh, AICP Director of Community Development City of Arroyo Grande 300 E. Branch Street Arroyo Grande, C-\ 93421 (805) 473-5420 fa."{ (805) 473-0386 tmcclish@arroyogrande.m:g From: John D Lovern Sent: Tuesday, Augus To: Teresa McClish . Subject: Concerns about planned development at Grand & Courtland Hello Ms. McClish ATTACHMENT 17 I'm a home owner in the Berry Gardens complex, and I'd like to share some concerns with you that I have about the planned development on the corner of Grand and Courtland. I would be attending the meeting tonight to voice my concerns, but I'm a professor at Hancock College, and I have a class to teach tonight. I hope that you may be able to carry my concerns to that meeting. My wife and I both feel that the planned development is too ambitious. I am not opposed to either commercial buildings on Grand Avenue or residential units behind them. What I'm e:oncerned about is the plan to cram so many homes into such a small area, with insufficient room on the street for parking, and commercial buildings being erected without knowing in advance what specific businesses or types of businesses would use the commercial buildings. It is unclear whether the . commercial buildings facing Grand Avenue would enhance the appearance and ambiance of our area as a tourist destination or as a nice place to live. The whole plan has a strong appearance of being designed to maximize the profit of a single individual (the developer) at the expense and inconvenience of many Arroyo Grande home owners. Sincerely, John Lovern, Ph.D . . 1553 Blackberry Avenue Arroyo Grande 93420 Item 9.a. - Page 221 ATTACHMENT 18 Be TJ.l "1? ' . ./~ ¥~'? (..l<'C)1-'. 7.:: . RECEIVED AUG 1 7 2015 CITY Or Ai<IROVO GR.ANDIE ~ COMM!:!!'lJ_!YJ?EVELOPMEN'i' Item 9.a. - Page 222 Item 9.a. - Page 223 '\ -------·:-~1· 1-----, :sf i"" U F~ PU AUR , • ·-1 ~a'i.iHM~CiiYTtfj~--- l>t~!llO Clf>,12~1.00 :· J Planting Specifications W"lll!O ll«:!llllC~ ' .f ~~ ~==-~=:-.~'t<!111'~~-' ~~~Pl~·~~~~ 1.-lll<,l.-~'ICI);,, ·~· '1;~.IMt~~~;:;:=~::un:o~u ~G'!IUOW!foi; ... ~'lrS"t<I.. <~-... ll'C<!'•H!ll."llptU•~JMl>ilil.,o,wl.._..!¥ ::::.::: $(~ OO)U 10!! ~ ~~,:ii~ 1~'"'f>ltllGl;Ofllft"JltQ)t;""1.'r'1">:J!GWl'n~<111f>Ol.•{..,;.4"1 ~_,,~ ... :!r''':'==~~lQo.:·~~~ WMl"°ll'U~l'l'>'t"f:Qli!ll'W~l~A!1'1¢t!ll"CQlo~\lll,' :l.!:C'l.~lllrol!l;ll~i'U."Qo'lll...iK.1>;1Uv.t=TIT J~l''11~rQl.tl>ISOO .. Tt!'1Al."""1ro!'!lll,(IQQ- ~i:.~yRl"ll!llt?:ll<'rl!'?M:~0<1,_10,....,._-_.., ~-":s •;m::!:t'V:•'<•.-c• "',_~ON::.~' ' '• ~~1'1.tr.1'1:!15"'1!.>CC$ ' ~~~~1t:m:~-ifli!;;~~~~S~!.' ~ ? ~=.=s~~W'llOl~~:~'=.':i.o~tt:."' ~M° :::-v mn1 •~11~ OJ'!t'I ~"oo 11,11'14:'1("'1. ~"ViC.rME"f SCALF IN rn.T , ' CITY OF ARROYO G~~DE 30 :.: .. ~: ! DEPARTMENT.-OF PUBLIC' WORKS --""'-"'--, ORANO;;;.. .. ,,,,;;;;;;:.NU;;;mf"'°'™o•M"ORAoAA;;;;;:.,NO;;;;;:PO;;;;-;;PLAR=!l1R=••1=0ETE=•m=11 ... =1•:7.:,ARR~OYO~ORAN=-o•=. CA-+:==::.t1 " VERT PONSr>AGNOl.0.Cfl'Y~tt--~ 1 rop~sAs1NPLANl1NGP~N ~(~;~v-!(~~-·21:~1' si~u, I ___ _, ________ ....:__J __ 4----'--"'-""'--""'-"'-'"'---------.l...------~--.. -... ·/~4 :'._•~~.; ·,,. J')/' 1 "1'1 1 ~-·!(,•'• ~ '~ Mor.Jl. 1 ~ APPROVE:OBY. ! --' --,. ._.._,. ~·"-,,,_ ~ '' Item 9.a. - Page 224 C1.t1 e-t-L1 t& ~,e,.111 44 ""·---~ Ct'( u-<a; e,vf c Bv1r;1-wJ..e1c.e-f!'