Loading...
PC 2017-10-17 08b CUP 16-008 MER 16-001 AND MND MEMORANDUM TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: TERESA McCLISH, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR BY: MATTHEW DOWNING, PLANNING MANAGER SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF LOT MERGER 16-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 16-008, AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION; CONSTRUCTION OF AN APPROXIMATELY 2,900 SQUARE-FOOT FAST-FOOD RESTAURANT WITH DRIVE-THRU; LOCATION – 727 EL CAMINO REAL (WESTERN CORNER OF EL CAMINO REAL, FAEH AVENUE, AND BELL STREET); APPLICANT – ELA FOODS, INC.; REPRESENTATIVE – KEITH SIMON DATE: OCTOBER 17, 2017 SUMMARY OF ACTION: Recommendation for approval of the project will allow the City Council to consider the construction of a new, 3,150 square foot, fast-food restaurant with a drive-thru. IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES: Approval of the proposed project is anticipated to result in an estimated increase of City sales tax revenue by approximately $10,000 to $20,000 per year, with the latter based on the applicant’s long term projection of sales. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution, recommending the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve Lot Merger 16-001 and Conditional Use Permit 16-008. BACKGROUND: The subject property is a vacant, City-owned parcel located at the western corner of the intersection of El Camino Real, Faeh Avenue, and Bell Street, at 727 El Camino Real (Attachment 1). The site primarily fronts El Camino Real and Faeh Avenue and includes ten (10) City improved Park & Ride spaces on El Camino Real. The site is part of the Highway Mixed-Use (HMU) zoned corner, bounded by El Camino Real, Faeh Avenue, and Halcyon Road. Across Faeh Avenue are residences in the adjoining Single Family zoning district. PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION OF LOT MERGER 16-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 16-008, AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OCTOBER 17, 2017 PAGE 2 Staff Advisory Committee The Staff Advisory Committee (SAC) reviewed the proposed project on September 27, 2017. Members of the SAC discussed the need for two points of ingress and egress to the project site, the need for clarification of proposed hours of operation, and coordination with Caltrans regarding traffic and circulation, and the need for appropriate easements over existing sewer facilities on the site. Members of the SAC were generally in support of the proposed project, with conditions identified in the Resolution prepared for the project. Architectural Review Committee The Architectural Review Committee (ARC) reviewed the proposed project on June 19, 2017 (Attachment 2). The ARC discussed a number of aspects associated with the project, including the existing Park & Ride spaces on El Camino Real, opportunities to address neighborhood compatibility issues associated with the drive-thru, including relocating the drive-thru, relocating the ordering speaker, and/or utilizing any inaudible ordering systems available, the need for some type of screen wall adjacent to the drive- thru to help attenuate noise from idling vehicles in the drive-thru, the location of the proposed use in the HMU zoning district, and the appropriateness of the building design as it relates to the proposed use. The ARC recommended against the drive-thru being permitted to operate as a 24-hour operation, which was being considered by the applicant at the time. The applicant has since revised the proposed hours of operation to not be 24-hour. Several of the ARC's recommendations are included in the prepared Resolution, as appropriate, given project refinements since their review. Traffic Commission The Traffic Commission (TC) reviewed the proposed project on August 14, 2017 (Attachment 3). At that time, the members of the TC continued the item and directed the investigation of items of potential impact to the traffic report prepared for the project. The TC considered the item a second time on September 18, 2017. At that meeting, the TC reviewed additional information provided by the traffic consultant regarding mid-day peak hour trip generation and restriping to take place at the Brisco Road underpass (Attachment 4). Following the discussion, the TC recommended approval of the proposed project with conditions of approval included in prepared Resolution. ANALYSIS OF ISSUES: Project Description The proposed project consists of the construction of an approximately 2,900 square- foot, fast-food restaurant with a drive-thru on an approximately 34, 625 square-foot vacant commercial site. A Lot Merger is required to merge the ten (10) antiquated underlying lots spread across the parcel, while a Conditional Use Permit is required for the new commercial building. The building is proposed to be one (1) story, with a maximum building height of twenty-one feet ten inches (21’ 10”) from finished floor to the top of the tallest roof parapet. The building is proposed to be located in the southern portion of the site closest to Faeh Avenue, allowing vehicular access from El Camino PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION OF LOT MERGER 16-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 16-008, AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OCTOBER 17, 2017 PAGE 3 Real and Faeh Avenue. The remainder of the site will include a 450 square foot outdoor seating area, surface parking totaling thirty-five (35) spaces and landscaped areas. The use is proposed to be operated from 10 AM to 12 AM daily. General Plan The General Plan designates the subject property for Mixed Use land uses. Development of a restaurant meets a number of Policies of the General Plan Land Use Element and Economic Development Element, which state: LU5: Community commercial, office, residential, and other compatible land uses shall be located in Mixed Use (MU) areas and corridors, both north and south of the freeway, in proximity to major arterial streets. LU5-1: Provide for a diversity of retail and service commercial, offices, residential and other compatible uses that support multiple neighborhoods and the greater community, and reduce the need for external trips to adjacent jurisdictions, by designating Mixed Use areas along and near major arterial streets and at convenient, strategic locations in the community. LU5-4: Conditional use permits shall be required for service stations, car washes, drive through windows and other automobile oriented uses and for all commercial uses adjoining residential classified areas. LU5-8: Provide for different combinations, configurations and mixtures of commercial, office and residential uses designating the East Grand Avenue, El Camino Real and Traffic Way corridors as Mixed Use (MU). LU5-8.1: Accommodate the continuance and development of retail commercial, professional offices, eating and drinking establishments, banks, bakeries, deli/cafes, specialty shops, outdoor dining/sidewalk cafes, household goods sales, food sales, drugstores, personal services, tourist accommodations, cultural facilities and similar uses in the Mixed Use corridors. ED5: Pursue unique opportunities to promote continuity within commercial service and retail business sectors of the City. ED5-2: Continue to enhance connectivity and increase retail utilization of the East Grand Avenue corridor, the Village Core, and the Traffic Way and El Camino Real mixed-use corridors. The proposed project is potentially in conflict with the following Policy of the General Plan Land Use Element, which states: PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION OF LOT MERGER 16-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 16-008, AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OCTOBER 17, 2017 PAGE 4 LU5-6: Allowable uses within the MU category shall not include uses that adversely affect surrounding commercial or residential uses, or contribute to the deterioration of existing environmental conditions in the area. Development Standards The subject property is zoned Highway Mixed-Use (HMU). The primary purpose of the HMU district is to provide areas for a variety of visitor serving and auto-related uses in areas convenient to both freeway traffic and vehicles or pedestrians. The construction of drive-thru retail uses is allowed in the HMU zoning district following approval of a Conditional Use Permit. The intent of the Conditional Use Permit is to allow for the establishment of uses that have some special impact or uniqueness such that their effects on the surrounding environment cannot be determined in advance of the use being proposed for a particular location and the Conditional Use Permit application process allows for the review of the location and design of the proposed use , configuration of improvements, and potential impact on the surrounding area from the proposed use The development standards for the HMU district and the proposed project are identified in the following table: Table 1: Site Development Standards for the HMU Zoning District Development Standards HMU District CUP 16-008 Notes Maximum Density – Mixed Use Projects 20 dwelling units/acre None Not Applicable Maximum Density Multi-family Housing 20 dwelling units/acre None Not Applicable Minimum Lot Size 20,000 square-feet 34,625 square-feet Meets Code Minimum Lot Width 80 feet 125 feet Meets Code Front Yard Setback 0-15 feet 25 feet Meets Code Rear Yard Setback 0-15 feet 154 feet Meets Code Side Yard Setback 0 feet 63 feet Meets Code Street Side Yard Setback 0-15 feet 18 feet Meets Code Building Size Limits 30 feet or 3 stories 50,000 square-feet max 21 feet 10 inches 3,146 square-feet Meets Code Site Coverage and Floor Area Ratio 75% site coverage Floor Area Ratio: .75 9% coverage/Floor Area Ratio Meets Code Off-Street Parking 1 space/75 sq. ft. of area accessible by the public (2,000 sq. 35 spaces Meets Code PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION OF LOT MERGER 16-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 16-008, AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OCTOBER 17, 2017 PAGE 5 Development Standards HMU District CUP 16-008 Notes ft./75 = 27 spaces Standards for Drive-Thru Uses Section 16.52.090 of the AGMC outlines standards for drive-in, drive-through fast food and take-out restaurants. The purpose of these standards is to ensure that these uses do not result in adverse impacts on adjacent properties and residents or on surrounding neighborhoods by reason of customer and employee parking demand, traffic generation, noise, light, litter, or cumulative impact of such demands in one area. Subsection C of this Section identifies the Minimum Development Standards as follows: Table 2: AGMC Subsection 16.52.090.C – Minimum Development Standards Code Section Requirement CUP 16-008 Notes 1. Hours of Operation When located on a site adjacent to, or separated by an alley from, any residentially zoned property, a drive-in, drive-through, fast-food, or take-out restaurant shall not open prior to six a.m. nor remain open after ten p.m. The applicant is proposing operating hours of 10 a.m. to 12 a.m., daily Meets Code. The Code requirement is triggered when the use is proposed adjacent or separated by an alley to a residentially zoned property. Faeh Avenue is a local road and not an alley; however, compatibility impacts will likely be felt by the neighbors. 2. Driveways Drive-in and drive-through restaurants shall have two points of ingress/egress Access is provided from El Camino Real and separately from Faeh Avenue Meets Code. 3. Queuing Drive-in and drive-through restaurants shall have a Queuing for eight (8) Meets Code. PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION OF LOT MERGER 16-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 16-008, AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OCTOBER 17, 2017 PAGE 6 Code Section Requirement CUP 16-008 Notes capacity for queuing a minimum of eight vehicles awaiting service. Queuing area shall not interfere with on or off-site circulation patterns and shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to approval of a CUP vehicles is provided in the drive-through 4. Parking A parking and vehicular circulation plan encompassing adjoining streets and alleys shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer and Planning Director Prior to approval of a CUP Parking provided on- site is in excess of that required by the Municipal Code. Meets Code. 5. Refuse Storage Area A minimum of one outdoor trash receptacle shall be provided on-site adjacent to each driveway exist or as approved by the Planning Director. At least one additional on-site outdoor trash receptacle shall be provided for every ten (10) required parking spaces. Trash receptacles, other than the dumpster area, are not identified on the site plans. However, the site has ample room to provide the required five (5) total receptacles and the project has been conditioned to require them. Meets Code as conditioned. 6. Noise Any drive-up or drive-through speaker system shall be limited to one that emits no more than fifty (50) decibels four feet between the vehicle and the speaker, and shall not be audible above daytime ambient noise levels beyond the The speaker system has been located to face into the center of the proposed project, is more than Meets Code as conditioned. PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION OF LOT MERGER 16-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 16-008, AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OCTOBER 17, 2017 PAGE 7 Code Section Requirement CUP 16-008 Notes property boundaries. The system shall be designed to compensate for ambient noise levels in the immediate area, and shall not be located within thirty (30) feet of any residential district or any property used for residential uses. thirty feet (30’) than residential properties, and although specific decibel information is not provided, the project has been conditioned to provide adequate proof that the system complies with the Municipal Code. Neighborhood Compatibility As mentioned above, the project site is located across the street from single-family residential development, but is also contained in a mixed-use zoning district. The project has been revised through the entitlement process in an attempt to address compatibility issues with the adjacent residences, including the reconfiguration of the drive-thru exit, the changed location of the ordering menu and speaker, and limiting operating hours from the original proposal of 24-hours. Odor, noise, litter, and traffic remain items of concern voiced by many of the residents in the neighborhood. However, the intent of the requirements identified in Table 2 above is to reduce these to levels acceptable when considering the City as a whole. Access and Parking The project proposes two (2) public access points to the site, with one (1) from El Camino Real and another from Faeh Avenue, in compliance with Municipal Code requirements for drive-thru projects. The proposed ingress and egress points preserve the existing Park & Ride spaces constructed on El Camino Real. These points of ingress and egress were reviewed in conjunction with the traffic analysis conducted for the project and were determined to be of adequate size and orientation to accommodate the proposed project. During the Traffic Commission’s review of the project, the TC requested that steps be taken to limit traffic on Faeh Avenue. While it is anticipated that a majority of the traffic generated by the use will enter from the El Camino Real entrance, the TC was specifically interested in eliminating the Faeh PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION OF LOT MERGER 16-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 16-008, AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OCTOBER 17, 2017 PAGE 8 Avenue entrance. This is not a feasible option for the project since two (2) points of access are required for the project as identified in Table 2. As identified in Table 1, the proposed project requires parking at a ratio of 1/75 square- feet of building space accessible by the public. The proposed project includes 2,025 square-feet of floor space accessible to the public. This includes 1,575 square-feet on the interior of the building and a 450 square-foot outdoor patio area, resulting in a parking requirement of twenty-seven (27) spaces. In total, thirty-one (31) parking spaces are being provided, exceeding the City’s requirements. Traffic As part of the environmental review process for the project, the applicant contracted with the City’s on-call civil engineer to prepare a Traffic Impact Analysis Report (Attachment 5). The TIAR includes trip generation using the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation factors. The project is anticipated to generate:  Seventy-four (74) new AM Peak Hour trips; and  Fifty-three (53) new PM Peak Hour trips. Of the ten (10) intersections studied, all but two (2) intersections currently operate at a level-of-service (LOS) “C” or better, while Brisco Road/El Camino Real operates at an LOS “D” and East Grand Avenue/El Camino Real operates at an LOS “F”. It should be noted that the LOS “F” at El Camino Real/East Grand Avenue is a result of vehicle delay attempting to enter on East Grand Street and not traveling through East Grand Street. The proposed project will add to the congestion at the identified intersections, and will contribute to the future condition of Brisco Road/US 101 northbound ramps falling to an LOS “D”. As such, the TIAR identifies that payment of the proposed project’s pro-rata share percentages for each intersection to reduce the level of significance of impact. At the request of Caltrans due to the project’s location to US 101, a merge/diverge analysis was conducted for the northbound on and off ramps at Brisco Road and the southbound on and off ramps at Halcyon Road. The result of this analysis is that the project will not have an impact to the operation of those freeway segments. During the Traffic Commission’s review of the TIAR, they recommended that the traffic signal identified in the TIAR for the El Camino Real/East Grand Avenue intersection be required to be installed by the applicant prior to store opening. Installation of a signal at that intersection, in close proximity to Caltrans controlled facilities, will require coordination with Caltrans prior to installation. Additionally, although the LOS is impacted at that intersection, appropriate warrants have not been met to allow installation at this time. These signal warrants, as identified in the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices published by Caltrans, can deal with vehicular volumes, pedestrian volumes, crash experiences, and the overall roadway network, but do not PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION OF LOT MERGER 16-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 16-008, AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OCTOBER 17, 2017 PAGE 9 include LOS delay, particularly from a low volume side street, as a warrant for signal installation. This is similar to when requests for reduced speed limits are made when appropriate conditions are not met to allow for that change. As such, Condition of Approval 107 has been worded to allow the City Engineer latitude toward timing the installation of the signal. Architecture The building’s architecture, as seen in the image below, is proposed to be a contemporary commercial design with features typical of Louisiana, tying in the company’s name to the building’s architecture. The building will utilize parapets of varying heights to screen rooftop mechanical equipment. Faux window shutters will be utilized to break up the buildings massing. The awning over the drive-thru window will be made to look like a balcony, common of second stories in Louisiana. A ledgestone wainscot is proposed around the entirety of the building, separated from the remainder of the wall plane by a red accent band, matching the accent band around the parapet of the building and the awnings over the windows on the portions of the building closest to El Camino Real. The building color will primarily be “Delightful Golden”, which is a yellow color, and will include red and green accents. Trees and Landscaping The conceptual landscape plan includes nineteen (19) new trees being installed with the project, including twelve (12) Brisbane box street trees on El Camino Real and Faeh Avenue, six (6) drake Chinese elm trees, and one (1) additional on-site Brisbane box. Additional shrubs and ground cover will be included in the project. These meet the PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION OF LOT MERGER 16-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 16-008, AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OCTOBER 17, 2017 PAGE 10 requirements for trees based on number of parking spaces and the final landscape plans will comply with the model water efficient landscape ordinance. Signage The project plans indicate four (4) total signs, including one (1) internally illuminated channel letter wall sign on the front elevation facing El Camino Real, two (2) internally illuminated wall logos on the west and east elevations, and one (1) “freeway” sign in the front plantar area. Formal sign plans have not been submitted as part of the proposed project and will require separate processing and approval of a Planned Sign Program to determine compliance with the Municipal Code. Therefore, the location and size of signage indicated should be reviewed for illustrative purposes only. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the Commission’s consideration: 1. Adopt the attached Resolution recommending the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve Lot Merger 16-001 and Conditional Use Permit 16-008; 2. Modify as appropriate and adopt the attached Resolution recommending the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve Lot Merger 16- 001 and Conditional Use Permit 16-008; 3. Modify and adopt the attached Resolution recommending the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve Lot Merger 16-001 and Conditional Use Permit 16-008, with hours of operation for the drive-thru to be limited from 10 am to 10 pm; 4. Do not adopt the attached Resolution, take tentative action to recommend denial of the project to the City Council, provide specific findings for denial of the project, and direct staff to return with an appropriate resolution recommending denial; or 5. Provide direction to staff. ADVANTAGES: The proposed project will develop a currently vacant site with an additional restaurant choice in close proximity to the freeway and therefore will benefit visitors to the City . The proposed use will additionally increase City sales tax revenue. DISADVANTAGES: The proposed project would place a drive-thru restaurant in close proximity to a residential neighborhood. Additional impacts to the neighborhood will result from traffic, odor and noise associated with the proposed project. However, the site is appropriately zoned for a visitor serving use in close proximity to the freeway. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project (Attachment 6). PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION OF LOT MERGER 16-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 16-008, AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OCTOBER 17, 2017 PAGE 11 Mitigation is required for air quality, cultural resources, greenhouse gas emissions, hydrology/water quality, noise, transportation/traffic, and tribal cultural resources. The Initial Study/Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration was sent to the State Clearinghouse, and referrals were sent to responsible agencies and agencies that may be impacted by the project, including Caltrans, San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District, tribal representatives, and Heal-SLO. Comments have yet to be received on the Mitigated Negative Declaration; however, the public review and comment period is still open and comments are still being accepted through November 17, 2017. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENT: 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 October 6, 2017. A sign announcing the public hearing was posted at the project site on October 5, 2017, in accordance with City policy. The Agenda was posted at City Hall and on the City’s website in accordance with Government Code Section 54654.2. Several items of correspondence have been received regarding the proposed project and are included as Attachment 7. Attachments: 1. Project vicinity map 2. Minutes of the June 19, 2017 Architectural Review Committee meeting 3. Minutes of the August 14, 2017 Traffic Commission meeting 4. Draft minutes of the September 18, 2017 Traffic Commission meeting 5. Transportation Impact Analysis Report and Memorandum 6. Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration 7. Correspondence received regarding the project 8. Project plans RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVE LOT MERGER 16-001 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 16-008; LOCATED AT 727 EL CAMINO REAL; APPLIED FOR BY ELA FOODS, INC. WHEREAS, the project site is currently vacant, located at 727 El Camino Real, and zoned Highway Mixed-Use (HMU); and WHEREAS, the applicant has filed Lot Merger 16-001 and Conditional Use Permit 16-008 for the construction of an approximately 3,150 square foot fast-food restaurant with drive- thru and associated site improvements; and WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Committee considered the project on June 19, 2017 and recommended approval with conditions; and WHEREAS, the Traffic Commission considered the project on August 14, 2017 and September 18, 2017 and recommended approval with conditions; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission 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 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Arroyo Grande has reviewed the project at a duly noticed public hearing on October 17, 2017; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds, after due study, deliberation and public hearing, the following circumstances exist: Lot Merger Findings: 1. The lot merger is in compliance with the California Government Code. 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 fast food restaurant with drive-thru is a permitted use within the HMU zoning district with approval of a conditional use permit, which ensures that the project complies with all applicable provisions of the RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 2 General Plan and development policies and standards of the City. 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 use fast-food restaurant with drive-thru is proposed on a vacant commercial parcel zoned HMU located in convenient proximity to US Highway 101 and would not impair the integrity of the HMU district due to the intent of the district to provide areas for a variety of visitor-serving and auto-related uses in areas convenient to both freeway traffic ad vehicles or pedestrians, including restaurants. 3. The site is suitable for the type and intensity of use or development that is proposed. The site is approximately 0.79 acres of vacant land and meets the development standards of the HMU zoning district and the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code, and is suitable for the intensity of the development. The project additionally meets the design standards for drive-thru uses identified in Subsection 16.52.090.C of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code. 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 processing of the entitlement 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 materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity as it will comply with all applicable codes and standards of the Municipal Code and in accordance with conditions of approval specifically developed for the project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Arroyo Grande hereby recommends the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration as set forth in Exhibit “B”, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and approve Lot Merger 16-001 and Conditional Use Permit 16-008 as set forth in Exhibit “C”, 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 Commissioner _______, seconded by Commissioner _______, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 3 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 17th day of October, 2017 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 4 _______________________________ GLENN MARTIN, CHAIR ATTEST: _______________________________ DEBBIE WEICHINGER, SECRETARY TO THE COMMISSION AS TO CONTENT: _______________________________ TERESA MCCLISH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 5 EXHIBIT ‘A’ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL LOT MERGER 16-001 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 16-008 727 EL CAMINO REAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION GENERAL CONDITIONS 1. This approval authorizes the construction of an approximately 3,150 square foot fast food restaurant with drive-thru. Operation of the use is permitted to occur between the hours of 10 AM and 12 AM. 2. The applicant shall ascertain and comply with all Federal, State, County and City requirements as are applicable to this project. 3. The applicant shall comply with all applicable conditions of approval and mitigation measures for Lot Merger 16-001 and Conditional Use Permit 16-008. 4. This application shall automatically expire on November 28, 2019 unless a building permit is issued or an extension is granted pursuant to Section 16.12.140 of the Development Code. 5. Development shall conform to the Highway Mixed-Use zoning district requirements except as otherwise approved. 6. Development shall occur in substantial conformance with the plans presented to the City Council at the meeting of November 28, 2017 and marked Exhibit “B”. 7. The applicant shall agree to indemnify and defend at his/her sole expense any action brought against the City, its present or former agents, officers, or employees because of the issuance of said approval, or in any way relating to the implementation thereof, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers or employees may be 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 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 6 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. 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. 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. 15. 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. 16. Final design and location of the trash enclosure(s) and locations of all other trash receptacles required by Municipal Code Section 16.52.090 shall be reviewed by the Architectural Review Committee and approved by the Community Development Director. 17. 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 and 9 AM to 5 PM on Saturdays. No construction shall occur on Sunday. 18. At the time of application for construction permits, the applicant shall provide details on any proposed exterior lighting. The lighting plan shall include the height, location, and intensity of all exterior lighting consistent with Section 16.48.090 of the Development Code. All lighting fixtures shall be shielded so that neither the lamp nor the related reflector interior surface is visible from adjacent properties. All lighting for the site shall be downward directed and shall not create spill or glare to adjacent properties. All lighting shall be energy efficient (e.g. LED) and shall RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 7 comply with the 2013 California Energy Code. 19. All new construction shall utilize fixtures and designs that minimize water and energy usage. Such fixtures shall include, but are not limited to, low flow showerheads, water saving toilets, instant water heaters and hot water recirculating systems. Water conserving designs and fixtures shall be installed prior to final occupancy. 20. 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 (Model Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance). 21. 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. 22. Trees shall be provided at a ratio of one tree for every five parking spaces. 23. For projects approved with specific exterior building colors, the color and manufacturer shall be identified on building plans. 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. 24. All new electrical panel boxes shall be installed inside the building. 25. All Fire Department Connections (FDC) shall be located near a fire hydrant, adjacent to a fire access roadway, and screened to the maximum extent allowed while maintaining easy identification and access by the Five Cities Fire Authority. 26. Double detector check valve assemblies shall be located within the respective building to which they serve. 27. 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 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 8 objectionable material to be directed away from residential properties. 28. 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. SPECIAL CONDITIONS 29. All store deliveries shall be restricted to between the hours of 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM to ensure compatibility with existing residential development in the vicinity. 30. Delivery truck drivers shall be instructed to turn off engines when trucks are parked or being unloaded. 31. The developer shall record a Notice of Land Use Restrictions and Conditions on the property with the San Luis Obispo County Clerk Recorder, on a form provided by the Community Development Department, prior to issuance of any permit for construction. 32. It is the City’s preference that the Notice of Merger be recorded via map but can also be recorded via a certificate of compliance in compliance with the Subdivision Map Act. All pertinent conditions of approval satisfied prior to issuance of any building permit. If the merger is recorded via a map, 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. If the merger is recorded via a certificate of compliance, information from the tax collector’s office shall be provided to show that there are no unpaid taxes or special assessments against the property. 33. The proposed use shall meet all standards contained in Municipal Code Section 16.52.090. BUILDING AND LIFE SAFETY DIVISION AND FIRE DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS BUILDING CODES 34. The project shall comply with the most recent editions of all California Building and Fire Codes, as adopted by the City of Arroyo Grande. FIRE LANES 35. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall post designated fire lanes, per Section 22500.1 of the California Vehicle Code. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 9 36. All fire lanes must be posted and enforced, per Police Department and Fire Department guidelines. FIRE FLOW/FIRE HYDRANTS 37. Project shall have a fire flow in accordance with the California Fire Code. 38. Fire hydrants shall be installed, per Fire Department and Public Works Department standards and per the California Fire Code. 39. Two (2) new fire hydrants shall be installed, with one (1) installed on Faeh Avenue and one (1) installed on El Camino Real. The specific location of the fire hydrants shall be reviewed and approved by the Building Official and the Fire Chief. SECURITY KEY BOX 40. The applicant must provide an approved "security key vault," per Building and Fire Department guidelines and per the California Fire Code. FIRE SPRINKLER 41. All buildings must be fully sprinklered per Building and Fire Department guidelines and per the California Fire Code. ABANDONMENT / NON-CONFORMING 42. 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 / RETAINING WALLS 43. A demolition permit must be applied for, approved and issued. All asbestos and lead shall be verified if present and abated prior to permit issuance. SPECIAL CONDITIONS 44. One week prior to scheduling of final inspection or any issuance of certificate of occupancy, a project inspection by the Building, Planning, and Engineering Divisions and Public Works Department is required. 45. Applicant shall fund outsourced plan check services, as required. ENGINEERING DIVISION CONDITIONS POST CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 10 BOARD, STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN, OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN, AND ANNUAL STORMWATER CONTROL FACILITIES MAINTENANCE 46. The Applicant shall develop, implement and provide the City a: a. Prior to a building or grading permit a Stormwater Control Plan that clearly provides engineering analysis of all Water Quality Treatment, Runoff Retention, and Peak Flow Management controls complying with Engineering Standard 1010 Section 5.2.2. b. Prior to final acceptance an Operations and Maintenance Plan and Maintenance Agreements that clearly establish responsibility for all Water Quality Treatment, Runoff Retention, and Peak Flow Management controls complying with Engineering Standard 1010 Section 5.2.3. c. Annual Maintenance Notification indicating that all Water Quality Treatment, Runoff Retention, and Peak Flow Management controls are being maintained and are functioning as designed. d. All reports must be completed by either a Registered Civil Engineer or Qualified Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Developer (QSD). GENERAL CONDITIONS 47. The developer shall sweep streets in compliance with Standard Specifications Section 13-4.03F. 48. For work requiring engineering inspections, working hours shall comply with Standard Specification Section 5-1.01. 49. Provide trash enclosure in compliance with Engineering Standard 9060 with solid/rain-deflecting roof. Provide a grease trap prior to draining to sanitary sewer or appropriate LID stormwater device. 50. 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. 51. All project improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the most recent version of the City of Arroyo Grande Standard Specifications and Engineering Standards. 52. The property owner shall provide maintenance of all landscaping placed in and adjacent to the development. 53. Record Drawings (“as-built” plans) are required to be submitted prior to release of the Faithful Performance Bond. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 11 54. Submit as-built plans at the completion of the project or improvements as directed by the Community Development Director in compliance with Engineering Standard 1010 Section 9.3E. Provide One (1) set of paper prints and electronic documents on CD or flash drive in both AutoCAD and PDF format. 55. Submit three (3) full-size paper copies and one (1) electronic PDF file of approved improvement plans for inspection purposes during construction. 56. Preserve existing survey monuments and vertical control benchmarks in compliance with Standard Specifications Section 5-1.26A 57. Provide one (1) new vertical control survey benchmark, per City Standard, as directed by City Engineer. IMPROVEMENT PLANS 58. Improvement plans must comply with Engineering Standard 1010 Section 1 and shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer or qualified specialist licensed in the State of California and approved by the Public Works Department and/or Community Development Department. The following plan sheet shall be provided: a. Site Plan i. The location and size of all existing and proposed water, sewer, and storm drainage facilities within the project site and abutting streets or alleys. ii. The location, size and orientation of all trash enclosures. iii. All existing and proposed parcel lines and easements crossing the property. iv. The location and dimension of all existing and proposed paved areas. v. The location of all existing and proposed public or private utilities. vi. Location of 100-year flood plain and any areas of inundation within project area. b. Grading Plan with Cross Sections c. Retaining Wall Plan and Profiles d. Roadway Improvements Plan and Profiles e. Storm Drainage Plan and Profile f. Utilities - Water and Sewer Plan and Profile g. Utilities – Composite Utility h. Signing and Striping i. Erosion Control j. Landscape and Irrigation Plans for Public Right-of-Way k. Tree Protection Plan l. Details m. Notes n. Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Measures o. Other improvements as required by the Community Development Director. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 12 (NOTE: All plan sheets must include City standard title blocks) p. Engineers estimate for construction cost based on County of San Luis Obispo unit cost. 59. Submit all retaining wall calculations for review and approval by the Community Development Director including any referenced geotechnical report. 60. Prior to approval of an improvement plan the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City for inspection of the required improvements. 61. Applicant shall fund outsourced plan and map check services, as required. 62. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining an encroachment permit for all work within a public right-of-way. STREET IMPROVEMENTS 63. 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 or type 2 slurry seal. 64. Remove existing roadway striping and markers prior to any overlay or slurry seal work to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. Use only thermoplastic roadway striping. CURB, GUTTER, AND SIDEWALK 65. Install new concrete curb, gutter, and sidewalk on El Camino Real and Faeh Avenue and as directed by the Community Development Director and Public Works Director. 66. Driveway crossings shall have a decorative treatment and the applicant shall color any such new facilities as directed by the Community Development Director. 67. Install ADA compliant facilities where necessary or verify that existing facilities are compliant with State and City Standards. 68. 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. 69. Install tree wells with root barriers for all trees planted adjacent to curb, gutter and sidewalk to prevent damage due to root growth. DEDICATIONS AND EASEMENTS RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 13 70. All easements, abandonments, or similar documents to be recorded as a document separate from a map, shall be prepared by the applicant on 8 1/2 x 11 City standard forms, and shall include legal descriptions, sketches, closure calculations, and a current preliminary title report. The Developer shall be responsible for all required fees, including any additional required City processing. 71. A drainage, sewer main and/or water main easement(s) shall be dedicated to the public on the map. 72. All easements, abandonments, or similar documents to be recorded as a document separate from a map, shall be prepared by the applicant on 8 1/2 x 11 City standard forms, and shall include legal descriptions, sketches, closure calculations, and a current preliminary title report. The applicant shall be responsible for all required fees, including any additional required City processing. 73. The project shall provide a 15’ sanitary sewer easement for the sewer main servicing the adjacent properties on El Camino Real. GRADING AND DRAINAGE 74. 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. 75. All grading shall be performed in accordance with the City Grading Ordinance and Standard Specifications and Engineering Standards. 76. Drainage facilities shall be designed in compliance with Engineering Standard 1010 Section 5.1.2. 77. 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. The date of the soils report shall be less than 3 years old at the time of submittal. 78. The applicant shall dedicate a pedestrian access easement(s) for any ADA sidewalk extension. 79. Infiltration basins shall be designed based on soil percolation tests. Infiltration test shall include adequate borings depth and frequency to support design recommendations. 80. The applicant shall submit an engineering study regarding flooding related to the project site. Any portions of the site subject to flooding from a 100-year storm RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 14 shall be shown on the tentative map or other recorded document, and shall be noted as a building restriction. WATER 81. Whenever possible, all water mains shall be looped to prevent dead ends. The Public Works Director must grant permission to dead end water mains. 82. The applicant shall replace the public water main with a new 8” main to adequately serve the project across the property frontage. 83. A Reduced Pressure Principle (RPP) backflow device is required on all water lines to the structure and landscape irrigation. 84. A Double Detector Check (DDC) backflow device is required on the water service line to the building. 85. Non-potable water is available at the Soto Sports Complex. The City of Arroyo Grande does not allow the use of hydrant meters. 86. Existing water services to be abandoned shall be abandoned in compliance with Engineering Standard 6050. SEWER 87. All sewer laterals shall comply with Engineering Standard 6810. 88. Existing sewer laterals to be abandoned shall be abandoned in compliance with Engineering Standard 6050. 89. The parcel shall be provided a separate sewer lateral. Laterals shall be sized for the appropriate use, minimum 4”. 90. All sewer mains or laterals crossing or parallel to public water facilities shall be constructed in accordance with Standard Specifications and Engineering Standards. 91. Obtain approval from the South County Sanitation District for the development’s impact to District facilities prior to permit issuance. 92. Obtain approval from the South County Sanitation District prior to relocation of any District facilities. PUBLIC UTILITIES 93. The developer shall comply with Development Code Section 16.68.050: All RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 15 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. 94. Prior to approving any building permit within the project for occupancy, all conditions of approval for project are satisfied. 95. 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. 96. Street lighting shall comply with Engineering Standard 1010 Section 3.1.2.Q. FEES AND BONDS The applicant shall pay all applicable City fees, including the following: 97. FEES TO BE PAID PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF PERMIT a. Plan check for grading plans (Based on an approved earthwork estimate) b. Plan check for improvement plans (Based on an approved construction cost estimate) c. Permit Fee for grading plans (Based on an approved earthwork estimate) d. Inspection Fee of subdivision or public works construction plans (Based on an approved construction cost estimate) e. Plan Review Fee (Based on the current Building Division fee schedule) 98. FEES TO BE PAID PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT a. Water Neutralization fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, involving water connection or enlargement of an existing connection. b. Water Distribution fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, in accordance with Municipal Code Section 13.04.030. c. Water Meter charge to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, in accordance with Municipal Code 6-7.22. d. Water Availability charge, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, in accordance with - (not correct). e. Traffic Impact fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, in accordance with Ord. 461 C.S., Res. 3021. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 16 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. Alarm Fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of development in accordance with Ord. 435 C.S. k. 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. l. 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. BONDING SURETY 99. 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. 100. 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. Erosion Control and Landscape, 100% of the approved estimated cost of all erosion control work during construction and the estimated cost of all final landscaping after construction is complete. This bond is refundable upon successful completion of the work, less expenses uncured by the City in maintaining and/or restoring the site. c. Labor and Materials, 50% of the approved estimated cost of all subdivision improvements. d. One Year Guarantee, 10% of the approved estimated cost of all subdivision improvements. This bond is required prior to acceptance of the subdivision improvements. e. Monumentation, 100% of the estimated cost of setting survey monuments. f. Tax Certificate, In accordance with Section 9-15.130 of the Development Code, the applicant shall furnish a certificate from the RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 17 tax collector’s office indicating that there are no unpaid taxes or special assessments against the property. PUBLIC SAFETY CONDITIONS 101. Prior to issuance of building permit, applicant to submit exterior lighting plan for Police Department approval. 102. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall post handicapped parking, per the California Building Code. 103. 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 and annual renewal fee. 104. 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. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE CONDITIONS 105. The applicant shall return with an alternate drive-thru location away from Faeh Avenue. 106. If the drive-thru is not able to be moved, the project shall include a 36”-42” hard barrier adjacent to the drive-thru to mitigate light and noise. 107. If the drive-thru is not able to be moved, the project shall include a non-audible ordering system, if feasible. 108. Eliminate all turf on the site. TRAFFIC COMMISSION CONDITIONS 109. The developer shall install a traffic signal at the intersection of El Camino Real and East Grand Avenue, in appropriate coordination with Caltrans, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 110. The City shall investigate traffic calming measures on local neighborhood roadways within one (1) year of operation of the project. The developer shall be required to reimburse the City the costs of the study and install required traffic calming measures resulting from the study. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 18 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. MM AQ-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. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Engineering Division, Public Works Department Timing: During Construction MM AQ-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. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Engineering Division, Public Works Department Timing: During Construction MM AQ-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. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Engineering Division, Public Works Department Timing: During Construction MM AQ-4: The project applicant shall comply with these more restrictive requirements to minimize impacts to nearby sensitive receptors (adjacent RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 19 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. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Engineering Division, Public Works Department Timing: During Construction MM AQ-5: The project shall implement the following mitigation measures to manage nitrogen oxide (NOX), reactive organic cases (ROG), and diesel particulate matter (DPM) emissions:  Maintain all construction equipment in property tune according to manufacturer’s specifications;  Fuel all off-road and portable diesel powered equipment with ARB certified motor vehicle diesel fuel (non-taxed version suitable for use off-road);  Use diesel construction equipment meeting ARB’s Tier 2 certified engines or cleaner off-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State Off-Road Regulation;  Use on-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State On- Road Regulation;  Construction or trucking companies with fleets that do not have engines in their fleet that meet the engine standards identified in the above two measures (e.g. captive or NOX exempt area fleets) may be eligible by proving alternative compliance;  Electrify equipment when feasible;  Substitute gasoline-powered in place of diesel-powered equipment, where feasible; and  Use alternatively fueled construction equipment on-site where feasible, such as compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane or biodiesel. MM AQ-6: The project shall implement the following mitigation measures to manage fugitive dust emissions such that they do not exceed the APCD’s 20% opacity limit (APCD Rule 401) or prompt nuisance violations (APCD Rule 402).  Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible;  Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site and from exceeding the APCD’s limit of 20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in any 60 minute period. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 20 Increased watering frequency would be required when wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed (non-potable) water shall be used;  All dirt stock pile areas should be sprayed daily and covered with tarps or other dust barriers as needed;  Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans shall be implemented as soon as possible, following completion of any soil disturbing activities;  Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading should be shown with a fast germinating, non-invasive, grass seed and watered until vegetation is established;  All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation should be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD;  All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed as soon as possible. In addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used;  Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site;  All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with CVC Section 23.114;  Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site;  Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers shall be used with reclaimed water should be used where feasible. Roads shall be p re-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. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Engineering Division, Public Works Department Timing: During Construction RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 21 MM AQ-7: 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. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Engineering Division, Public Works Department Timing: Prior to start of work MM AQ-8: Burning of vegetative material on the development site shall be prohibited. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Engineering Division, Public Works Department Timing: During Construction MM AQ-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. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Engineering Division, Public Works Department Timing: During Construction MM AQ-10: The project shall implement a minimum of eight (8) Standard Mitigation Measures as stated in Table 3-5 of the APCD’s 2012 CEQA Handbook Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Engineering Division, Public Works Department RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 22 Timing: Prior to permit issuance MM CUL-1: If a potentially significant cultural resource is encountered during subsurface earthwork activities, all construction activities within a 100-foot radius of the find shall cease until a qualified archaeologist determines whether the uncovered resource requires further study. A standard inadvertent discovery clause shall be included in every grading and construction contract to inform contractors of this requirement. Any previously undiscovered resources found during construction shall be recorded on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance in terms of California Environmental Quality Act criteria by a qualified archaeologist. Potentially significant cultural resources consist of, but are not limited to, stone, bone, glass, ceramic, wood, or shell artifacts; fossils; or features including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. If the resource is determined significant under CEQA, the qualified archaeologist shall prepare and implement a research design and archaeological data recovery plan that will capture those categories of data for which the site is significant. The archaeologist shall also perform appropriate technical analysis, prepare a comprehensive report, and file it with the appropriate Information Center and provide for the permanent curation of the recovered materials. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Engineering Division, Public Works Department Timing: During construction MM CUL-2: If human remains are encountered during earth-disturbing activities, all work in the adjacent area shall stop immediately and the San Luis Obispo County Coroner’s office shall be notified. 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: During construction MM GHG-1: Prior to issuance of a building permit, all construction plans shall incorporate the following GHG-reducing measures where applicable:  Incorporate outdoor electrical outlets to encourage the use of electric appliances and tools.  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 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 23 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 homes 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 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 landscaping with emphasis on native plants. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Planning, Building and Engineering Divisions Timing: Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit or Building Permit MM HYD-1: The following BMPs shall be incorporated into the project:  Run-off Control. Maintain post-development peak runoff rate and average volume of runoff at levels that are similar to pre-development levels.  