.S 12i7e:@ /J1111 ~Aib &oJrT.5 RECEIVED AUG 1 9 2015 CITV OF ARROYO GRANDE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Item 9.a. - Page 225 . ') )/?~') ~ O~::;l , · n1 .3 bl ?:tr1'f\ /:.]SJ~: -.1-111;/w~LV gy <9.3/'(\ ' . Ji 15-rE_ p·o;u.tr~.:;zi3~ '.J.. )' (.J·Yld.<t:J. i~ n 9t!~;L '?·P' r-::r1<f ~ 11v v, 0, , ~-·;:o. 1:· r/-1 : (Y)'1 , ~/'J_~1i: ---·t' if -~ +" . .).,'1l"f!'l~~'?l\ O':).. 'i-v.::z'. O~C'\l,::1.J..$0.:.'>-:rl-:.:trf'Vc.l , 3 ? ,.,,.g .• ~ rt?;;'] t·t · ~4 -f~ll~ ~ l<"l' .1. :;i l: P s J.. q t"l . ,.... ~?.! I , !. j,1 1:;,ih 0 :~ (l1 V\I b ';1~;;~ ~:Cl.,, 1 'v'f ;i t9 0 ...l : ~ h l '.'.) 1\1.;l:;I .... ~ I I '?I, a;:J 'i -P·-'v :ii ~,'. f'/-V-J:! ; ~ (1 l? ('~~}. EJJ. l 5. ·I ctn ~}1 '. .L d. n b7; I ; •I ·' I ' ). ? :i r ~"Hl ~ rJ 1? ri Pfi I i i I i • I I . ' cl-~~~,. ~,~sr. ~r~~~ : I i : I I I i : I ] • ! ~ !-· ---! --l • • i I I : I I I ---·-----·-----l .. ~..: ... _. __ L_ i ; I I 1---------'-· I ' I • , 1rv 1:9-t:~ ,·.1~: C::tf~)'l l • J.7~)11 tir.._o1gi e\~;i.,~ ""'"-+--::"--~ ..;:::;;-.,> 1 I 1 1 I (}'~ t\1 )1'\ <f l"t t ·t-f\ · _,1;r1v I 'I Ht ~-~'"lJ: I -+. ... -.-. _____ ,.,.._., __ • _,.. __ .,.. $'-N: I )I· d WOi·l I , I I'-- Item 9.a. - Page 226 \> 'f' '· ' ~~. ~ ~ -~ t"~'' ' ' ~"' :.,f,. 'i .,, ,1 -J -- ·.:..~~ .. • '~ i).: '-, ' __,, 7J."'7~: 4.3:3 ~ h;if/'J f"1SyJ' P' \?LLN3L::JJf -i 71 V"'?e! ?d /(, .. ~·. Item 9.a. - Page 227 !'"f:J\l cv-' Ir , ~.oie:o•;:,e, .'D FiAI Ai <' ~f&UFic.J, no..i !. w A.5 s,wposEJ:> ('o Mk/JG ol" w-,,:.oa,;,1+'1 1.eo..i tJ or .5 u--er?T" "''e n+L.. AL!OD ...io rt: ?1 Lk$ TE"-(ou«"',,s -~ ;:ii~t··>::'·\n:1'· 1 BEi"',;"'" ;;::,;,..1a fM.tjf-"--___ -. -~ .,:....·,,•'~;;c.v>-~!J ·~ ·~ '1 ~ t.IJG 2 S IIJ\'j \ ' ·~ ... , , 1:;,·r .-.... ·.;,, 1: z;;,:JJ":-1.C·'= ¥ • ~ ... ,\It'_; .'7ii,}Jl.~~~ ~ ,• ~N•~~.,.·•--'"'t.A'-~'=-"-JO~ Item 9.a. - Page 228 ~f'UtHL Crr'-:' {-Oi!-(;loPt+E es ,'i~ ·n ' ~-~~~ . , z :' ·::.1 "-·.i 0 ct· D.4s(:i:J _, 2.C-( 4- ~~!14, i= , ., .. .. '\ 1; .: > ,1,' Item 9.a. - Page 229 Ct T'f U)E::tl> Pt+-<CJ.{ foPl41'-:U. ~c. re.,, no,..;· fS..'<SnJ { 4-f D f'e>pi_;tl<? ,Sr. Item 9.a. - Page 230 ~l-1.2//?0J )!, :?,'1)f C!(t-'f'?JJ :..7 fY J.M O\Jv SfV .I){ i~ 071 I -;,/':) _ .... ~-·-.. Item 9.a. - Page 231 ;1 ;'11" f: q ._L )~:/ j " 1 r;: ,_ Item 9.a. - Page 232 --------~---- ,..~_..,, .. , ..... ,. ...... w-.,~~' ,.- i._ ..... " ~.::.. ~ t.,i."I (\~ " -_:: t:~ ';;,t?, , ..... ; c.~ ,. <;;~' ;;- (fr'~ "' ;;.~, ' "'~ ... , r_r:: -- u ; ) ~1·: <' ~ + ..... , Item 9.a. - Page 233 c '-. $.. s::.. ~ ":::') ]:.._ \ (\ ),::. 1;::._ --\ t-m !:. 'C1 ~ ~ ~ F_; -\, {!-. ~ ~ ......,, ~ ,, " \JJ !::: l-') " ~ ~ "' ~ rJ ~\ ~ \ \ l __ ~----------·-----------.. ---------------------~ Item 9.a. - Page 234 1)-_L, rV()01:> l'2.B6 f{.t55t µ 4' Cu.,-DD"'-'/..( il 'i C,v!C-6; 5 .. "' ~ CILC ilS {).) (f ti OJ) i ,<I s A-~5: .. Item 9.a. - Page 235 o "'1 .eioc.>, 1. P- I> As Iµ /->-' ~ jL t' .A;o-)5 tD J , Item 9.a. - Page 236 foPLA:dZ. S-r. :J-Dob A _ n, ! I "T~~ -fJ. -I ' ' --~r~~-·~" ~··..,.~~, --':'l ,,..,_,_. ~·~ ~{i;:\.~ ~' ; . ' l .!~ ... .. j ~ ~ ~ r:rrt Of ;.. · ~_5,_::~ iJH.'' l \ Item 9.a. - Page 237 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Item 9.a. - Page 238