Labeling and Maintenance of Storm Drain Facilities. Label new storm drain inlets with “No Dumping – Drains to Ocean” to alert the public to the destination of stormwater and to prevent direct discharge of pollutants into the storm drain.  Common Area Litter Control. Implement a trash management and litter control program to prevent litter and debris from being carried to water bodies or the storm drain system.  Food Service Facilities. Design the food service facility to have a sink or other area for cleaning floor mats, containers, and equipment that is RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 24 connected to a grease interceptor prior to discharging to the sanitary sewer system. The cleaning area shall be large enough to clean the largest mat or piece of equipment to be cleaned.  Refuse Areas. Trash compactors, enclosures and dumpster areas shall be covered and protected from roof and surface drainage. Install a self- contained drainage system that discharges to the sanitary sewer if water cannot be diverted from the areas.  Outdoor Storage Controls. Oils, fuels, solvents, coolants, and other chemicals stored outdoors must be in containers and protected from drainage by secondary containment structures such as berms, liners, vaults or roof covers and/or drain to the sanitary sewer system. Bulk materials stored outdoors must also be protected from drainage with berms and covers. Process equipment stored outdoors must be inspected for proper function and leaks, stored on impermeable surfaces and covered. Implement a regular program of sweeping and litter control and develop a spill cleanup plan for storage areas.  Cleaning, Maintenance and Processing Controls. Areas used for washing, steam cleaning, maintenance, repair or processing must have impermeable surfaces and containment berms, roof covers, recycled water wash facility, and discharge to the sanitary sewer. Discharges to the sanitary sewer may require pretreatment systems and/or approval of an industrial waste discharge permit.  Street/parking lot Sweeping: Implement a program to regularly sweep streets, sidewalks and parking lots to prevent the accumulation of litter and debris. Debris resulting from pressure washing should be trapped and collected to prevent entry into the storm drain system. Washwater containing any cleaning agent or degreaser should be collected and discharged to the sanitary sewer Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Planning, Building, and Engineering Divisions Timing: Prior to issuance of a Building Permit MM NOI-1: Construction activities shall be restricted to between the hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. Monday through Friday. No construction shall occur on Saturday or Sunday. Equipment maintenance and servicing shall be confined to the same hours. To the greatest extent possible, grading and construction activities should occur during the middle of the day to minimize the potential for disturbance of neighboring noise sensitive uses. Responsible Party: Developer RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 25 Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Planning, Building, and Engineering Divisions Timing: During construction MM NOI-2: All construction equipment utilizing internal combustion engines shall be required to have mufflers that are in good condition. Stationary noise sources shall be located at least 300 feet from occupied dwelling units unless noise reducing engine housing enclosures or noise screens are provided by the contractor. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Planning, Building, and Engineering Divisions Timing: During construction MM NOI-3: Equipment mobilization areas, water tanks, and equipment storage areas shall be placed in a central location as far from existing residences as feasible. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Planning, Building, and Engineering Divisions Timing: Prior to and during construction MM TT-1: The developer shall pay pro-rata share contributions for intersections improvements as identified in the Traffic Impact Analysis Report prepared for the project (Omni-Means 2017). Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Planning, Building, and Engineering Divisions Timing: Prior to building permit issuance MM TCR-1: Implement MM CUL-1 and CUL-2. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande –Engineering Division and Public Works Department Timing: During Construction INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 1 of 45 INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Document on File in the Community Development Department) Conditional Use Permit 16-008 Lot Merger 16-001 727 El Camino Real October 2017 EXHIBIT "B" EXHIBIT "C" ATTACHMENT 1 Subject Property ACTION MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE MONDAY, JUNE 19, 2017 ARROYO GRANDE CITY HALL, 300 EAST BRANCH STREET ARROYO GRANDE, CA 1.CALL TO ORDER Chair Warren Hoag called the Regular Architectural Review Committee meeting to order at 2:30 p.m. 2.ROLL CALL ARC Members: Chair Warren Hoag, Vice Chair Bruce Berlin, and Committee Members Mary Hertel, Keith Storton, and Coleen Kubel were present. City Staff Present: Planning Manager Matt Downing was present. 3.FLAG SALUTE Committee Member Storton led the Flag Salute. 4.AGENDA REVIEW It was the consensus of the Committee that one Staff Communication be heard after Item 6. 5.COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS None. 6.WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS None. 11.STAFF COMMUNICATIONS Planning Manager Downing introduced the new City Manager Jim Bergman. Mr. Bergman introduced himself and thanked the Committee for their service to the community. 7.CONSENT AGENDA Committee Member Berlin made a motion, seconded by Committee Member Storton, to approve the minutes of June 5, 2017, as submitted. The motion carried on a 5-0 voice vote. 8.PROJECTS 8.a. CONSIDERATION OF LOT MERGER 16-001 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 16- 008; CONSTRUCTION OF AN APPROXIMATELY 3,150 SQUARE-FOOT FAST-FOOD RESTAURANT WITH DRIVE-THRU; LOCATION – 727 EL CAMINO REAL (WESTERN CORNER OF EL CAMINO REAL, FAEH AVENUE, AND BELL STREET) APPLICANT – ELA FOODS, INC.; REPRESENTATIVE – KEITH SIMON (Downing) Planning Manager Downing presented the staff report and responded to questions from the Committee regarding the City’s ownership of the project site, the status of the Park & Ride spaces on El Camino Real, status of a traffic study for the project, and other drive-thru locations considered on the project site. ATTACHMENT 2 Minutes: ARC PAGE 2 Monday, June 19, 2017 Keith Simon, representative, spoke in support of the project, and responded to questions regarding the standardization of colors for Popeye’s restaurants, the need for the drive-thru for the project to move forward, hours of operation, and alternative methods of ordering at the drive-thru. The Committee provided comments in support of the location, design, fit, and feel of the project. The Committee expressed concerns regarding the drive-thru operation adjacent to residences, noise impacts resulting from drive-thru operation, and need for a small screening wall if drive-thru is not relocated.. Committee Member Storton made a motion, seconded by Committee Member Kubel, to recommend approval of the project to the Planning Commission as a suitable visitor serving use at the site, with the following modifications: 1. The applicant shall return with an alternate drive-thru location away from Faeh Avenue; 2. If the drive-thru is not able to be moved, the project shall include a 36”-42” hard barrier adjacent to the drive-thru to mitigate light and noise; and 3. If the drive-thru is not able to be moved, the project shall include a non-audible ordering system, if feasible. Following discussion on the motion, the following additional modifications were included: 4. Eliminate turf on the site; 5. It is recommended the drive-thru not be permitted as a 24-hour operation; and 6. The applicant shall clarify details on the landscape plan regarding irrigation and coverage of plant materials. The motion passed on a 5-0 voice vote. 9. DISCUSSION ITEMS None. 10. COMMITTEE COMMUNICATIONS Committee Member Storton requested information on if an online option is available for the recent harassment training. Committee Members provided reminders of anticipated absences from upcoming meetings. 11. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS Planning Manager Downing provided information to the Committee regarding when items of projects that are addressed by the Municipal Code are highlighted for the Committee. Planning Manager Downing also provided updates to the Committee on the East Branch Streetscape Project and the Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan Project. 12. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 3:53 p.m. to a meeting on July 17, 2017 at 2:30 p.m. /s/ Warren Hoag, Chair ATTEST: Matthew Downing, Planning Manager (Approved at ARC Mtg 07-17-2017) TRAFFIC COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 14, 2017 6.b CONSIDERATION OF LOT MERGER 16-001 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 16-008; CONSTRUCTION OF AN APPROXIMATELY 3,150 SQUARE-FOOT FAST-FOOD RESTAURANT WITH DRIVE-THRU; LOCATION – 727 EL CAMINO REAL (WESTERN CORNER OF EL CAMINO REAL, FAEH AVENUE, AND BELL STREET); APPLICANT – ELA FOODS, INC; REPRESENTATIVE KEITH SIMON City Engineer Dickerson presented the staff report. City Engineer Dickerson responded to questions regarding bike racks, striping changes on Brisco Road, and CalTrans timelines for issuing an encroachment permit. Chair Henslin opened the meeting for public comment. Molly Dreger, Faeh, spoke against the project and stated that the drive-thru would be directly across from her house and is not in support of the added traffic and noise that the project would bring. Maureen Herrera, N. Alpine, spoke against the project, specifically the added congestion from the drive-thru and motorhome parking. Elliot Dreger, Faeh, spoke against the project, mentioning existing traffic conditions caused by the cemetery and the nearby lumberyard will create a problem with the increased traffic caused by this project. He also questioned how many additional fast-food restaurants the City needs. Laurie Hunstad spoke against the project, but expressed her appreciation for the Traffic Commissioners’ desire to receive additional input before making any decisions. She mentioned that the most concerning part of the project would be the impacts on the queueing of cars on the southbound exit of Highway 101 at Halcyon. Vince Hartman, N. Alpine, spoke against the project, mentioning that there is already a lot of traffic in this neighborhood and that he would like to see a park in this location, rather than a fast-food restaurant. Dave Aguallo, Bell, spoke against the project, mentioning that a fast-food restaurant in the residential neighborhood will cause traffic, noise, and litter concerns. Jason Veras, Alpine, spoke against the project and stated that he would prefer to see this type of project on East Grand Avenue. Hearing no further public comment, Chair Henslin closed the public comment period. Vice Chair Price stated that the Planning Commission would be the appropriate arena for the members of the public to express their concerns about the project. Commissioner McAustin mentioned that the project has more parking spaces than required and asked if there was any possibility of re-configuring the parking so that RVs and large trucks could park somewhere. Keith Simon, representative for ELA Foods, responded to Commissioner McAustin’s question, stating that the parking lot layout has already changed many times, and could be re-configured to ATTACHMENT 3 TRAFFIC COMMISSION MEETING PAGE 3 of 3 MINUTES AUGUST 14, 2017 accommodate large vehicle parking. He also stated, in response to public comments, that the project has investigated using sound-dampening walls to mitigate noise issues in the neighborhood. Vice Chair Price asked about the possibility of signalizing any of the intersections most effected by the proposed project. City Engineer Dickerson mentioned that the intersection at East Grand Avenue and El Camino Real could be considered for signalization to improve existing conditions and mitigate additional traffic related to this proposal. Chair Henslin asked that any changes made to the proposal be brought back before the Traffic Commission. She also stated that the Commission would like to see how the previously approved striping changes to Brisco Road will affect traffic movement and asked that the Traffic Analysis Impact Report be updated to reflect noontime peak traffic before making a recommendation to the Planning Commission. 7. DISCUSSION ITEMS 7.a. NOMINATION TO CITIZENS TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE (CTAC) Commissioner Pappas volunteered to represent the City of Arroyo Grande on the CTAC. Chair Henslin made a motion, seconded by Commissioner McAustin, to nominate Commissioner Pappas to the Citizens Transportation Advisory Committee as the representative for the City of Arroyo Grande. 8. COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS Commissioner McAustin spoke about the striping on El Camino Real heading north and questioned if the line of restriction could be moved back to improve traffic safety. City Engineer Dickerson stated that the striping could be considered along with the re-striping of Brisco Road. 9. ADJOURNMENT Chair Henslin adjourned the meeting at 7:15 p.m. /s/ Susan Henslin, Chair ATTEST: /s/ Patrick Holub, Traffic Commision Clerk (Approved at TC Mtg 9-18-2017) ACTION MINUTES MEETING OF THETRAFFIC COMMISSION MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 2017 ARROYO GRANDE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 215 EAST BRANCH STREET ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA 1.CALL TO ORDER Chair Henslin called the Traffic Commission meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 2.ROLL CALL Traffic Commissioners: Commissioners Susan Henslin, Kenneth Price, Mike McAustin, and Rodney Pappas were present. Staff present: City Engineer Robin Dickerson, Planning Manager Matt Downing, Public Works Director Bill Robeson, and Senior Office Assistant Patrick Holub were present. Consultant Present: Joe Weiland, Omni Means. 3.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner McAustin led the pledge of allegiance. 4.COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS Chair Henslin opened the meeting for public comment. Bill Robeson, Public Works Director, introduced himself to the Commissioners. Hearing no further public comment, Chair Henslin closed the public comment period. 5.CONSENT AGENDA. 5.a. Consideration of Approval of Minutes. Action: The minutes of the Traffic Commission Meeting of August 14, 2017, were approved as submitted with the following roll call vote. AYES: McAustin, Price, Pappas, and Henslin NOES: None ABSENT: None 6.BUSINESS ITEMS 6.a. CONTIUNUED CONSIDERATION OF LOT MERGER 16-001 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 16-008; CONSTRUCTION OF AN APPROXIMATELY 3,150 SQUARE-FOOT FAST- FOOD RESTAURANT WITH DRIVE-THRU; LOCATION – 727 EL CAMINO REAL (WESTERN CORNER OF EL CAMINO REAL, FAEH AVENUE, AND BELL STREET); APPLICANT – ELA FOODS, INC.; REPRESENTATIVE – KEITH SIMON City Engineer Dickerson presented the updated site plan and revised Traffic Impact Analysis Report. City Engineer Dickerson responded to questions regarding peak traffic counts at lunchtime, Levels of Service at the studied intersections, and potential impacts to the neighboring local streets. ATTACHMENT 4 TRAFFIC COMMISSION MEETING PAGE 2 of 3 MINUTES SEPTEMBER 18, 2017 Chair Henslin opened the meeting for public comment. Howie Conroy, Bennett Ave, spoke against the project, including potential traffic concerns in the neighborhood and safety concerns for the children in the neighborhood. Maureen Herrera, N. Alpine Street, spoke against the project, specifically traffic impacts, safety concerns at the Highway 101/ Halcyon off-ramp, and the impact of high school students at lunchtime. Lori Hunstad, North Alpine Street, spoke against the project, mentioning increased traffic from the freeway and traffic impacts caused by cars heading down Halcyon towards the freeway. David Lyle, Bell Street, spoke against the project, including traffic impacts caused by busses, delivery trucks, and students at lunch and dinner times. Jason Veras, Alpine, spoke against the project, mentioning impacts to long-term residents and how other Cities have handled fast food restaurant siting. Hearing no further public comment, Chair Henslin closed the public comment period. Commissioner Pappas spoke about the need for traffic mitigation throughout the residential neighborhood and encouraged the residents to attend the other relevant meetings for this project. Commissioner McAustin mentioned the importance of taking the best measures to mitigate traffic concerns for the neighborhood, and spoke about the unique nature of the property. Vice Chair Price spoke about the potential increase in tax revenue for the City while also mentioning that he did not want to create any unnecessary ill will for the neighborhood and inquiring about the possibility of having only one exit for the development. Chair Henslin spoke about the Levels of Service being maintained based upon the Traffic Impact Analysis Report and the additional traffic that will be caused by the development. Commissioner McAustin made a motion, seconded by Vice Chair Price to make a recommendation to the Planning Commission for approval of the project as proposed with the following conditions: a. A traffic signal at the intersection of El Camino Real and East Grand Avenue be installed; b. Investigate traffic calming measures on local neighborhood roadways in the future, if necessary; c. Investigate methods of reducing vehicular traffic on Faeh Street, so long as level of service is not reduced at the intersections identified in this study. The motion passed on the following roll call vote: AYES: McAustin, Price, and Pappas NOES: Henslin ABSENT: None 7. DISCUSSION ITEMS None. Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen Transportation Impact Analysis Draft Report Prepared for: City of Arroyo Grande Prepared by: ATTACHMENT 5 POPEYE'S LOUISIANA KITCHEN TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS DRAFT REPORT Prepared For: City of Arroyo Grande 300 E. Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Prepared By: Omni-Means, Ltd. 669 Pacific Street, Suite A San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 (805) 242-0461 JULY 2017 65-1275-35 R2308TIA002.docx Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen Transportation Impact Analysis Draft Report Page i City of Arroyo Grande R2308TIA002.docx TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 1  Existing Transportation System .................................................................................................................... 1  Data Collection & Existing Traffic Volumes ................................................................................................... 3  Existing Pedestrian & Bicycle Facilities ........................................................................................................ 4  Existing Transit Services ............................................................................................................................... 5  Traffic Analysis Parameters .......................................................................................................................... 6  Analysis Methodology .............................................................................................................. 9  Existing Traffic Operations ....................................................................................................... 9  Project Location and Description ................................................................................................................ 13  Project Site Access ................................................................................................................ 13  Project Trip Generation .......................................................................................................... 14  Trip Reductions ...................................................................................................................... 15  Pass-by/Diverted Linked Trips ............................................................................................... 16  Project Trip Nature, Distribution, and Assignment ................................................................. 16  Existing plus Approved/Pending Projects ................................................................................................... 17  Short Term (Approved/Pending) Projects Trip Generation .................................................... 17  Existing plus Approved/Pending Projects plus Project ............................................................................... 23  Cumulative Conditions ................................................................................................................................ 25  Cumulative No Project Traffic Volumes ................................................................................. 25  Cumulative plus Project ......................................................................................................... 27  Freeway Ramp Conditions – Existing and Cumulative Conditions ............................................................. 29  Recommended Mitigation Measures .......................................................................................................... 30  Existing plus Approved/Pending Projects plus Project Conditions ................................................... 30  Year 2035 Base plus Project Conditions .......................................................................................... 30  Pro Rata Share Calculations ....................................................................................................................... 32  Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen Transportation Impact Analysis Draft Report Page ii City of Arroyo Grande R2308TIA002.docx LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 - Project Location and Vicinity Map ................................................................................................ 2  Figure 2 - Bicycle & Trail Network Plan ........................................................................................................ 4  Figure 3 - SoCoTransit Route Map ............................................................................................................... 5  Figure 4 - Existing Control and Lane Geometrics ....................................................................................... 11  Figure 5 - Existing Traffic Volumes ............................................................................................................. 12  Figure 6 - Project Site Access ..................................................................................................................... 14  Figure 7 - Project Trip Distribution .............................................................................................................. 17  Figure 8 - General Plan Land Uses ............................................................................................................ 18  Figure 9 - Existing plus Approved/Pending Projects Volumes .................................................................... 21  Figure 10 - Existing plus Approved/Pending Projects plus Project Volumes .............................................. 24  Figure 11 - Cumulative No Project Volumes ............................................................................................... 26  Figure 12 - Cumulative plus Project Volumes ............................................................................................. 28  LIST OF TABLES Table 1 LOS Criteria and Definition For Intersections .................................................................................. 7  Table 2 Existing Conditions: Intersection LOS ............................................................................................ 10  Table 3 Weekday Project Trip Generation .................................................................................................. 15  Table 4 Approved/Pending Projects ........................................................................................................... 19  Table 5 Approved/Pending Projects Trip Generation ................................................................................. 20  Table 6 Existing plus Approved/Pending Projects conditions: Intersection LOS ........................................ 22  Table 7 Existing plus Approved/Pending Projects plus Project conditions: Intersection LOS .................... 23  Table 8 Cumulative No Project Conditions: Intersection LOS .................................................................... 25  Table 9 Cumulative plus Project Conditions: Intersection LOS .................................................................. 27  Table 10 Existing & Cumulative With and Without Project Scenarios: Freeway Ramp Conditions .......... 29  Table 11 Existing & Cumulative With and Without Project Scenarios: Freeway Ramp segment Weaving Conditions ...................................................................................................................................... 29  Table 12 Year 2035 Base plus Project PM Peak Hour Queuing Analysis: E. Grand Avenue between El Camino Real & US 101 SB Ramps ................................................................................................ 32  Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen Transportation Impact Analysis Draft Report Page iii City of Arroyo Grande R2308TIA002.docx Table 13 Pro Rata Share Calculations ........................................................................................................ 33  APPENDIX Project Site Plan Level of Service Worksheets Peak-Hour Warrant-3 Worksheets AM & PM Peak Hour Traffic Counts Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen Transportation Impact Analysis Draft Report Page 1 City of Arroyo Grande R2308TIA002.docx Introduction The City of Arroyo Grande has retained Omni-Means to prepare a Transportation Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) for the proposed Popeye’s Louisiana Kitchen, proposed to be located at the corner of the intersection of El Camino Real/Faeh Avenue/Bell Street in Arroyo Grande (shown on Figure 1). The site’s address is 727 El Camino Real, Arroyo Grande. The proposed project includes approximately 3,200 square feet of fast food restaurant area with a drive-thru as indicated by the Site Plan dated March 2, 2017, (included in the Appendix). The following scenarios are analyzed as a part of the TIAR, as established in the original Scope of Work and approved by the City and Caltrans in the Draft Memorandum of Assumptions (MOA) dated May 16, 2017.  Existing Conditions;  Existing plus Approved/Pending Projects Conditions;  Existing plus Approved/Pending Projects plus Project Conditions;  Cumulative “No Project” Conditions; and,  Cumulative plus Project Conditions. For each scenario, intersection AM and PM peak hour capacity analyses identifying traffic operations is provided. In addition, potential transportation-related effects of the proposed development includes a review of safety for pedestrian and bicycle access/circulation and vehicular mobility. Transportation improvements required to maintain acceptable vehicular, pedestrian, bicycle access and safety at all locations are identified and documented under the Impacts and Mitigation section of this report. 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 connections between and through several cities and communities. Through the “Five Cities” (Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, Oceano, Pismo Beach, Shell Beach) area of the San Luis Obispo County, US 101 represents a major recreational as well as commuter travel route and generally consists of a 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 partial interchange access at Traffic Way and Fair Oaks Avenue. Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen Transportation Impact Analysis Draft Report Page 3 City of Arroyo Grande R2308TIA002.docx East Grand Avenue is a primary east-west arterial in Arroyo Grande that extends from East Branch Street just east of the junction with US 101 west to the City of Grover Beach where it becomes West Grand Avenue, and then continues west to the intersection with State Route 1. East Branch Street serves residences, businesses, schools and local government offices in the Historic Village in the downtown area and extends north as State Route 227 to the City of San Luis Obispo. The primary purpose of this corridor is to serve local, recreational and commuter within the Five Cities area and to connect the downtown with the region. El Camino Real is a two-lane north-south arterial that generally extends from the City limits in the north/west to E. Grand Avenue in central Arroyo Grande. El Camino Real runs parallel to and south of US 101 and functions as a frontage road to provide local access and relieve congestion to the freeway. According to the City’s 2012 Bicycle & Trails Master Plan, El Camino Real is an Existing Class II facility for bikes. El Camino Real is the project’s northern boundary and provides access via a project driveway. Currently, on-street parking exists on El Camino Real and a public ridesharing parking area is provided for commuters. Approximately 75 diagonal parking stalls are located north El Camino Real and 10 diagonal parking stall are made available on the south side of the street that adjoin the property of the proposed project. However, the ridesharing parking lot is not for customers or employees from the proposed project. Halcyon Road is primarily a north-south undivided arterial between El Camino Real and Zenon Way. At the intersection of El Camino Real and Halcyon Road, there is access to the US 101 Southbound ramps. There is a short break in the route at Highway1/Cienaga Street (SR 1). Halcyon Road is a two-lane arterial through most of its route; south of Mesa View Road (SR 1), it is classified as a collector. Halcyon Road is a four-lane arterial between Grand Avenue and Olive Street in Arroyo Grande. Halcyon Road continues as a two-lane collector South of Cabrillo Highway (south). Faeh Avenue is a two-lane local street that extends from Halcyon Road to El Camino Real. The unstriped road is approximately 40’ wide (curb to curb) and provides for on-street parking. Faeh Avenue is proposed to provide primary access to the project via two project driveways: one full-access driveway and another exit only driveway for drive-thru customers exiting the site. Brisco Road is an arterial connecting between W. Branch Street and E. Grand Avenue, with intersections at northbound US 101 ramps and El Camino Real. Also measuring 40’ wide from curb to curb, Brisco Road allows on-street parking on both sides of the street. Data Collection & Existing Traffic Volumes The following intersections were established through consultations with the City of Arroyo Grande and will be analyzed for this study. Traffic counts were taken March 2017 during the peak hours of 7:00 am to 9:00 am and 4:00 pm to 6:00 pm. 1. Brisco Road/W. Branch Street 2. Brisco Road/US 101 NB Ramps 3. Brisco Road/El Camino Real 4. El Camino Real/N Halcyon Road/US 101 SB Ramps 5. Faeh Avenue/N Halcyon Road 6. Faeh Avenue/Bell Street/El Camino Real Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen Transportation Impact Analysis Draft Report Page 4 City of Arroyo Grande R2308TIA002.docx 7. E Grand Avenue/Halcyon Road 8. E Grand Avenue/El Camino Real 9. E Grand Avenue/US 101 SB Off Ramp 10. E Grand Avenue/US 101 SB On Ramp 11. E Grand Avenue/US 101 NB Ramps Per the project's Site Plan, two (2) project driveways are proposed onto Faeh Avenue and one (1) project driveway is proposed on El Camino Real. Existing Pedestrian & Bicycle Facilities The City of Arroyo Grande adopted the 2012 Bicycle & Trail Master Plan that includes proposed bicycle and pedestrian trails (reference Figure 2), 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. Figure 2 - Bicycle & Trail Network Plan Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen Transportation Impact Analysis Draft Report Page 5 City of Arroyo Grande R2308TIA002.docx 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 III Bike Route known as bike routes, Class III 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 III routes do not provide measures of separation, they have an important function in providing continuity to the bikeway network. Bike Boulevards are streets with low motorized traffic volumes and speeds, designated and designed to give bicycle travel priority. Bike Boulevards use signs, pavement markings, and speed and volume management measures to discourage through trips by motor vehicles and create safe, convenient bicycle crossings of busy arterial streets. In the project vicinity, there is an Existing Class II Bike Route on El Camino Real between Elm Street and E. Grand Avenue; a proposed Class II Bike Route on Halcyon Road between E. Grand Avenue and El Camino Real; and, a proposed Class II Bike Route along the E. Grand Avenue corridor between Elm Street and El Camino Real. 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 (SLORTA). SCAT routes 21, 22, 24, 27 and 28 serve major roadways in the City. Out of those routes, SCAT routes 21, 27 and 28 directly serve the project area as identified in Figure 3. As a result, ample transit opportunities exist within close proximity of the proposed project. Figure 3 - SoCoTransit Route Map Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen Transportation Impact Analysis Draft Report Page 6 City of Arroyo Grande R2308TIA002.docx Traffic Analysis Parameters This TIAR provides a “planning level” evaluation of traffic conditions, 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 9 Modeling The Synchro Version 9 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. Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen Transportation Impact Analysis Draft Report Page 7 City of Arroyo Grande R2308TIA002.docx TABLE 1 LOS CRITERIA AND DEFINITION FOR INTERSECTIONS Level of Service Type of Flow Delay Maneuverability Stopped Delay/Vehicle Signalized Unsignalized All- Way Stop A Stable Flow Very slight delay. Progression is very favorable, with most vehicles arriving during the green phase not stopping at all. Turning movements are easily made, and nearly all drivers find freedom of operation. < 10.0 < 10.0 < 10.0 B Stable Flow Good progression and/or short cycle lengths. More vehicles stop than for LOS A, causing higher levels of average delay. Vehicle platoons are formed. Many drivers begin to feel somewhat restricted within groups of vehicles. >10.0 and < 20.0 >10.0 and < 15.0 >10.0 and < 15.0 C Stable Flow Higher delays resulting from fair progression and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures may begin to appear at this level. The number of vehicles stopping is significant, although many still pass through the intersection without stopping. Back-ups may develop behind turning vehicles. Most drivers feel somewhat restricted >20.0 and < 35.0 >15.0 and < 25.0 >15.0 and < 25.0 D Approaching Unstable Flow The influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. Longer delays may result from some combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, or high volume-to-capacity ratios. Many vehicles stop, and the proportion of vehicles not stopping declines. Individual cycle failures are noticeable. Maneuverability is severely limited during short periods due to temporary back-ups. >35.0 and < 55.0 >25.0 and < 35.0 >25.0 and < 35.0 E Unstable Flow 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. There are typically long queues of vehicles waiting upstream of the intersection. >55.0 and < 80.0 >35.0 and < 50.0 >35.0 and < 50.0 F Forced Flow 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 individual cycle failures. Poor progression and long cycle lengths may also be major contributing factors. Jammed conditions. Back-ups from other locations restrict or prevent movement. Volumes may vary widely, depending principally on the downstream back-up conditions. > 80.0 > 50.0 > 50.0 References: 2010 Highway Capacity Manual Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen Transportation Impact Analysis Draft Report Page 8 City of Arroyo Grande R2308TIA002.docx 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 “C” has been taken as the general threshold for acceptable operations at study intersections and roadways maintained by the State. General Plan EIR Statement of Overriding Considerations During the 2001 update of the City General Plan, the City Council by Resolution No. 3555 made findings regarding the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the General Plan Update, and adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for certain unavoidable significant impacts relating to water, air quality and traffic. Resolution No. 3555 states, in part, "that based on information set forth in the Final EIR and in the Statement of Significant Environmental Effects and Mitigation Measures, the adverse environmental effects related to circulation/transportation are significant environmental effects that cannot be entirely mitigated or avoided if the Project [General Plan Update] is approved because they are regional in nature and cannot be mitigated by the City policies alone." The Resolution further states "based on the Final EIR and the Statement of Significant Environmental Effects and Mitigation Measures, and other documents in the record, all remaining unavoidable significant environmental effects of the 2001 General Plan Update are overridden by the benefits of the Project [General Plan Update] as described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations." The 2001 General Plan EIR Statement of Significant Environmental Effects and Mitigation Measures lists a potentially significant impact under Section VI: "Transportation and Circulation," that "Correction of circulation deficiencies to LOS 'C' in question with all alternative due to regional land use pattern. Major projects with cumulative traffic impacts include: 11 & 12) Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen Transportation Impact Analysis Draft Report Page 9 City of Arroyo Grande R2308TIA002.docx E. Grand Avenue & El Camino Real Mixed Use parking & regional congestion unresolved. [This would] require Statement of Overriding Considerations for approval." The Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC, Exhibit B to Resolution No. 3555) states "the City Council has weighed the benefits of the proposed 2001 General Plan Update adoption against its unavoidable potentially significant environmental impacts. Based on consideration of the record as a whole, the City Council finds that the benefits of the 2001 General Plan Update outweigh the unavoidable and potentially significant environmental impacts and make adoption acceptable." Relating specifically to traffic, the SOC states that "Circulation/Transportation impacts are regional in nature and cannot be effectively mitigated by City policies alone." Analysis Methodology Synchro 9 will be used for this analysis. This computer software program is based upon the most recent version of the Transportation Research Board Publication Highway Capacity Manual, Fourth Edition, 2010, and is consistent with the Draft Transportation Impact Analysis Report Guidelines (City of Arroyo Grande, 2015). Traffic signal timing information was obtained from Caltrans and is input into the model to accurately represent the existing conditions at the signalized intersections at applicable state facilities. Omni-Means will apply level-of-service (LOS) “C” standard for all scenarios. In addition, seconds of delay will be considered. Significance thresholds for signalized and unsignalized intersections will be evaluated. Should LOS “D” or “E” conditions exist under the "No Project" scenario, any additional delay introduced by the project of more than 7.5 seconds for signalized intersections is considered a significant impact. Likewise, if LOS “F” conditions exist under the “No Project” scenario, any additional delay introduced by the project of 5.0 seconds or more for signalized intersections is considered a significant impact. For unsignalized intersections, the project is considered to have a significant impact if it would go from acceptable to unacceptable LOS conditions, or if it would increase the delay by more than 5.0 seconds at an intersection that is already operating at an unacceptable condition under the “No Project” scenario. 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 4 shows existing intersection lane geometries and control, while Figure 5 shows existing peak hour volumes at the study intersections. Existing AM and PM peak hour intersection traffic operations 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. Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen Transportation Impact Analysis Draft Report Page 10 City of Arroyo Grande R2308TIA002.docx TABLE 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS: INTERSECTION LOS # Intersection Control Type1,2 Target LOS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Warrant Met?3 Delay LOS Warrant Met?3 1 Brisco Rd/W Branch St Signal C 10.5 B No 10.5 B No 2 Brisco Rd/US 101 NB Ramps Signal C 15.4 B No 19.4 B No 3 Brisco Rd/El Camino Real Signal C 28.0 C -- 38.6 D -- 4 El Camino Real/N Halcyon Rd/US 101 SB Ramps Signal C 12.6 B -- 12.5 B -- 5 Faeh Ave/N Halcyon Rd TWSC C 12.6 B No 13.7 B No 6 Faeh Ave/Bell St/El Camino Real TWSC C 4.5 A No 4.6 A No 7 E Grand Ave/Halcyon Rd Signal C 12.3 B -- 12.0 B -- 8 E Grand Ave/El Camino Real TWSC C 91.4 F No 42.2 E No 9 E Grand Ave/US 101 SB Ramps Signal C 10.7 B -- 12.0 B -- 10 E Grand Ave/US 101 NB Ramps Signal C 20.8 C -- 12.5 B -- Notes: 1. TWSC = Two Way Stop Control 2. LOS = Delay based on worst minor street approach for TWSC intersections, average of all approaches for Signal 3. Warrant = Based on California MUTCD Warrant 3 As presented in table 2, all study intersections are currently operating at acceptable LOS with the exception two intersections. The signalized intersection of Brisco Road/El Camino Real is operating at LOS D during the PM peak hour and LOS F and E are occurring at the stop- controlled intersection of E. Grand Avenue/El Camino Real during the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. This is a result of the minor approach (El Camino Real) experiencing long periods of delay waiting for an suitable time to enter into the major traffic flow, i.e., E. Grand Avenue. However, the intersection at E. Grand Avenue/El Camino Real does not currently meet the Peak-Hour Warrant-3 during peak hour conditions. All mitigation measures will be discussed in a subsequent section of this report. Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen Transportation Impact Analysis Draft Report Page 13 City of Arroyo Grande R2308TIA002.docx Project Location and Description The City of Arroyo Grande is located approximately three (3) miles inland from the Central California coastline. Incorporated in 1911, the City contains acres of agriculturally productive land in a valley created by the Arroyo Grande Creek. The City, locally known as one of the “Five Cities”, adjoins Pismo Beach and Grover Beach, and is neighbor to Oceano and Shell Beach. The economy of the Five Cities depends heavily on tourists and retail sales. Many of the residents of Arroyo Grande commute to work in neighboring communities. Others are employed in the service industries of Arroyo Grande, such as retail, education and health care. A small quantity of manufacturing is located within the City. The heart of the City is the Village of Arroyo Grande, a unique section of the community from which the modern City derived its roots. Antique shops, an ice cream parlor, and turn of the century architecture are reminiscent of an earlier age.1 Today, the City of Arroyo Grande has an estimated population of 17,720.2 The term “project,” refers to the development of a 34,625 square feet parcel generally located at the southwest corner of the intersection of El Camino Real/Faeh Avenue/Bell Street as shown on Figure 1. The proposed project is zoned highway mixed-use. The lot coverage is broken down as follows: 3,146 of building area, 7,235 square feet of landscape area, 24,244 of paved area, with 37 parking spaces provided (21 spaces required). Project Site Access According to the Project Site Access, as shown on Figure 6, the proposed project will develop one project driveway on El Camino Real (Driveway #1). This is a 30’ wide driveway that will provide full access into and out of the site. Faeh Avenue is proposed to have two projects driveways, including a 25’ wide full access driveway (Driveway #2) and an exit only driveway (Driveway #3) that is approximately 12’ wide. For purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that approximately one-third of the project trips (i.e., drive-thru patrons) will exit on Driveway #3. Additionally, Driveways #1 and #2 appear to have adequate throat depth based upon geometrics identified in the Site Plan. 1 City of Arroyo Grande Community Profile, City of Arroyo Grande, 2015 2 California Department of Finance, May 1, 2017 Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen Transportation Impact Analysis Draft Report Page 14 City of Arroyo Grande R2308TIA002.docx Figure 6 - Project Site Access Project Trip Generation For this TIAR, project related impacts are evaluated for weekday conditions therefore weekday peak hour trip rates for the proposed project are provided in Table 3. Table 3 summarizes the estimated trip generation of the project’s land-uses based upon data presented in ITE Trip Generation (9th Edition). Specifically, the proposed project was evaluated using ITE Code 934, which is described as fast food restaurant with drive-thru. Trip reductions were also applied and are further discussed in this section. As shown in Table 3, the project is anticipated to generate 74 net AM peak hour trips (38 in and 36 out) and 53 net PM peak hour trips (28 in and 26 out). Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen Transportation Impact Analysis Draft Report Page 15 City of Arroyo Grande R2308TIA002.docx TABLE 3 WEEKDAY PROJECT TRIP GENERATION Land Use Category (ITE Code) Unit1 AM Peak Hour Trip Rate/Unit PM Peak Hour Trip Rate/Unit Total In % Out % Total In % Out % Fast Food with Drive-Thru (934) ksf 45.42 51% 49% 32.65 52% 48% Project Name Quantity (Units) AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips Total In Out Total In Out Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen 3.2 145 74 71 104 54 50 Diverted Link Pass-by Reduction 49% (71) (36) (35) (51) (27) (25) Net New Project Trips 74 38 36 53 28 26 Notes: 1. 1 ksf = 1,000 square feet 2. Trip rates based on ITE Trip Generation Manual 9th edition average rates 3. Diverted Link Pass-by Reduction is derived by ITE Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition, Tables F.31 & F.32 Pass-by and Non-Pass-by Trips Weekday, AM & PM Peak Period, Land Use Code 934 - Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Through Window. It should be noted that the project driveways used the actual trips, not the “Net New Project Trips” as shown in Table 3. Therefore, 145 AM and 53 PM peak hour trips were analyzed at the three project driveways. Trip Reductions In developing traffic and transportation impact analyses for urban and suburban infill projects, professionals have often relied on ITE published trip generation rates for various types of land use. The ITE data, however, are predominantly representative of suburban contexts and their automobile-dependent land use patterns and transportation networks and typically do not take into account variations in type and location (suburban versus urban) of proposed land uses, proximity of transit service and existence of pedestrian and bicycle facilities. The common use of suburban-focused vehicular trip generation data in the preparation of TIAs, combined with a lack of information and techniques on how and when to adjust the data, has often resulted in an application of conventional trip generation rates to proposed infill development, even in places that are compact, highly walkable and transit-rich.3 This use of conventional data can over-predict vehicular traffic impacts, resulting in possible mitigations that negatively affect use of transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities in the infill project area. Inaccurate data may also result in excessive traffic mitigation fees or requirements for additional infrastructure that can hinder the type of development that promotes lower automobile use.4 3 Trip Generation Rates for Transportation Impact Analyses for Infill Development – NCHRP Report 758 (2013). 4 Ibid. Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen Transportation Impact Analysis Draft Report Page 16 City of Arroyo Grande R2308TIA002.docx Pass-by/Diverted Linked Trips According to the ITE Trip Generation Handbook (3rd Edition), “pass-by trips” are made as intermediate stops on the way from an origin to a primary trip destination without a route diversion. Pass-by trips are attracted from traffic passing the site on an adjacent street or roadway that offers direct access to the generator. Further, pass-by trips do not involve a route diversion to enter the site driveway. “Diverted linked trips,” on the other hand, are trips that are attracted from the traffic volume on roadways within the vicinity of the generator but require a diversion from a nearby roadway to gain access to the site. For this proposed project, diverted link pass by trips are directly attributable to location of the project and its proximity to US 101, a major regional route. It is assumed that approximately 49% of the restaurant trips that will enter/exit the project will be passing through on the freeway and/or nearby arterials, and will access the site. Diverted link pass by reduction data is not documented in the Institute of Transportation Engineer’s Trip Generation Handbook (3rd Edition); therefore, available pass-by data in the Handbook was used for this analysis to represent diverted link pass by reductions. For land use 934, fast-food restaurant with drive-through window, a diverted link pass-by reduction of 49% will be applied. This data is documented in the Handbook under Tables F.31 & F.32 Pass-by and Non-Pass-by Trips Weekday, AM & PM Peak Period, Land Use Code 934 - Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Through Window. Project Trip Nature, Distribution, and Assignment The project is expected to “generate” and “attract” trips throughout the City and from other locations throughout the area. Directional trip distribution for project generated trips was estimated based upon existing traffic flow patterns, geographic location of the project site, and location of other similar destinations. This resulted in a distribution of all project trips throughout the study area that is illustrated in Figure 7 and is summarized below:  40% to/from US 101 SB Ramps  25% to/from US 101 NB Ramps via E. Grand Avenue  15% to/from Brisco Road/El Camino Real  10% to/from E. Grand Avenue w/o Halcyon Road  10% to/from Halcyon Road s/o E. Grand Avenue Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen Transportation Impact Analysis Draft Report Page 17 City of Arroyo Grande R2308TIA002.docx Figure 7 - Project Trip Distribution Existing plus Approved/Pending Projects Short Term (Approved/Pending) Projects Trip Generation Based upon the City’s Draft Transportation Impact Analysis Report Guidelines, short term conditions analysis represents a near-term future analysis scenario in which approved/pending development projects and transportation system improvements are assumed to be constructed. This scenario is representative of conditions in the foreseeable future, typically within the next 5 to 10 years. For reference purposes, Figure 8 identifies General Plan land uses within the vicinity of the proposed project, including the mixed use designation at the subject property. Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen Transportation Impact Analysis Draft Report Page 18 City of Arroyo Grande R2308TIA002.docx Figure 8 - General Plan Land Uses For the Popeye’s Louisiana Kitchen TIAR, several projects within the project vicinity are proposed. These include projects that are generally located north and south of the US 101 freeway. Table 4 represents a partial list of approved/pending projects that was provided by the City of Arroyo Grande. Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen Transportation Impact Analysis Draft Report Page 19 City of Arroyo Grande R2308TIA002.docx TABLE 4 APPROVED/PENDING PROJECTS City of Arroyo Grande - Approved/Pending Projects # Location Description Status 1 Grace Lane 15 single-family homes and 4 apartments Under Construction 2 250 Ridgeview Way 3 residential lots Under Construction 3 415 East Branch Street 24 townhouses and 13,000 SF retail/office building on 2.78 acres Approved 4 May Street 7 residential lots Approved 5 Corbett Canyon 11 residential lots Pending 6 Pearwood Avenue 8 residential lots Approved 7 Huasna Road 12 residential lots Under Construction 8 East Cherry Avenue 28 single-family homes Under Construction 9 E. Cherry Avenue and Traffic Way 58 new residences, cultural center, unknown commercial dev. Approved 10 NWC Fair Oaks Avenue/Woodland Drive 44,926 square foot medical office building Approved As identified in Table 4, 10 projects within the vicinity of the project have been identified. These include 8 residential projects and two non-residential projects. Table 5 identifies the estimated weekday daily and peak hour trip generation for the approved/pending projects within the vicinity of the project. Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen Transportation Impact Analysis Draft Report Page 20 City of Arroyo Grande R2308TIA002.docx TABLE 5 APPROVED/PENDING PROJECTS TRIP GENERATION Land Use Category Unit Daily Trip Rate/Unit Weekday AM Peak Hour Rate/Unit Weekday PM Peak Hour Rate/Unit Total In % Out % Total In % Out % Single Family Dwelling Units SFDU 9.52 0.75 25% 75% 1.0 63% 37% Multi-Family Dwelling Units MFDU 6.65 0.51 20% 80% 0.62 65% 35% Townhouses/Condos DU 5.81 0.44 17% 83% 0.52 67% 33% Retail/Office Building 1,000 sf 44.32 6.84 48% 52% 2.71 44% 66% Medical Office1 1,000 sf 36.13 2.39 79% 21% 3.57 28% 72% Description Quantity Daily Trips Weekday AM Peak Hour Trips Weekday PM Peak Hour Trips Total In Out Total In Out Single Family Detached Housing [ITE Code: 210] 138 1,314 104 26 78 138 87 51 Apartment [ITE Code: 220] 4 27 2 1 1 2 1 1 Residential Condominiums/ Townhouse [ITE Code: 203] 24 139 11 2 9 15 10 5 Specialty Retail Center [ITE Code: 826] 13 576 89 43 46 35 15 20 Medical-Dental Office Building [ITE Code: 720] 14.96 541 36 28 8 53 15 38 Project Trips 2,597 242 100 142 243 128 115 Trip Reduction (10%)1 (112) (13) (7) (5) (9) (3) (6) Total Project Trips 2,485 229 93 137 234 125 109 1 Assumes 10% Internal Capture Rate for Specialty Retail Center and Medical-Dental Office. Errors due to rounding may occur. As shown in Table 5, it is estimated that 2,485 daily trips will be generated, including 229 during the AM peak hour and 234 during the PM peak hour. As also indicated in the table, an internal capture rate of 10% was applied for specialty retail center and medical-dental office land uses. The distribution of the identified approved/pending projects’ trip generation was determined by use of the recently prepared traffic impact studies, existing traffic flow patterns, geographic location of the project sites, and location of other similar destinations. Existing plus Approved/Pending Projects conditions were then developed by superimposing the projected AM and PM peak hour trips shown in Table 5 onto the existing traffic volumes provided on Figure 5 (previously shown) with the resulting Existing plus Approved/Pending Projects traffic volumes are presented on Figure 9. Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen Transportation Impact Analysis Draft Report Page 22 City of Arroyo Grande R2308TIA002.docx Based on the peak hour volumes shown on Figure 9, intersection analysis was then performed assuming the existing intersection lane geometrics and control types (Figure 4). Table 6 presents the results of the Existing plus Approved/Pending Projects conditions analysis. TABLE 6 EXISTING PLUS APPROVED/PENDING PROJECTS CONDITIONS: INTERSECTION LOS # Intersection Control Type1,2 Target LOS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Warrant Met?3 Delay LOS Warrant Met?3 1 Brisco Rd/W Branch St Signal C 10.6 B -- 10.5 B -- 2 Brisco Rd/US 101 NB Ramps Signal C 15.4 B -- 19.4 B -- 3 Brisco Rd/El Camino Real Signal C 28.0 C -- 38.8 D -- 4 El Camino Real/N Halcyon Rd/US 101 SB Ramps Signal C 12.7 B -- 12.5 B -- 5 Faeh Ave/N Halcyon Rd TWSC C 12.7 B No 13.8 B No 6 Faeh Ave/Bell St/El Camino Real TWSC C 5.0 A No 5.1 A No 7 E Grand Ave/Halcyon Rd Signal C 12.3 B -- 12.1 B -- 8 E Grand Ave/El Camino Real TWSC C 95.0 F No 43.0 E No 9 E Grand Ave/US 101 SB Ramps Signal C 10.8 B -- 12.1 B -- 10 E Grand Ave/US 101 NB Ramps Signal C 21.3 C -- 12.7 B -- Notes: 1. TWSC = Two Way Stop Control 2. LOS = Delay based on worst minor street approach for TWSC intersections, average of all approaches for Signal 3. Warrant = Based on California MUTCD Warrant 3 As presented in Table 6, eight (8) of the study intersections are projected to operate acceptably under Existing plus Approved/Pending Projects conditions. Intersection #3, Brisco Road/El Camino Real, is expected to operate at LOS D during the PM peak period. Also, the unsignalized intersection at E. Grand Avenue/El Camino Real is forecasted to continue to operate at LOS F and E during the AM and PM peak hours, respectively, without meeting the Peak-Hour Warrant-3 during peak hour conditions. This is a result of the minor approach (El Camino Real) experiencing long periods of delay waiting for the critical gap to enter into the major traffic flow (E. Grand Avenue). All mitigation measures will be discussed in a subsequent section of this report. Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen Transportation Impact Analysis Draft Report Page 23 City of Arroyo Grande R2308TIA002.docx Existing plus Approved/Pending Projects plus Project Existing plus Approved/Pending Projects plus Project conditions were developed by superimposing proposed AM and PM peak hour project-generated trips (Table 3) using the proposed project trip distribution (Figure 7) onto existing traffic volumes (Figure 5). The resulting Existing plus Approved/Pending Projects plus Project traffic volumes are presented in Figure 10. Intersection analysis was performed assuming the existing intersection lane geometrics and control types (Figure 4). Table 7 presents the results of the Existing plus Approved/Pending Projects plus Project conditions analysis. TABLE 7 EXISTING PLUS APPROVED/PENDING PROJECTS PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS: INTERSECTION LOS # Intersection Control Type1,2 Target LOS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Warrant Met?3 Delay LOS Warrant Met?3 1 Brisco Rd/W Branch St Signal C 10.6 B -- 10.5 B -- 2 Brisco Rd/US 101 NB Ramps Signal C 15.6 B -- 20.2 C -- 3 Brisco Rd/El Camino Real Signal C 28.2 C -- 40.6 D -- 4 El Camino Real/N Halcyon Rd/US 101 SB Ramps Signal C 12.8 B -- 12.6 B -- 5 Faeh Ave/N Halcyon Rd TWSC C 12.9 B No 13.2 B No 6 Faeh Ave/Bell St/El Camino Real TWSC C 5.3 A No 5.8 A No 7 E Grand Ave/Halcyon Rd Signal C 12.4 B -- 12.1 B -- 8 E Grand Ave/El Camino Real TWSC C 133.6 F No 49.1 E No 9 E Grand Ave/US 101 SB Ramps Signal C 10.8 B -- 12.1 B -- 10 E Grand Ave/US 101 NB Ramps Signal C 21.8 C -- 12.9 B -- 11 Driveway #1/El Camino Real TWSC C 1.4 A No 0.9 A No 12 Driveway #2/Faeh Avenue TWSC C 5.2 A No 5.1 A No 13 Driveway #3/Faeh Avenue TWSC C 8.5 A No 8.5 A No Notes: 1. TWSC = Two Way Stop Control 2. LOS = Delay based on worst minor street approach for TWSC intersections, average of all approaches for Signal 3. Warrant = Based on California MUTCD Warrant 3 As identified in Table 7, all study intersections are forecasted to operate acceptably under Existing plus Approved/Pending Projects plus Project conditions with the exception of two intersections. Brisco Road/El Camino Real is projected to operate at LOS D conditions (40.6 seconds delay) during the PM peak hour. Based upon significance thresholds for mitigation for signalized intersections at LOS D condition under “No Project”, which has a delay of 43 seconds, the project impact is not significant, i.e., less than 7.5 seconds delay. In contrast, a significant project-related impact is expected at the unsignalized intersection of E. Grand Avenue/El Camino Real where LOS is forecasted to be F during the AM peak hour and E during the PM peak hour. This is a result of the minor approach (El Camino Real) experiencing long periods of delay waiting for an acceptable time to enter into the major traffic flow (E. Grand Avenue). Nonetheless, this intersection is not forecasted to meet the Peak-Hour Warrant-3 during AM or PM peak hour conditions. All mitigation measures will be discussed in a subsequent section of this report. Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen Transportation Impact Analysis Draft Report Page 25 City of Arroyo Grande R2308TIA002.docx Cumulative Conditions Cumulative conditions refer to an analysis scenario approximately 20 years in the future. Cumulative conditions were analyzed by deriving traffic volume forecasts using the City of Arroyo Grande Travel Demand Model and the San Luis Obispo Regional Travel Demand Forecast Model, assuming full build-out of the City's General Plan land uses and circulation network. Omni-Means used the Models’ 2010 (Base) and 2035 (Cumulative) traffic forecasts to identify the incremental change in traffic volumes by approach and applied the factor to known traffic counts to predict 2035 traffic volumes. The count delta method forecasts adjustment is based upon the difference of recent counts from interpolation resulting from base and forecast year. Following this process, Omni-Means checked the forecasted turning movements for reasonableness and made adjustments where necessary. Cumulative No Project conditions will assume that the proposed project site is developed consistent with the existing General Plan land use designation. Previously shown on Figure 8, the ‘mixed use’ land use is consistent with planned development of restaurant uses. Cumulative plus Project conditions were developed by using existing General Plan land uses on the proposed project site and adding proposed project land use as shown in the Site Plan. Cumulative No Project Traffic Volumes The Travel Demand Models were 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 4. Figure 11 shows Cumulative No Project peak hour traffic volumes at study intersections. Table 8 shows the peak hour intersections level of service operations at study locations under Cumulative No Project conditions. TABLE 8 CUMULATIVE NO PROJECT CONDITIONS: INTERSECTION LOS # Intersection Control Type1,2 Target LOS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Warrant Met?3 Delay LOS Warrant Met?3 1 Brisco Rd/W Branch St Signal C 10.9 B - 12.2 B - 2 Brisco Rd/US 101 NB Ramps Signal C 21.5 C - 46.7 D - 3 Brisco Rd/El Camino Real Signal C 33.1 C - 112.1 F - 4 El Camino Real/N Halcyon Rd/US 101 SB Ramps Signal C 13.5 B - 14.6 B - 5 Faeh Ave/N Halcyon Rd TWSC C 12.9 B No 15.2 C No 6 Faeh Ave/Bell St/El Camino Real TWSC C 4.8 A No 4.8 A No 7 E Grand Ave/Halcyon Rd Signal C 12.8 B - 13.9 B - 8 E Grand Ave/El Camino Real TWSC C 130.2 F No 221.4 F Yes 9 E Grand Ave/US 101 SB Ramps Signal C 12.3 B - 18.6 B - 10 E Grand Ave/US 101 NB Ramps Signal C 21.2 C - 15.7 B - Notes: 1. TWSC = Two Way Stop Control 2. LOS = Delay based on worst minor street approach for TWSC intersections, average of all approaches for Signal 3. Warrant = Based on California MUTCD Warrant 3 Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen Transportation Impact Analysis Draft Report Page 27 City of Arroyo Grande R2308TIA002.docx As presented in Table 8, three (3) intersections are forecasted to operate at unacceptable LOS in Cumulative No Project conditions. These failing intersections include Brisco Road/US 101 NB Ramps, Brisco Road/El Camino Real, and E Grand Avenue/El Camino Real. The intersection at E. Grand Avenue/El Camino Real is anticipated to meet the Peak-Hour Warrant-3 under PM peak hour conditions for the Cumulative No Project scenario. This is a result of expectation of the minor approach (El Camino Real) experiencing long periods of delay while waiting for an suitable time to enter into the major traffic flow (E. Grand Avenue). Recommended improvements to mitigate these deficiencies are proposed in the concluding section of this report. Cumulative plus Project Cumulative plus Project traffic volumes were derived from adding project trips (Table 3) to Cumulative No Project volumes (Figure 6). Future lane geometrics are the same as the existing intersection lane geometries and control as shown in Figure 4. Figure 12 shows Cumulative plus Project peak hour traffic volumes at study intersections. Table 9 shows the peak hour intersections LOS operations at study locations under Cumulative plus Project conditions. TABLE 9 CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS: INTERSECTION LOS # Intersection Control Type1,2 Target LOS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Warrant Met?3 Delay LOS Warrant Met?3 1 Brisco Rd/W Branch St Signal C 10.9 B -- 12.2 C -- 2 Brisco Rd/US 101 NB Ramps Signal C 21.9 C -- 46.7 D -- 3 Brisco Rd/El Camino Real Signal C 32.7 C -- 115.3 F -- 4 El Camino Real/N Halcyon Rd/US 101 SB Ramps Signal C 13.7 B -- 14.8 B -- 5 Faeh Ave/N Halcyon Rd TWSC C 13.3 B No 15.3 B No 6 Faeh Ave/Bell St/El Camino Real TWSC C 5.6 A No 4.9 A No 7 E Grand Ave/Halcyon Rd Signal C 12.8 B -- 13.9 B -- 8 E Grand Ave/El Camino Real TWSC C 169.8 F No 276.5 F Yes 9 E Grand Ave/US 101 SB Ramps Signal C 12.3 B -- 18.6 B -- 10 E Grand Ave/US 101 NB Ramps Signal C 21.6 C -- 15.9 B -- 11 Driveway #1/El Camino Real TWSC C 1.4 A No 0.9 A No 12 Driveway #2/Faeh Avenue TWSC C 5.2 A No 5.1 A No 13 Driveway #3/Faeh Avenue TWSC C 8.5 A No 8.5 A No Notes: 1. TWSC = Two Way Stop Control 2. LOS = Delay based on worst minor street approach for TWSC intersections, average of all approaches for Signal 3. Warrant = Based on California MUTCD Warrant 3 As shown in Table 9, three (3) intersections are projected to operate at unacceptable LOS during the AM and/or PM peak hour periods during the Cumulative plus Project conditions. Additionally, intersection at E. Grand Avenue/El Camino Real is expected to meet the Peak- Hour Warrant-3 under PM peak hour conditions. This is a result of the minor approach (El Camino Real) forecasted to experience long periods of delay waiting for an acceptable time to enter into the major traffic flow (E. Grand Avenue). All mitigation measures will be discussed in a subsequent section of this report. Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen Transportation Impact Analysis Draft Report Page 29 City of Arroyo Grande R2308TIA002.docx Freeway Ramp Conditions – Existing and Cumulative Conditions For this study, a merge/diverge analysis was performed on intersection #2 northbound off-ramp State Route 101/Brisco Avenue and a weaving analysis was conducted on the freeway segment from the on-ramp at Halcyon road to the off-ramp at E. Grand Avenue. Freeway segment and ramp volumes utilized information found on the Caltrans website and previous traffic studies. Density (passenger cars per mile per lane) was evaluated using Highway Capacity Software (HCS) version 2010. Table 10 identifies existing and forecasted density and LOS for intersection #2 and Table 11 identifies existing and forecasted density and LOS for the weaving segment analysis as identified above. TABLE 10 EXISTING & CUMULATIVE WITH AND WITHOUT PROJECT SCENARIOS: FREEWAY RAMP CONDITIONS Existing Existing + A/P Projects Existing + A/P + Project Cumulative Cumulative + Project Interchange Movements Target LOS Junction Type Density (pc/mi/ln)LOS Density (pc/mi/ln)LOS Density (pc/mi/ln)LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln)LOS US 101 NB Ramps @ Brisco Road NB Onramp C Merge 21.7 C 21.7 C 21.7 C 25.6 C 25.7 C NB Offramp C Diverge 18.2 B 18.2 B 18.2 B 21.8 C 21.8 C Note: Represents Peak Hour Analysis As shown in Table 10, all of the merge/diverge segments at northbound off-ramp US 101/Brisco Road and southbound off-ramp US 101 at Halcyon Road are either operating at or are expected to operate at acceptable LOS under the study scenarios. TABLE 11 EXISTING & CUMULATIVE WITH AND WITHOUT PROJECT SCENARIOS: FREEWAY RAMP SEGMENT WEAVING CONDITIONS Existing Existing + A/P Projects Existing + A/P + Project Cumulative Cumulative + Project Freeway/Freeway Segment Target LOS Junction Type Density (pc/mi/ln)LOS Density (pc/mi/ln)LOS Density (pc/mi/ln)LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln)LOS US 101 SB/ Halcyon Rd to Grand Ave SB Onramp C Weaving 25.0 C 25.1 C 25.1 C 26.9 C 27.0 C SB Offramp C Diverge 26.9 C 26.9 C 26.9 C 27.8 C 27.8 C As shown in Table 11, the weaving segment on southbound US 101 from the on-ramp at Halcyon Road to the off-ramp at E. Grand Avenue is either operating at or expected to operate at acceptable LOS under these study scenarios. The southbound off-ramp is anticipated to continue to operate at acceptable LOS C conditions. Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen Transportation Impact Analysis Draft Report Page 30 City of Arroyo Grande R2308TIA002.docx Recommended Mitigation Measures This section presents recommended mitigation measures at the study intersections and based upon the results of the analysis presented in this report. Two (2) of the study intersections, Brisco Road/El Camino Real and Brisco Road/US 101 NB Ramps, are currently and/or are expected to operate at LOS D or worse conditions with or without the project. Both of these study intersections are located in an area designated for future improvements within the City. The City Arroyo Grande is currently evaluating improvement alternatives to the Brisco Road / Halcyon Road / US 101 interchange. An alternative under consideration includes closure of the northbound on and off ramps at Brisco Road and improvements to the adjacent interchanges at E. Grand Avenue and Camino Mercado provide additional capacity in support of anticipated redirected traffic volumes. Another alterative under consideration is to relocate the NB ramps to intersect W. Branch Street at Rodeo Drive and installing a roundabout. An Administrative Draft Project Report is currently being reviewed by Caltrans as part of the environmental review process. Although it is unknown at this time which alternative will be selected and which improvement(s) will be planned, it is clear that this project will add trips to these intersections. As such, pro-rata shares have been calculated to assist in determining the projects contribution of trips to these intersections. All of the study intersections with project are projected to operate at acceptable LOS conditions through the Year 2035 with implementation of the recommended improvements and mitigation measures identified below. Existing plus Approved/Pending Projects plus Project Conditions Under “Existing plus Approved/Pending Projects plus Project”, the following intersections operate at unacceptable LOS “D” or worse conditions: Brisco Road/El Camino Real [#3] intersection: This intersection is expected to operate at LOS “D” conditions under “Existing plus Approved/Pending Projects plus Project” PM peak hour conditions. The project does not create a significant impact at this intersection because the overall delay at this intersection, when compared to “Existing” conditions increases by 1.8 seconds, which falls within the LOS criteria established by the City. However, the project does contribute trips to this intersection and a pro-rata share has been developed for future improvements. E. Grand Avenue/El Camino Real [#8] intersection: This intersection is forecasted to operate at unacceptable LOS “F/E” conditions during the AM/PM peak hour periods, respectively. This is a result of anticipated long periods of delay by the minor approach (El Camino Real) waiting at the stop sign to enter into the traffic flow on the major approach (E. Grand Avenue). Based on the significance factor established by the City, the project has a significant impact at this intersection. However, this intersection does not currently meet the Peak-Hour Warrant-3 standard during peak hour conditions. This is because the minor traffic approach on El Camino Real does not exceed 100 peak hour trips. Year 2035 Base plus Project Conditions Under “Year 2035 Base plus Project” conditions, the following intersections operate at unacceptable LOS “D” or worse conditions: Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen Transportation Impact Analysis Draft Report Page 31 City of Arroyo Grande R2308TIA002.docx Brisco Road/US 101 Northbound Ramps [#2] intersection: This intersection is forecasted to operate at LOS “D” conditions under the “Year 2035 Base plus Project” scenario. Although the project does not create a significant impact at this intersection based upon the City’s significance threshold, this is a state facility and the City’s level of significance criteria does not apply. However, the project does contribute trips to this intersection and a pro-rata share has been developed for future improvements. Brisco Road/El Camino Real [#3] intersection: This intersection is forecasted to operate at LOS “F” conditions under the “Year 2035 Base plus Project” scenario. The project does not create a significant impact at this intersection because the overall delay at this intersection under plus project conditions, when compared to base conditions, does not increase by more than 5.0 seconds (for LOS F), which falls within the level of significance criteria established by the City. Regardless, the project does affect future intersection operations and a pro-rata share has been established for future improvements. E. Grand Avenue/El Camino Real [#8] intersection: This intersection is forecasted to operate at LOS “F” conditions and meets the Peak-Hour Warrant-3 standard during the PM peak hour. Therefore, a traffic signal is recommended to be installed at this location. This intersection is listed in the Draft Arroyo Grande 2016 Transportation Impact Fee Update as a future intersection improvement. However, potential access issues need to be considered. As a result, Omni-Means conducted a queuing analysis between this intersection and the existing signalized intersection at E. Grand Avenue/US 101 Southbound Ramps under “2035 Base plus Project” PM peak hour conditions. Table 12 provides vehicle queues by approach and by approach movement at intersection #8, E. Grand Avenue/El Camino Real and intersection #9, E. Grand Avenue/US 101 SB Ramps with the results shown below. As indicated in Table 12, the available storage is forecasted to accommodate the 95th percentile queue storage requirements for all critical intersection movements between the two study intersections. Other access considerations are related to the existing driveway located along the north side of E. Grand Avenue between El Camino Real and US 101 Southbound Ramps, which is a convenience store. This project driveway is located approximately 120 feet west of the US 101 SB Ramps, which does not meet the Caltrans minimum distance between ramp intersections and local road intersections of 400 feet, according to the Highway Design Manual (Chapter 500). Therefore, the City and/or Caltrans may consider limiting access to a right-turn only driveway on E. Grand Avenue at this location (convenience store driveway). Access for southbound vehicles exiting the site would be redirected to the existing convenience store driveway on El Camino Real. A pro-rata share has been calculated for improvements related to installation of a traffic signal, signing and striping. Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen Transportation Impact Analysis Draft Report Page 32 City of Arroyo Grande R2308TIA002.docx TABLE 12 YEAR 2035 BASE PLUS PROJECT PM PEAK HOUR QUEUING ANALYSIS: E. GRAND AVENUE BETWEEN EL CAMINO REAL & US 101 SB RAMPS Int. # Queue Segment - Direction # Lanes Available Storage (Ft.) AM Peak Hour 95th % Queue PM Peak Hour 95th % Queue 8 E. Grand Avenue/El Camino Real Eastbound Left 1 80 62 64 Eastbound Thru 1 > 500 313 327 Eastbound Thru/Right 1 > 500 200 335 Westbound Thru 1 300 236 292 Westbound Thru/Right 1 300 212 252 Westbound Left 1 75 27 -- Northbound Left/Thru/Right 1 -- -- 29 Southbound Left/Thru/Right 1 -- 65 92 9 E. Grand Avenue/US 101 SB Ramps Eastbound Thru 1 485 145 323 Eastbound Thru/Right 1 485 165 334 Westbound Thru 2 610 253 164 Westbound Left 1 170 86 134 Southbound Left 1 > 500 129 196 Southbound Right 1 > 500 42 39 Pro Rata Share Calculations Table 13 includes a worksheet that identifies the pro-rata share calculations (Weekday PM Peak Hour Pro-Rata Share Calculations) as documented in the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies (December 2002). The method for calculating equitable mitigation measures is as follows: P=T/(TB - TE ) Where: P = The equitable share for the proposed project’s traffic impact. T = The vehicle trips generated by the project during the peak hour of adjacent State highway facility in vehicles per hour (vph). TB = The forecasted traffic volume on a impacted State highway facility at the time of general plan build-out (e.g., 20 year model or the furthest future model date feasible), vph. TE = The traffic volume existing on the impacted State highway facility plus other approved projects that will generate traffic that has yet to be constructed/opened, vph. Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen Transportation Impact Analysis Draft Report Page 33 City of Arroyo Grande R2308TIA002.docx TABLE 13 PRO RATA SHARE CALCULATIONS Intersection Existing + A/P Projects (TE) 2035 General Plan Buildout (TB) Project Only (T) Pro Rata % (P) Brisco Road/US 101 NB Ramps [#2] 1,408 1,711 11 3.63% Brisco Road/El Camino Real [#3] 1,661 2,042 19 4.99% E. Grand Avenue/El Camino Real [#8] 1,659 1,963 13 4.28% As shown in Pro-Rata Share Calculations, the proposed project will generate a portion of PM peak hour trips that will contribute to the deficiencies identified in this report. The spreadsheet further breaks down pro-rata share percentages for each intersection. According to the methodology described in the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies, Table 13 is neither intended as, nor does it establish a legal standard for determining equitable responsibility and cost of the project’s traffic impact; the intent is to provide: 1. A starting point for early discussions to address traffic mitigation equitably; 2. A means for calculating the equitable share for mitigating traffic impacts; and 3. A means for establishing rough proportionality [Dolan vs. City of Tigard, 1994, 512 U.S. 374 (114 S. Ct. 2309)]. Appendix 1. Project Site Plan 2. Level of Service Worksheets 3. Peak-Hour Warrant-3 Worksheets 4. AM & PM Peak Hour Traffic Counts INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 1 of 45 INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Conditional Use Permit 16-008 Lot Merger 16-001 727 El Camino Real October 2017 ATTACHMENT 6 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 2 of 45 Project: Conditional Use Permit 16-008 & Lot Merger 16-001 Lead Agency: City of Arroyo Grande Document Availability: 1. City of Arroyo Grande Community Development Department 300 East Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 2. http://www.arroyogrande.org/ Project Description: The proposed project involves the merger of ten (10) underlying lots for the development of an approximately 3,150 square foot fast-food restaurant with a drive-thru (Popeye’s Louisiana Kitchen), and associated improvements on an approximately 34,625 square foot parcel in the Highway Mixed Use zoning district. Summary Document Preparation: Pursuant to Section 21082.1 of the California Environmental Quality Act, the City of Arroyo Grande (the City) has independently reviewed and analyzed the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed project and finds that these documents reflect the independent judgment of the City. The City, as lead agency, also confirms that the project mitigation measures detailed in these documents are feasible and will be implemented as stated in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. _________________________________ _____ __________________ Teresa McClish, AICP Date Community Development Director _________________________________ ____________ Matthew Downing, AICP Date Planning Manager INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 3 of 45 Table of Contents: 1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 5 Introduction and Regulatory Guidance..................................................................................................... 5 Lead Agency .............................................................................................................................................. 5 Purpose and Document Organization ....................................................................................................... 5 Summary of Findings................................................................................................................................. 6 Revisions ................................................................................................................................................... 6 2. Project Description .................................................................................................................................... 7 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 7 Project Location ........................................................................................................................................ 7 Background and Need for Project ............................................................................................................. 7 Project Description.................................................................................................................................... 8 Required Public Agency Approvals ........................................................................................................... 8 Related Projects ........................................................................................................................................ 8 3. Environmental Checklist ........................................................................................................................... 9 Project Information ................................................................................................................................... 9 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ........................................................................................... 10 Determination ......................................................................................................................................... 10 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ..................................................................................................... 11 4. Environmental Issues .............................................................................................................................. 12 I. Aesthetics ............................................................................................................................................. 12 II. Agriculture and Forestry Resources .................................................................................................... 13 III. Air Quality .......................................................................................................................................... 14 IV. Biological Resources .......................................................................................................................... 18 V. Cultural Resources .............................................................................................................................. 18 VI. Geology and Soils ............................................................................................................................... 20 VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions ............................................................................................................... 21 VIII Hazards and Hazardous Materials .................................................................................................... 24 IX Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................................................................................. 25 X. Land Use and Planning ........................................................................................................................ 28 XI. Mineral Resources ............................................................................................................................. 28 XII. Noise ................................................................................................................................................. 29 XIII. Population and Housing ................................................................................................................... 30 XIV. Public Services ................................................................................................................................. 31 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 4 of 45 XV. Recreation ......................................................................................................................................... 31 XVI. Transportation/Traffic ..................................................................................................................... 32 XVII. Tribal Cultural Resources ................................................................................................................ 34 XVIII. Utilities and Service Systems ......................................................................................................... 35 5. Mandatory Findings of Significance ........................................................................................................ 37 6. Summary of Mitigation Measures .......................................................................................................... 38 7. References .............................................................................................................................................. 44 Documents & Maps ................................................................................................................................ 45 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 5 of 45 1. Introduction Introduction and Regulatory Guidance The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) has been prepared by the City of Arroyo Grande (the City) to evaluate the potential environmental effects of the proposed project. This document has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code §21000 et seq., and the State CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations (CCR) §15000 et seq. An Initial Study is conducted by a lead agency to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment [CEQA Guidelines §15063(a)]. If there is substantial evidence that a project may have a significant effect on the environment, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) must be prepared, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines §15064(a). However, if the lead agency determines that revisions in the project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant mitigate the potentially significant effects to a less-than-significant level, a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be prepared instead of an EIR [CEQA Guidelines §15070(b)]. The lead agency prepares a written statement describing the reasons a proposed project would not have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, why an EIR need not be prepared. This IS/MND conforms to the content requirements under CEQA Guidelines §15071. Lead Agency The lead agency is the public agency with primary approval authority over the proposed project. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines §15051(b)(1), "the lead agency will normally be an agency with general governmental powers, such as a city or county, rather than an agency with a single or limited purpose." The lead agency for the proposed project is the City of Arroyo Grande. The contact person for the lead agency is: Matthew Downing, AICP Planning Manager City of Arroyo Grande 300 E. Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 T: (805) 473-5420 E: mdowning@arroyogrande.org Purpose and Document Organization The purpose of this document is to evaluate the potential environmental effects of the proposed project. Mitigation measures have been identified and incorporated into the project to eliminate any potentially significant impacts or reduce them to a less-than-significant level. This document is organized as follows: 1. Introduction This chapter provides an introduction to the project and describes the purpose and organization of this document. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 6 of 45 2. Project Description This chapter describes the background and scope of the project, scope of the project, all proposed project components, and identifies project objectives. 3. Environmental Checklist This chapter summarizes the project and the environmental issues to be considered, and describes the process for evaluation of environmental impacts. 4. Environmental Setting, Potential Impacts and Mitigation Measures This chapter explains the environmental setting for each environmental issue area, identifies the significance of potential environmental impacts, 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. 5. Mandatory Findings of Significance This chapter identifies and summarizes the overall significance of any potential impacts to natural and cultural resources, cumulative impacts, and impact to humans, as identified in the Initial Study. 6. Summary of Mitigation Measures This chapter summarizes the mitigation measures incorporated into the project as a result of the Initial Study. 7. References This chapter identifies the references and sources used in the preparation of this IS/MND. It also provides a list of those involved in the preparation of this document. Summary of Findings Section 3 of this document contains the Environmental (Initial Study) Checklist that identifies the potential environmental impacts (by environmental issue) and a brief discussion of each impact resulting from implementation of the proposed project. In accordance with §15064(f) of the CEQA Guidelines, a Mitigated Negative Declaration shall be prepared if the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment after the inclusion of mitigation measures in the project. Based on the available project information and the environmental analysis presented in this document, there is no substantial evidence that, after the incorporation of mitigation measures, the proposed project would have a significant effect on the environment. It is proposed that a Mitigated Negative Declaration be adopted in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines. Revisions None. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 7 of 45 2. 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 El Camino Real, at the northwest corner of the El Camino Real, Faeh Avenue, and Bell Street intersection. The project site consists of ten (10) lots totaling approximately 34,625 square feet. These lots are proposed to be merged into a single parcel to accommodate the project. The site is surrounded on all sides by existing development: single-family residential to the south, commercial development to the west and north, and US Highway 101 to the east. Project Location The project site is located within the City of Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo County, California. The project site is bounded by El Camino Real to the east and Faeh Avenue to the south as shown in the map below. Background and Need for Project The City’s General Plan and Development Code provide for a mix of commercial uses in the Highway Mixed-Use zoning district of Arroyo Grande. The proposed project will merge ten (10) underlying lots for the development of a new fast-food restaurant with a drive-thru on a commercially zoned property that is currently vacant. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 8 of 45 Project Description The proposed project involves the merger of ten (10) underlying lots into a single lot for the development of an approximately 3,150 square foot fast-food restaurant with a drive-thru (Popeye’s Louisiana Kitchen) and associated improvements on resulting parcel of approximately 34,625 square feet in the Highway Mixed Use zoning district Required Public Agency Approvals No other public agency approvals are required for the proposed project. Related Projects The proposed project is not related to any other past, present, or future planned projects. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 9 of 45 3. Environmental Checklist Project Information Project Title: Conditional Use Permit 16-008 and Lot Merger 16- 001 Lead Agency Name & Address: City of Arroyo Grande 300 East Brach Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Contact Person & Telephone Number: Matthew Downing, AICP Planning Manager (805) 473-5420 Project Location: 737 El Camino Real (northwest corner of El Camino Real, Faeh Avenue, and Bell Street intersection), Arroyo Grande, California Project Sponsor Name & Address: Nick Amirian ELA Foods, Inc. 1451 Cordova Avenue Glendale, CA 91207 General Plan Designation: Mixed-Use (MU) Zoning: Highway Mixed-Use (HMU) Description of Project: Refer to page 8 Surrounding Land Uses & Setting: The project site is surrounded by commercial and residential land uses and Highway 101 Approval Required from Other Public Agencies: None INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 10 of 45 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact", as indicated by the checklist on the following pages: Aesthetics Agricultural Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology/Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards & Hazardous Materials Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population/Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation/Traffic Tribal Cultural Resources Utilities/Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that, although the original scope of the proposed project COULD have had a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect because revisions/mitigations to the project have been made by or agreed to by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or its functional equivalent will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated impact" on the environment. However, at least one impact has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document, pursuant to applicable legal standards, and has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis, as described in the report's attachments. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the impacts not sufficiently addressed in previous documents. I find that, although the proposed project could have had a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration, pursuant to applicable standards, and have been avoided or mitigated, pursuant to an earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, all impacts have been avoided or mitigated to a less-than- significant level and no further action is required. _________________________________ ________________________________ Matthew Downing, AICP Date Planning Manager INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 11 of 45 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 1. A brief explanation is required for all answers, except "No Impact", that are adequately supported by the information sources cited. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact does not apply to the project being evaluated (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on general or project-specific factors (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must consider the whole of the project-related effects, both direct and indirect, including off-site, cumulative, construction, and operational impacts. 3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, the checklist answers must indicate whether that impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate when there is sufficient evidence that a substantial or potentially substantial adverse change may occur in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project that cannot be mitigated below a level of significance. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required. 4. A "Mitigated Negative Declaration" (Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated) applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures, prior to declaration of project approval, has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level. 5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR (including a General Plan) or Negative Declaration [CCR, Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA, § 15063(c)(3)(D)]. References to an earlier analysis should: a) Identify the earlier analysis and state where it is available for review. b) Indicate which effects from the environmental checklist were adequately analyzed in the earlier document, pursuant to applicable legal standards, and whether these effects were adequately addressed by mitigation measures included in that analysis. c) Describe the mitigation measures in this document that were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and indicate to what extent they address site-specific conditions for this project. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate references to information sources for potential impacts into the checklist or appendix (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances, biological assessments). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should include an indication of the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7. A source list should be appended to this document. Sources used or individuals contacted should be listed in the source list and cited in the discussion. 8. Explanation(s) of each issue should identify: a) the criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate the significance of the impact addressed by each question; and b) the mitigation measures, if any, prescribed to reduce the impact below the level of significance. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 12 of 45 4. Environmental Issues I. Aesthetics Environmental Setting The project site is currently a vacant commercial parcel vegetated with ruderal species. The El Camino Real frontage has been previously improved with ten (10) Park & Ride spaces and curb, gutter, and sidewalk improvements. The vacant property is relatively flat and is visible from US Highway 101 to the north and residential development to the south. Development of the site with an approximately 3,150 square foot fast-food restaurant with drive-thru will minimally alter the view shed from these vantage points. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Have a substantial adverse affect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Discussion a-b: The project site and its vicinity do not include scenic vistas nor does it include other scenic resources. No impact. c: The project site is currently vacant, and any construction would impact the current aesthetic of the parcel. However, the project site is located adjacent to an existing commercial building and therefore any impact to the existing visual character of the site would be minimal. The proposed project will include hedges and landscaping to help screen site improvements and further minimize the impact on the existing visual character. Additionally, the City’s Architectural Review Committee has considered the project’s architecture, with special attention given to the massing and exterior materials and colors, and found that the proposed development is appropriate for the commercial parcel and the proposed use. Less than significant. d: The project would include new light sources by way of exterior building lights, sign illumination, and parking lot lighting, similar to the commercial developments on adjoining sites to the west and north. However, these new light sources will be shielded, downcast, and within appropriate illumination levels, in compliance with the Development Code. Therefore, any impact associated with a new source of light would be minimal. Less than significant. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 13 of 45 II. Agriculture and Forestry Resources Environmental Setting The U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) classifies agricultural lands into five (5) categories: Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, Unique Farmland, Farmland of Local Importance, and Farmland of Local Potential. Non-farmlands are classified as Grazing Land, Urban and Built-Up Land, Other Land, or Water. The project site is classified as “Urban and Built- Up Land” based on the California Department of Conservation’s (CDOC) Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) and San Luis Obispo County Important Farmland Map (CDOC 2014). The Agriculture, Conservation, and Open Space Element of the City’s General Plan identifies the importance of avoiding and/or mitigating for the loss of prime farmland soils and of conserving non- prime agriculture uses and natural resource lands. The City’s policies also recognize the importance of allocation and conservation of ground and surface water resources for agricultural uses and the need to minimize potential urban and fringe area development that would divert such resources away from agricultural uses. The project site is not designated or zoned for ag use nor is it near land zoned for ag use. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220)g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? * In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997), prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model for use in assessing impacts on agricultural and farmland. Discussion a-e: No impacts. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 14 of 45 III. Air Quality Environmental Setting San Luis Obispo County is part of the South Central Coast Air Basin, which also includes Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties. The climate of the basin area is strongly influenced by its proximity to the Pacific Ocean. Airflow around and within the basin plays an important role in the movement and dispersion of pollutants. The speed and direction of local winds are controlled by the location and strength of the Pacific Ocean high pressure system and other global weather patterns, topographical factors, and circulation patterns that result from temperature differences between the land and the sea. The San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (APCD) has developed and updated their CEQA Air Quality Handbook (APCD 2012) to evaluate project-specific impacts and help determine if air quality mitigation measures are needed, or if potentially significant impacts could result. To evaluate long-term emissions, cumulative effects, and establish countywide programs to reach acceptable air quality levels, the APCD has prepared and adopted a Clean Air Plan. The County’s air quality is measured by multiple ambient air quality monitoring stations, including four APCD-operated permanent stations, two state-operated permanent stations, two special stations, and one station operated by Tosco Oil Refinery for monitoring Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) emissions. San Luis Obispo County is in non-attainment status for ozone (O3), respirable particulate matter (PM10) and vinyl chloride under the California Air Resource Board (CARB) standards. The county is in attainment status for all other applicable CARB standards. The project site is not located within an area identified as having a potential for Naturally Occuring Asbestos (NOA) to occur based on the APCD’s NOA Map (APCD 2017). Some land uses are considered more sensitive to changes in air quality than others, depending on the population groups and the activities involved. The CARB has identified the following typical groups who are most likely to be affected by air pollution: children under 14 years of age, the elderly over 65 years of age, athletes, and people with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases. Sensitive receptors include residences, schools, playgrounds, childcare centers, athletic facilities, long-term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers, and retirement homes. Sensitive receptors near the project area include nearby residences to the south of the project site. The proposed project will construct a new 3,150 square foot fast food restaurant with drive-thru, which individually does not exceed the threshold of significance in the APCD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook (2012). However, given that the site is in close proximity to sensitive receptors (residential development), mitigation is required to reduce potential air quality impacts during construction. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 15 of 45 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? * Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied on to make these determinations. Discussion a-d: Operational impacts of the proposed project will likely be less than significant when typical mitigation measures are included in the project. The proposed project 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 AQ-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 AQ-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 AQ-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 AQ-4: The project shall comply with these more restrictive requirements to minimize impacts to nearby sensitive receptors (adjacent residential development):  Staging at 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. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 16 of 45 MM AQ-5: The project shall implement the following mitigation measures to manage nitrogen oxide (NOX), reactive organic cases (ROG), and diesel particulate matter (DPM) emissions:  Maintain all construction equipment in propert tune according to manufacturer’s specifications;  Fuel all off-road and portable diesel powered equipment with ARB certified motor vehicle diesel fuel (non-taxed version suitable for use off-road);  Use diesel construction equipment meeting ARB’s Tier 2 certified engines or cleaner off- road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State Off-Road Regulation;  Use on-raod heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State On-Road Regulation;  Construction or trucking companies with fleets that do not have engines in their fleet that meet the engine standards identified in the above two measures (e.g. captive or NOX exempt area fleets) may be eligibile by proving alternative compliance;  Electrify equipment when feasible;  Substitute gasoline-powered in place of diesel-powered equipment, where feasible; and  Use alternatively fueled construction equipment on-site where feasible, such as compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane or biodiesel. MM AQ-6: The project shall implement the following mitigation measures to manage fugitive dust emissions such that they do not exceed the APCD’s 20% opacity limit (APCD Rule 401) or prompt nuisance violations (APCD Rule 402):  Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible;  Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site and from exceeding the APCD’s limit of 20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in any 60 minute period. Increased watering frequency would be required when wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed (non-potable) water shall be used;  All dirt stock pile areas should be sprayed daily and covered with tarps or other dust barriers as needed;  Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans shall be implemented as soon as possible, following completion of any soil disturbing activities;  Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading should be shown with a fast germinating, non-invasive, grass seed and watered until vegetation is established;  All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation should be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD;  All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed as soon as possible. In addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used;  Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site;  All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with CVC Section 23.114; INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 17 of 45  Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site;  Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers shall be used with reclaimed water should be used where feasible. Roads shall be pre-wetted prior to sweeping when feasible;  A listing of all required mitigation measures should be included on grading and building plans; and,  The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below the APCD's limit of 20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in any 60 minute period. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork or demolition. MM AQ-7: 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 AQ-8: Burning of vegetative material on the development site shall be prohibited. MM AQ-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. MM AQ-10: The project shall implement a minimum of eight (8) Standard Mitigation Measures as stated in Table 3-5 of the APCD’s 2012 CEQA Handbook. e: The proposed project would construct a new fast-food restaurant. Restaurants are not classified as an odor generating facility within Table 3-3 of the SLO County APCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook. Therefore, the proposed project would not be anticipated to create significant levels of odors under CEQA. Less than significant INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 18 of 45 IV. Biological Resources Environmental Setting The site is mostly devoid of flora and fauna apart from ruderal species. Existing development on three (3) sides of the project site precludes its use as a wildlife corridor. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modification, on any species identified as a sensitive, candidate, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands, as defined by §404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Discussion a-f: No impacts. V. Cultural Resources Environmental Setting This section is largely based on the Cultural Resources Survey prepared for the project (Central Coast Archaeological Research Consultants 2017). The earliest inhabitants of Arroyo Grande Valley were the northern or Obispeno Chumash Indians. Given the long history of the Chumash occupying this region, many archaeological sites have been identified within the City limits, including sites within one-half mile INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 19 of 45 of the project site. The property has been previously graded, making it less likely that cultural resources are present on the site. Nevertheless, isolated archaeological materials could still be present given the extensive history of Chumash Indians inhabiting this area. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Discussion a. No impact. b-d: The Cultural Resources Survey stated that through archival research, previous studies, and an intensive archaeological survey of the site, no cultural resources were identified. As a precaution, if cultural resources are encountered during the construction process, development activities at the site shall cease until a qualified archaeologist has been employed to view and assess the discovery and prepare a mitigation plan. Implementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce these impacts to a less than significant level. Less than significant with mitigation. MM CUL-1: If a potentially significant cultural resource is encountered during subsurface earthwork activities, all construction activities within a 100-foot radius of the find shall cease until a qualified archaeologist determines whether the uncovered resource requires further study. A standard inadvertent discovery clause shall be included in every grading and construction contract to inform contractors of this requirement. Any previously undiscovered resources found during construction shall be recorded on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance in terms of California Environmental Quality Act criteria by a qualified archaeologist. Potentially significant cultural resources consist of, but are not limited to, stone, bone, glass, ceramic, wood, or shell artifacts; fossils; or features including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. If the resource is determined significant under CEQA, the qualified archaeologist shall prepare and implement a research design and archaeological data recovery plan that will capture those categories of data for which the site is significant. The archaeologist shall also perform appropriate technical analysis, prepare a comprehensive report, and file it with the appropriate Information Center and provide for the permanent curation of the recovered materials. MM CUL-2: If human remains are encountered during earth-disturbing activities, all work in the adjacent area shall stop immediately and the San Luis Obispo County Coroner’s office shall be notified. If the remains are determined to be Native American in origin, the Native American INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 20 of 45 Heritage Commission shall be notified and will identify the Most Likely Descendent, who will be consulted for recommendations for treatment of the discovered remains. VI. Geology and Soils Environmental Setting The proposed project is located within the Coast Ranges province, which is characterized by its many elongate mountain ranges and valleys, extending 600 miles along the coast of California from the Oregon border south to the Santa Ynez River in Santa Barbara County. The Arroyo Grande Valley (and the southern Cienega Valley portion) is located near the intersection of the California coastal ranges and the Los Angeles ranges. The project site encompasses an urban area that is generally flat within the city of Arroyo Grande at elevations ranging from 75 to 100 feet above mean sea level. Arroyo Grande is located in a geologically complex and seismically active region. Seismic, or earthquake- related, hazards have the potential to result in significant public safety risks and widespread property damage. Two of the direct effects of an earthquake include the rupture of the ground surface along the trend or location of a fault, and ground shaking that results from fault movement. Other geologic hazards that may occur in response to an earthquake include liquefaction, seismic settlement, and landslide. The main trace of the Wilmar Avenue Fault is the closest fault to the project site. According to the City’s General Plan, the Wilmar Avenue Fault is a potentially active fault adjacent to the City of Arroyo Grande. The Wilmar Avenue Fault is exposed in a sea cliff in Pismo Beach, and the buried trace of the fault is inferred to strike northwest-southeast parallel and adjacent to US 101 beneath portions of Arroyo Grande. This potentially active fault poses a moderate potential fault rupture hazard to the City. Near surface soils generally consist of silty sand to a depth of 3 feet in a very moist and loose state. Sub- surface materials consisted of silty sand in a moist and dense condition. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map, issued by the State Geologist for the area, or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.) ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 21 of 45 Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable, as a result of the project and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18- 1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste disposal systems, where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? Discussion a, c: A geotechnical investigation of the project site was performed by GeoSolutions Inc. (2017). 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. Less than significant. b, d-e: No impacts. VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Environmental Setting GHGs are any gases that absorb infrared radiation in the atmosphere, and are different from the criteria pollutants discussed in Section III, Air Quality, above. The primary GHGs that are emitted into the atmosphere as a result of human activities are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and fluorinated gases. These are most commonly emitted through the burning of fossil fuels (i.e., oil, natural gas, and coal), agricultural practices, decay of organic waste in landfills, and a variety of other chemical reactions and industrial processes (e.g., the manufacturing of cement). CO2 is the most abundant GHG and is estimated to represent approximately 80–90% of the principal GHGs that are currently affecting the earth’s climate. According to the CARB, transportation (vehicle exhaust) and electricity generation are the main sources of GHG in the state. The passage of Assembly Bill (AB) 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act, in 2006 recognized the need to reduce GHG emissions and set the GHG 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 accomplished by reducing GHG emissions from significant sources via regulation, market mechanisms, and other actions. Subsequent legislation (e.g., Senate Bill [SB] 97, Greenhouse Gas Emissions bill) directed the CARB to develop statewide thresholds. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 22 of 45 In March 2012, the APCD approved thresholds for GHG emission impacts, and these thresholds have been incorporated into the APCD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook. APCD determined that a tiered process for land use development 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 Action Plans): A qualitative threshold that is consistent with AB 32 Scoping Plan measures and goals; or, 2. Bright-Line Threshold: A numerical value to determine the significance of a project’s annual GHG emissions; or, 3. Efficiency-Based Threshold: Assesses the GHG impacts of a project on an emissions per capita basis. The City of Arroyo Grande adopted a Climate Action Plan (CAP) on November 26, 2013. The City’s CAP is a long-range plan to reduce GHG emissions from City government operations and community activities within Arroyo Grande and prepare for the anticipated effects of climate change. To achieve the state- recommended target of 15% below 2005 levels (71,739 metric tons of CO2 equivalent [MT CO2e]) by 2020 and prepare for the anticipated effects of climate change, the CAP identifies climate action measures. Collectively, the measures identified in the CAP have the potential to reduce GHG emissions within Arroyo Grande by 5,371 MT CO2e (17% below the 2005 baseline) by 2020 and meet the reduction target. For most projects, the Bright-Line Threshold of 1,150 MT CO2e per year (MT CO2e/yr) will be the most applicable threshold. In addition to the land use development threshold options proposed above, a bright-line numerical value threshold of 10,000 MT CO2e/yr was adopted for stationary source (industrial) projects. It should be noted that projects that generate less than the above-mentioned thresholds will also participate in emission reductions because air emissions, including GHGs, are under the purview of the CARB (or other regulatory agencies) and will be “regulated” by CARB, the federal government, or other entities. For example, new vehicles will be subject to increased fuel economy standards and emission reductions, large and small appliances will be subject to more strict emissions standards, and energy delivered to consumers will increasingly come from renewable sources. Other programs that are intended to reduce the overall GHG emissions include Low Carbon Fuel Standards, Renewable Portfolio standards, and the Clean Car standards. As a result, even the emissions that result from projects that produce fewer emissions than the threshold will be subject to emission reductions. Under CEQA, an individual project’s GHG emissions will generally not result in direct significant impacts. This is because the climate change issue is global in nature. However, an individual project could be found to contribute to a potentially significant cumulative impact. Projects that have GHG emissions above the noted thresholds may be considered cumulatively considerable and require mitigation. The project site is located adjacent to existing residential and commercial developments as well as to Highway 101. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 23 of 45 Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant effect on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Discussion a: The San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District (APCD) has adopted GHG significance thresholds. These thresholds are based on AB 32 GHG emission reduction goals, which take into consideration the emission reduction strategies outlined in the Air Resource Board’s Scoping Plan. The GHG significance thresholds include one (1) qualitative threshold and two (2) quantitative thresholds options for evaluation of operational GHG emissions. The qualitative threshold option is based on a consistency analysis in comparison to a Qualified Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy, or equitably similar adopted policies, ordinances and programs. If a project complies with a Qualified Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy that is specifically applicable to the project, then the project would be considered less than significant. The City’s Climate Action Plan was developed to be consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b) to mitigate emissions and climate change impacts and therefore serves as a Qualified GHG Reduction Strategy for the City. As previously stated, under CEQA, an individual project’s GHG emissions will generally not result in direct significant impacts because the climate change issue is global in nature. However, an individual project could be found to contribute to a potentially significant cumulative impact. APCD has established mitigation measures to reduce project-level GHG emissions, which are consistent with the City’s Climate Action Plan. Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Less than significant with mitigation. MM GHG-1: Prior to issuance of a building permit, all construction plans shall incorporate the following GHG-reducing measures where applicable:  Incorporate outdoor electrical outlets to encourage the use of electric appliances and tools.  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. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 24 of 45  Design homes 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 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 landscaping with emphasis on native plants. b: The project as proposed does not conflict with any regional or local plans or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Less than significant. VIII Hazards and Hazardous Materials Environmental Setting The information in this section relies on the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ISA) prepared for the proposed project (Geosolutions, Inc. 2017). No clean-up sites are identified within the project area according to the sources identified in the ISA. The project site does not contain hazardous waste and there is no evidence of Underground Storage Tanks (UST), pits, sumps, clarifiers, or other potential hazardous material conditions that might impact the underlying soil or groundwater. Only household trash was observed at the site and consisted of plastic, glass, paper, and metal. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and/or accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials, substances, or waste into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites, compiled pursuant to Government Code §65962.5, and, as a result, create a significant hazard to the public or environment? INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 25 of 45 Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 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 result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) Be located in the vicinity of a private airstrip? If so, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death from wildland fires, including areas where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Discussion a-h: No impacts. IX Hydrology and Water Quality Environmental Setting The project site is vacant, was previously graded in areas, and is covered with a mix of weeds. Existing soils are varying shades of brown silty sand. The project site is located within the Arroyo Grande Creek watershed, a coastal basin with headwaters that originate at approximately 3,100 feet above mean sea level and eventually drain to the Pacific Ocean. Arroyo Grande Creek drains the 157-square-mile watershed and is the dominant surface water feature in the city. Flows in the creek are dominated by two factors: winter rains and Lopez Dam. Arroyo Grande Creek is included on the Section 303(d) list of impaired waterbodies for elevated concentrations of fecal coliform and Escherichia coli (E. coli). The project site will be required to construct on site facilities to comply with post construction stormwater requirements. Low-impact development (LID) techniques are required to be implemented by the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and will act to filter drainage water. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 26 of 45 b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level that would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial on- or off-site erosion or siltation? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in on- or off-site flooding? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map, or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place structures that would impede or redirect flood flows within a 100-year flood hazard area? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death from flooding, including flooding resulting from the failure of a levee or dam? j) Result in inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? Discussion a, c-e: Development of the previously undeveloped property will result in an increase in the amount of impervious surface area. Post Construction Stormwater Requirements (PCSRs) have been developed for the project to provide the required retention volume and the usage of Low LID standards for a 95th percentile design storm event. These include biofiltration and underground clarifiers and storage tanks. Less than significant impact. b. The anticipated increase in water consumption by the project will result from the new fast-food restaurant. The property is zoned commercial and water use projections and supplies for this property have already been included within the Water Master Plan. Less than significant impact. f: The State Water Quality Control Board requires municipalities, via the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit, to minimize negative impacts on aquatic ecosystems and degradation of water quality to the maximum extent practicable. Permittees must implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) that reduce pollutants in storm water runoff to the technology-based INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 27 of 45 standard of Maximum Extent Practicable (MEP) to protect water quality. The goals of post-construction BMPs are to prevent and control erosion and sedimentation, provide source control of potential pollutants, control and treat runoff, and protect wetlands and water quality resources. Post- construction BMPs are required to achieve stormwater quality standards through site-planning measures. Vegetative swales or other biofilters are recommended as the preferred choice for post- construction BMPs for all projects with suitable landscape areas, because these measures are relatively economical and require limited maintenance. For projects where landscape based treatment is impracticable, or insufficient to meet required design criteria, other post-construction BMPs should be incorporated. All post-construction BMPs must be maintained to operate effectively. Implementation of the BMPs listed below will reduce the potential impacts to water quality to a less than significant level. Less than significant with mitigation. MM HYD-1: The following BMPs shall be incorporated into the project:  Run-off Control. Maintain post-development peak runoff rate and average volume of runoff at levels that are similar to pre-development levels.  Labeling and Maintenance of Storm Drain Facilities. Label new storm drain inlets with “No Dumping – Drains to Ocean” to alert the public to the destination of stormwater and to prevent direct discharge of pollutants into the storm drain.  Common Area Litter Control. Implement a trash management and litter control program to prevent litter and debris from being carried to water bodies or the storm drain system.  Food Service Facilities. Design the food service facility to have a sink or other area for cleaning floor mats, containers, and equipment that is connected to a grease interceptor prior to discharging to the sanitary sewer system. The cleaning area shall be large enough to clean the largest mat or piece of equipment to be cleaned.  Refuse Areas. Trash compactors, enclosures and dumpster areas shall be covered and protected from roof and surface drainage. Install a self-contained drainage system that discharges to the sanitary sewer if water cannot be diverted from the areas.  Outdoor Storage Controls. Oils, fuels, solvents, coolants, and other chemicals stored outdoors must be in containers and protected from drainage by secondary containment structures such as berms, liners, vaults or roof covers and/or drain to the sanitary sewer system. Bulk materials stored outdoors must also be protected from drainage with berms and covers. Process equipment stored outdoors must be inspected for proper function and leaks, stored on impermeable surfaces and covered. Implement a regular program of sweeping and litter control and develop a spill cleanup plan for storage areas.  Cleaning, Maintenance and Processing Controls. Areas used for washing, steam cleaning, maintenance, repair or processing must have impermeable surfaces and containment berms, roof covers, recycled water wash facility, and discharge to the INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 28 of 45 sanitary sewer. Discharges to the sanitary sewer may require pretreatment systems and/or approval of an industrial waste discharge permit.  Street/parking lot Sweeping: Implement a program to regularly sweep streets, sidewalks and parking lots to prevent the accumulation of litter and debris. Debris resulting from pressure washing should be trapped and collected to prevent entry into the storm drain system. Washwater containing any cleaning agent or degreaser should be collected and discharged to the sanitary sewer. g-j: No impact. X. Land Use and Planning Environmental Setting The project site is identified as Mixed-Use (MU) in the City’s Land Use Map and zoned Highway Mixed- Use (HMU). The proposed type and scale of development of an approximately 3,150 square foot fast- food restaurant with drive-thru will be consistent with both the MU land use category and HMU zoning district. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with the applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of any agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, a general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? Discussion a, b, c: No impacts. XI. Mineral Resources Environmental Setting The project site does not contain any known mineral resources. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 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? INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 29 of 45 b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? Discussion a-b: There are no known mineral resources in the project area, and future extraction of mineral resources is very unlikely due to the urbanized nature of the area. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. XII. Noise Environmental Setting Noise exposure throughout the City is primarily caused by automobile traffic on surface streets and US Highway 101, with intermittent noise generated by agricultural operations and construction activities. The site is surrounded by commercial uses to the north and west, a residential neighborhood to the south, and US Highway 101 to the east. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Generate or expose people to noise levels in excess of standards established in a local general plan or noise ordinance, or in other applicable local, state, or federal standards? b) Generate or expose people to excessive groundborne vibrations or groundborne noise levels? c) Create a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project (above levels without the project)? d) Create a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project, in excess of noise levels existing without the project? e) Be located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport? If so, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) Be in the vicinity of a private airstrip? If so, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Discussion a, b, d: During construction of the proposed project, the use of construction vehicles and equipment has the potential to generate excessive levels of noise; however, this is only a temporary increase. All construction activities will comply with applicable City policies regarding noise. Less than significant impact with mitigation INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 30 of 45 MM NOI-1: Construction activities shall be restricted to between the hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. Monday through Friday. No construction shall occur on Saturday or Sunday. Equipment maintenance and servicing shall be confined to the same hours. To the greatest extent possible, grading and construction activities should occur during the middle of the day to minimize the potential for disturbance of noise to neighboring sensitive uses. MM NOI-2: All equipment will have sound-control devices that are no less effective than those provided on the original equipment. No equipment will have an unmuffled exhaust. MM NOI-3: Equipment mobilization areas, water tanks, and equipment storage areas shall be placed in a central location as far from existing residences as feasible. c: Additional noise will be created as result of the commercial activity and drive-thru. However, a three to four foot (3’-4’) wall is required to be part of the project adjacent to the drive-thru, which will reduce ambient noise. Additionally, because the project is in such close proximity to US Highway 101, it is anticipated that noise generated from the project will be at lower levels than the ambient noise associated with the Highway. Therefore, any impacts are anticipated to be Less than significant impacts. e, f: No impacts. XIII. Population and Housing Environmental Setting Arroyo Grande’s population has grown from 3,291 in 1960 to 17,252, based on the 2010 Census. At the time of the 2010 Census, there were 7,628 housing units in the City, an 822-unit increase from 2000. The vast majority, 75%, are single-family units. The overall average household size in Arroyo Grande is 2.41 persons, with owner-occupied units averaging 2.45 persons per household and renter-occupied units averaging 2.33 persons per household. This rate is relatively consistent with the 1990 City average of 2.48, and slightly less than California’s average rate of 2.87 persons per household. There are no residences or residential uses within the project area; however, there are residences and commercial uses adjacent to the project site. The project site is vacant. The proposed project is an infill development, and no existing housing will be displaced. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 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? INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 31 of 45 c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Discussion a, b, c: No impacts. XIV. Public Services Environmental Setting The City of Arroyo Grande administers its own police department and parks and recreation facilities. Fire protection is provided by the Five Cities Fire Authority through a joint powers agreement (JPA). The Lucia Mar Unified School District (LMUSD) provides K-12 educational facilities. Public services to the project site are readily provided by the City of Arroyo Grande. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Result in significant environmental impacts from construction associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? Police protection: Schools? Parks? Other public facilities? Discussion a: No significant project-specific impacts to public services or utilities would occur. The project would not increase long-term demands on police, fire, or emergency response services due to the infill nature of the project. The project would not induce population growth or increase demands on local schools, parks, or other public facilities. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. XV. Recreation Environmental Setting The Recreation Services Department oversees recreational activities throughout the City and manages the City’s various parks and open spaces. The project will not affect any existing park or other recreational resource and is not expected to create additional demand for recreational facilities. Any potential impact will be mitigated by the City’s standard condition requiring payment of park development and impact fees for the improvement or development of neighborhood community parks. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 32 of 45 Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities, such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Discussion a, b: No impact XVI. Transportation/Traffic Environmental Setting This section is largely based on the Transportation Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) prepared for the project (Omni Means 2017) and Noon Peak & Brisco Road Restriping Analysis Memo (Omni Means 2017). The City’s street network consists of a hierarchy of street types which serve different functions. These include freeways, arterials, collectors, local streets and alleyways. Freeways route traffic through the community and are characterized by large traffic volumes and high- speed travel. Arterials link residential and commercial districts and serve shorter through traffic needs. Due to the heavier traffic on arterials, adjacent land uses are intended to be a mix of commercial and multi-family residential. Collector streets link neighborhoods to arterials and are not intended for through traffic but are nonetheless intended to move traffic in an efficient manner. Local streets are designed to serve only adjacent land uses and are intended to protect residents from through traffic impacts. Access to the project site is provided via two (2) driveways. The proposed project will develop one driveway on El Camino Real (Driveway #1). This is a 30’ wide driveway that will provide full access into and out of the site. Faeh Avenue is proposed to have a separate 25’ wide full access driveway (Driveway #2). Driveways #1 and #2 appear to have adequate throat depth based upon geometrics of the project plans. Vehicle queuing was evaluated to be adequate for the proposed project. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Cause a substantial increase in traffic, in relation to existing traffic and the capacity of the street system (i.e., a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 33 of 45 b) Exceed, individually or cumulatively, the level of service standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Cause a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location, that results in substantial safety risks? d) Contain a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or a dangerous intersection) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment) that would substantially increase hazards? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Omni-Means Transportation Impact Analysis Report A TIAR was prepared by Omni-Means dated July 2017 to evaluate the potential impact of the proposed project on the City’s circulation system. Recommendations from the TIAR are incorporated into this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. As part of the TIAR, AM and PM peak hour intersection counts were conducted in March 2017. Separately and following review of the TIAR by the City’s Traffic Commission, a Memorandum was prepared by Omni-Means dated Septebmer 11, 2017 to analyze the noon peak trip demands and restriping of the Brisco Road underpass. Discussion a, b: The Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element specifies minimum level-of-service standards for all streets and intersections within the City’s jurisdiction. In section CT2, the following performance standards for acceptable LOS are established: 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 designated LOS “C” minimum acceptable standard on City facilities, Caltrans LOS policy for state highways was also analyzed. The Caltrans published Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies (December 2002) states: “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 and City policies quoted above, LOS “C” has been taken as the general threshold for acceptable operations at study intersections and roadway segments maintained by the INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 34 of 45 City, and LOS “C” has been taken as the general threshold for acceptable operations at study intersections and roadways maintained by the State. Additionally, for the project TIAR, a merge/diverge analysis was performed on the northbound off-ramp State Route 101/Brisco Road intersection and a weaving analysis was conducted on the freeway segment from the on-ramp at Halcyon Road to the off-ramp at E. Grand Avenue, as requested by Caltrans during their review of Memorandum of Assumptions for the TIAR. Although the project TIAR states that the project will not create a significant impact at several of the study intersections based on the significance thresholds identified, the report acknowledges that the project will contribute additional trips to impacted intersections and therefore mitigation is necessary for the proposed project. In order to determine appropriate mitigations for the proposed project, the TIAR identifies that pro-rata share contributions are appropriate for improvements related to deficient operations at three (3) studied intersections, including: 1. Brisco Road/US 101 NB Ramps; 2. Brisco Road/El Camino Real; and 3. E. Grand Avenue/El Camino Real. Pro-rata share contributions were calculated as documented in the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies (December 2002). The TIAR concludes that collection of pro-rata share contributions for improvements at these intersections will mitigate projects to appropriate levels. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. MM TT-1: The developer shall pay pro-rata share contributions for intersections improvements as identified in the Traffic Impact Analysis Report prepared for the project (Omni-Means 2017). c-f: No impact XVII. Tribal Cultural Resources Environmental Setting As discussed in Section V. Cultural Resources, the earliest inhabitants of Arroyo Grande Valley were the northern or Obispeno Chumash Indians. Given the long history of the Chumash occupying this region, many archaeological sites have been identified within the City limits, including sites within one-half mile of the project site. The property has been previously graded, making it less likely that cultural resources are present on the site. Nevertheless, isolated archaeological materials could still be present given the extensive history of Chumash Indians inhabiting this area. On July 25, 2017, local Native American tribal groups that requested consultation under AB 52 were formally noticed that the application for the proposed project was deemed complete and invited to provide consultation on the proposed project. The City received no correspondence from local Native American tribal groups related to this project. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 35 of 45 Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k), or ii) A resource determined by the lead agency in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in Subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in Subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. Discussion a-i) No impact a-ii) As discussed in Section V. Cultural Resources, it is unlikely that Tribal Cultural Resources will be impacted due to previous grading on the site. However, as a precaution, if cultural resources are encountered during the construction process, development activities at the site shall cease until a qualified archaeologist has been employed to view and assess the discovery and prepare a mitigation plan. Therefore, potential impacts associated with tribal cultural resources would be less than significant with mitigation. MM TCR-1: Implement MM CUL-1 and CUL-2. XVIII. Utilities and Service Systems Environmental Setting The project site is located within the incorporated City Limits of Arroyo Grande. Utilities will be served by both the City and other regional entities. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 36 of 45 Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Exceed wastewater treatment restrictions or standards of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities? Would the construction of these facilities cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination, by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project, that it has adequate capacity to service the project’s anticipated demand, in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations as they relate to solid waste? a: 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, c: No impact d: The 2012 Water System Master Plan provides water demand factors based on land use. The project site is located in the Mixed-Use Land Use category, which has a demand factor of 1,788 gallons per day per acre (gpd/acre). The project site is 0.79 acres, which results in water demand of 1,421.25 gpd. This amount of demand is covered by existing resources in the projected build-out population of 20,000 residents. Additionally, 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 development. Therefore, there are sufficient water supplies available to serve the project, even in light of recent, cyclical drought conditions. Less than significant impact e-g: No impact INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 37 of 45 5. Mandatory Findings of Significance Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species; cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels; threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community; substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare or threatened species; or eliminate examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals? c) Have possible environmental effects that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable? “Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of possible future projects. d) Cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Discussion a: Although undeveloped, the project site does not contain any significant flora or fauna, and because it is surrounded by urban development, the site does not 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 have project specific impacts, with implementation of the 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. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 38 of 45 6. Summary of Mitigation Measures MM AQ-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. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Engineering Division, Public Works Department Timing: During Construction MM AQ-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. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Engineering Division, Public Works Department Timing: During Construction MM AQ-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. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Engineering Division, Public Works Department Timing: During Construction MM AQ-4: The project applicant shall comply with these more restrictive requirements to minimize impacts to nearby sensitive receptors (adjacent residential development):  Staging a queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors;  Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors shall not be permitted;  Use of alternative fueled equipment is recommended; and  Signs that specify no idling areas must be posted and enforced at the site. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 39 of 45 Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Engineering Division, Public Works Department Timing: During Construction MM AQ-5: The project shall implement the following mitigation measures to manage nitrogen oxide (NOX), reactive organic cases (ROG), and diesel particulate matter (DPM) emissions:  Maintain all construction equipment in property tune according to manufacturer’s specifications;  Fuel all off-road and portable diesel powered equipment with ARB certified motor vehicle diesel fuel (non-taxed version suitable for use off-road);  Use diesel construction equipment meeting ARB’s Tier 2 certified engines or cleaner off- road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State Off-Road Regulation;  Use on-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State On-Road Regulation;  Construction or trucking companies with fleets that do not have engines in their fleet that meet the engine standards identified in the above two measures (e.g. captive or NOX exempt area fleets) may be eligible by proving alternative compliance;  Electrify equipment when feasible;  Substitute gasoline-powered in place of diesel-powered equipment, where feasible; and  Use alternatively fueled construction equipment on-site where feasible, such as compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane or biodiesel. MM AQ-6: The project shall implement the following mitigation measures to manage fugitive dust emissions such that they do not exceed the APCD’s 20% opacity limit (APCD Rule 401) or prompt nuisance violations (APCD Rule 402).  Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible;  Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site and from exceeding the APCD’s limit of 20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in any 60 minute period. Increased watering frequency would be required when wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed (non-potable) water shall be used;  All dirt stock pile areas should be sprayed daily and covered with tarps or other dust barriers as needed;  Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans shall be implemented as soon as possible, following completion of any soil disturbing activities;  Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading should be shown with a fast germinating, non-invasive, grass seed and watered until vegetation is established;  All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation should be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD;  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; INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 40 of 45  Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site;  All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with CVC Section 23.114;  Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site;  Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers shall be used with reclaimed water should be used where feasible. Roads shall be pre-wetted prior to sweeping when feasible;  A listing of all required mitigation measures should be included on grading and building plans; and,  The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below the APCD's limit of 20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in any 60 minute period. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork or demolition. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Engineering Division, Public Works Department Timing: During Construction MM AQ-7: 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. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Engineering Division, Public Works Department Timing: Prior to start of work MM AQ-8: Burning of vegetative material on the development site shall be prohibited. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Engineering Division, Public Works Department Timing: During Construction MM AQ-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: INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 41 of 45  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. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Engineering Division, Public Works Department Timing: During Construction MM AQ-10: The project shall implement a minimum of eight (8) Standard Mitigation Measures as stated in Table 3-5 of the APCD’s 2012 CEQA Handbook Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Engineering Division, Public Works Department Timing: Prior to permit issuance MM CUL-1: If a potentially significant cultural resource is encountered during subsurface earthwork activities, all construction activities within a 100-foot radius of the find shall cease until a qualified archaeologist determines whether the uncovered resource requires further study. A standard inadvertent discovery clause shall be included in every grading and construction contract to inform contractors of this requirement. Any previously undiscovered resources found during construction shall be recorded on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance in terms of California Environmental Quality Act criteria by a qualified archaeologist. Potentially significant cultural resources consist of, but are not limited to, stone, bone, glass, ceramic, wood, or shell artifacts; fossils; or features including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. If the resource is determined significant under CEQA, the qualified archaeologist shall prepare and implement a research design and archaeological data recovery plan that will capture those categories of data for which the site is significant. The archaeologist shall also perform appropriate technical analysis, prepare a comprehensive report, and file it with the appropriate Information Center and provide for the permanent curation of the recovered materials. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Engineering Division, Public Works Department Timing: During construction MM CUL-2: If human remains are encountered during earth-disturbing activities, all work in the adjacent area shall stop immediately and the San Luis Obispo County Coroner’s office shall be notified. If the remains are determined to be Native American in origin, the Native American INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 42 of 45 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: During construction MM GHG-1: Prior to issuance of a building permit, all construction plans shall incorporate the following GHG-reducing measures where applicable:  Incorporate outdoor electrical outlets to encourage the use of electric appliances and tools.  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 homes 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 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 landscaping with emphasis on native plants. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Planning, Building and Engineering Divisions Timing: Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit or Building Permit MM HYD-1: The following BMPs shall be incorporated into the project:  Run-off Control. Maintain post-development peak runoff rate and average volume of runoff at levels that are similar to pre-development levels. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 43 of 45  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.  Common Area Litter Control. Implement a trash management and litter control program to prevent litter and debris from being carried to water bodies or the storm drain system.  Food Service Facilities. Design the food service facility to have a sink or other area for cleaning floor mats, containers, and equipment that is connected to a grease interceptor prior to discharging to the sanitary sewer system. The cleaning area shall be large enough to clean the largest mat or piece of equipment to be cleaned.  Refuse Areas. Trash compactors, enclosures and dumpster areas shall be covered and protected from roof and surface drainage. Install a self-contained drainage system that discharges to the sanitary sewer if water cannot be diverted from the areas.  Outdoor Storage Controls. Oils, fuels, solvents, coolants, and other chemicals stored outdoors must be in containers and protected from drainage by secondary containment structures such as berms, liners, vaults or roof covers and/or drain to the sanitary sewer system. Bulk materials stored outdoors must also be protected from drainage with berms and covers. Process equipment stored outdoors must be inspected for proper function and leaks, stored on impermeable surfaces and covered. Implement a regular program of sweeping and litter control and develop a spill cleanup plan for storage areas.  Cleaning, Maintenance and Processing Controls. Areas used for washing, steam cleaning, maintenance, repair or processing must have impermeable surfaces and containment berms, roof covers, recycled water wash facility, and discharge to the sanitary sewer. Discharges to the sanitary sewer may require pretreatment systems and/or approval of an industrial waste discharge permit.  Street/parking lot Sweeping: Implement a program to regularly sweep streets, sidewalks and parking lots to prevent the accumulation of litter and debris. Debris resulting from pressure washing should be trapped and collected to prevent entry into the storm drain system. Washwater containing any cleaning agent or degreaser should be collected and discharged to the sanitary sewer Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Planning, Building, and Engineering Divisions Timing: Prior to issuance of a Building Permit MM NOI-1: Construction activities shall be restricted to between the hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. Monday through Friday. No construction shall occur on Saturday or Sunday. Equipment maintenance and servicing shall be confined to the same hours. To the greatest extent possible, INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 44 of 45 grading and construction activities should occur during the middle of the day to minimize the potential for disturbance of neighboring noise sensitive uses. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Planning, Building, and Engineering Divisions Timing: During construction MM NOI-2: All construction equipment utilizing internal combustion engines shall be required to have mufflers that are in good condition. Stationary noise sources shall be located at least 300 feet from occupied dwelling units unless noise reducing engine housing enclosures or noise screens are provided by the contractor. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Planning, Building, and Engineering Divisions Timing: During construction MM NOI-3: Equipment mobilization areas, water tanks, and equipment storage areas shall be placed in a central location as far from existing residences as feasible. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Planning, Building, and Engineering Divisions Timing: Prior to and during construction MM TT-1: The developer shall pay pro-rata share contributions for intersections improvements as identified in the Traffic Impact Analysis Report prepared for the project (Omni-Means 2017). Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande – Planning, Building, and Engineering Divisions Timing: Prior to building permit issuance MM TCR-1: Implement MM CUL-1 and CUL-2. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande –Engineering Division and Public Works Department Timing: During Construction INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION October 2017 CUP 16-008; MER 16-001 Page 45 of 45 7. 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 (2016) 7. Arroyo Grande Water System Master Plan (2012) 8. Arroyo Grande Wastewater Master Plan (2012) 9. San Luis Obispo Important Farmland Map (California Department of Conservation, 2006) 10. CEQA & Climate Change White Paper (CAPCOA, 2008) 11. SLO County 2001 Clean Air Plan; Air Quality Handbook (SLO APCD, 2012) 12. Arroyo Grande Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (2012) 13. Arroyo Grande Climate Action Plan (2013) 14. Project Plans 15. Site Inspection 16. Stormwater Control Plan and 100-Year Peak Flow Summary (North Coast Engineering 2017) 17. Infiltration Testing Report (GeoSolutions, Inc. 2017) 18. Soils Engineering Report (Geosolutions, Inc. 2017) 19. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (GeoSolutions, Inc. 2017) 20. Cultural Resources Survey (Central Coast Archaeological Research Consultants 2017) 21. Transportation Impact Analysis Report (Omni-Means 2017) 22. Memorandum regarding Noon Peak & Brisco Road Restriping Analysis (Omni-Means 2017) . ?~~meter. ~,w_J Clt ~ Ci {s-/ i..o 11 f larin i'.0 9. CA'nrn ··s.r.·0,,., !Yte.Rb:~ ~ J:.-k?f'YI !). {f~e~5 j -(f1YY' T~ ICM..clvh ATTACHMENT 7 1 Matt Downing Subject:FW: Conditional use permit 16-008 From: Toni Toni Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2017 9:34 PM To: AG City Subject: Conditional use permit 16-008 Thanks for notifying residents in advance of the traffic commission meeting regarding Popeyes. I live on North Alpine and I get honked at if I make a left turn onto Faeh avenue coming from Halcyon. I don't turn left on Faeh as a result when I come off Halcyon because the traffic on Halcyon is backed up a majority of the time. It doesnt seem wise to put a Popeyes entrance and exit on Faeh street with existing traffic at capacity at the intersection of Brisco/El Camino Real/Halcyon. I would like to propose the City of Arroyo Grande City Council adopts Criteria for Review of Drive Through Uses such as the City of San Jose has (see link below). It is important that "primary ingress and egress to drive through type parking lots should be from at least a four lane major street." Grand Avenue is the place for drive through establishments until El Camino Real is widened to four lanes. https://www.sanjoseca.govt/DocumentCenter/View/3877 Thank you for reading my comments. Anonymous resident of North Alpine Street COUNCIL POLICY TITLE CRITERIA FOR THE REVIEW OF DRIVE-THROUGH USES PAGE 1 of 4 POLICY NUMBER 6-10 EFFECTIVE DATE March 13, 1979 REVISED DATE November 6, 1990 APPROVED BY COUNCIL ACTION 3/13/79; 9/14/79; 11/06/90, Item 8b BACKGROUND On March 13, 1979 the City Council approved an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance requiring that all applications for development of establishments with drive-through facilities in the C-1, C-2 and C-3 Commercial Districts be reviewed for adherence to current and applicable criteria and that such development proceed only after issuance of a Conditional Use Permit by the City. On this same date Council approved criteria applicable to such development. Subsequently, on September 4, 1979 the City Council approved additional drive-through criteria for the review of drive-through uses. In 1990, concerns with the development of self-service car wash facilities allowed under PD zoning led to additional criteria. PURPOSE To provide guidelines for the development of establishments with drive-through facilities within the City of San José. POLICY It is the policy of the City Council that development of establishments with drive-through facilities within the City of San José shall be governed as specified in this policy statement. Approval of such development shall be subject to the following conditions: 1. Development shall be restricted to Commercial Zoning Districts, designated as C-1, C-2, and C-3, and to Planned Development (PD) zoning. 2. DevelopmentmaynotproceeduntilaConditionalUsePermitorPlannedDevelopmentPermitisissued by the City. 3. Conditional Use Permits or Planned Development (PD) Permits for establishments with drive-through facilities shall be granted only after applicable criteria adopted by Council have been applied to each application, to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Planning and the City Planning Commission. Furthermore, it is the policy of the Council that gasoline service stations which do not include car wash facilities as well as vehicle repair and storage facilities shall be exempt from the provisions in this policy statement. CRITERIA The following criteria shall be applied to all applications for development of establishments with drive-through facilities which meet the applicable conditional requirements: I TRAFFIC A. Primary ingress and egress to drive-through type use parking lots should be from at least a four-lane major street. City of San José, California B. The drive-through stacking lane shall be situated so that any overflow from the stacking lane shall not spill out onto public streets or major aisles of any parking lot. Overflow capacity shall be 50 percent of required stacking for overflow restricted to the parking lot and 100 percent of required stacking if the overflow is directed to the street. C. No ingress and egress points shall conflict with turning movements of street intersections. D. No drive-through use shall be approved with ingress or egress driveways within 300 feet of a signalized intersection operating at a Level of Service D, E, or F unless a traffic analysis demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works, that vehicles entering or leaving said use will not impair the efficiency or operation of the intersection. E. The drive-through stacking lane shall be separated physically from the user's parking lot and shall have a capacity of: 1. Financial Institutions—8 cars per lane or 16 total*; 2. Restaurants—8 cars per lane*; 3. Photo Uses—2 cars per lane*; 4. Self-Service Car Washes—5 cars per lane*; 5. Full-Service Car Washes—15 cars* (may be in multiple lanes); 6. Other—Capacity requirement to be determined on an individual basis. *Allow 20 feet per car The storage required for savings and loans may be less than for banks, and should be reviewed on an individual basis. Eight (8) vehicles per lane for a drive-through restaurant is a maximum. Certain types of fast-food restaurants may require less storage if substantiated by acceptable data. F. No pedestrian crossing of the drive-through lane shall be allowed. G. Proposed drive-through uses at or near signalized intersections may compound existing traffic congestion and make it intolerable even if the intersection meets the Transportation LOS Policy. In these situations proposed drive-through uses should be discouraged. II NOISE A. Drive-through speakers shall not be audible from adjacent residentially used, zoned, or General Planned properties. B. Drive-through speakers shall not be used when the drive-through lane abuts residentially used, zoned, or General Planned Property. C. Use of sound attenuation walls and landscaping shall be encouraged. III HOURS OF OPERATION A. No drive-through portion of land use shall operate after the hour of 10:00 P.M. when adjacent to residentially used, zoned, or General Planned properties. IV EMISSION CONTROL It is recognized that auto emissions are particularly objectionable where "tunneling" effects occur due to prevailingwindpatternsincombinationwithbuildingorientation,andwhereidlingvehiclesareincloseproximity to concentrations of people. A. An east-west orientation of drive-through lanes is discouraged, especially on the south side of main buildings. TITLE CRITERIA FOR THE REVIEW OF DRIVE-THROUGH USES PAGE 2 of 4 POLICY NUMBER 6-10 B. "Tunneling" will be deemed to occur where adjacent buildings are within thirty (30) feet of each other, or whereroof/wallstructuresencloseaspacelessthanthirty(30)feet.Suchsituationsarediscouraged unless air quality analyses performed by the applicant shows that unusual pollutant concentrations will not occur. C. Applicants shall take positive steps to protect employees of the drive-through facility from emissions caused by idling cars. D. Drive-through lanes shall not be located adjacent to patios and other pedestrian use areas, other than walkways. E. Drive-through use stacking lanes are discouraged in close proximity to residential uses, existing or planned. V URBAN DESIGN A. The architecture of drive-through uses shall be compatible and harmonize with that of the shopping center motif or immediate neighborhood in terms of building color, materials, mass, scale, and form. Standardized, "corporate" building designs shall be discouraged. B. Drive-through lanes shall be suffered from adjacent properties by means of heavy landscaping, and sound attenuating uses where appropriate and necessary. C. Drive-through restaurants shall incorporate seating within the restaurant, and drive-through banking facilities shall provide a walk-up window. VI LIGHTING A. Reference is made to Section 20.12.200 of the Zoning Ordinance. 20.12.200: LIGHTING. Any and all lighting facilities hereafter erected, constructed, or used for or in connection with any off-street parking spaces located in any residential district or adjacent to any residential district shall be so arranged and shielded that light will be reflected away from lands located in such residential district, and so that there will be no glare which will cause unreasonable annoyance to occupants of properties in such residential district, or otherwise interfere with the public health, safety, or welfare. B. Lighting devices located on roofs are considered an advertising device and will not be permitted. In addition, the following specific criteria are recommended. Recommended maximums for all drive-through uses: At Residential Property Line 0.1 fc At Other Property Line 0.5 fc Detached Signs 50 FL Attached Signs 20 FL Parking Lots (drive-up)0.5 foot-candles at surface Parking Lots (walk-in)0.2 foot-candles at surface fc = Foot Candle = illumination level on work surface. FL = Foot Lamberts = brightness one sees at the source. VII LOCATION A. Drive-through uses shall be located 200 feet or more from immediately adjacent or directly opposite residentially used, zoned, or General Planned properties. B. Drive-through facilities are discouraged in the Downtown Core Area (bounded by Julian Street, Fourth Street, Freeway 280, and Future Freeway 87). TITLE CRITERIA FOR THE REVIEW OF DRIVE-THROUGH USES PAGE 3 of 4 POLICY NUMBER 6-10 C. Buildings with drive-through facilities shall be located with a minimum separation of 500 feet from any structure containing a drive-through facility. Self-service car washes which are proposed in conjunction with existing gasoline service stations may be exempted from this locational criterion, provided the traffic criteria in I above are satisfied. VIII OTHER CRITERIA A. Water drippage on public streets at the exit of car washes shall be minimized through either automatic drying systems or hand drying in connection with full-service car wash facilities or through on-site grading and drainage patterns or other design features in connection with self-serve car wash facilities. IX DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS On and off-site circulation, traffic safety, curbside parking, number or proximity of driveways, speed bumps, and other site development factors shall be considered during the Conditional Use Permit or Planned Development (PD) Rezoning/Permit process and evaluated on a site-by-site basis. TITLE CRITERIA FOR THE REVIEW OF DRIVE-THROUGH USES PAGE 4 of 4 POLICY NUMBER 6-10 1 Matt Downing Subject:FW: No drive through Popeyes at corner of Faeh & El Camino Real From: Toni Toni Date: October 10, 2017 at 2:21:57 PM PDT To: "jhill@arroyogrande.org" <jhill@arroyogrande.org>, "tbrown@arroyogrande.org" <tbrown@arroyogrande.org>, "kbarneich@arroyogrande.org" <kbarneich@arroyogrande.org>, "cray@arroyogrande.org" <cray@arroyogrande.org> Subject: No drive through Popeyes at corner of Faeh & El Camino Real Thank you for reading my thoughts about proposed drive through Popeyes at corner of Feah and El Camino Real. The road structure does not support the drive through on El Camino Real because it is not a four lane road. Please reference the successful Starbucks on Grand and Elm Street. Both roads are 4 lane. The awkward shape of property lends itself to a park or sit down restaurant or used car lot, among other things. Please reference other City Councils that have some guidelines on approval of drive through restaurant such as San Jose "Criteria for the Review of Drive Through Uses". See link called 6-10. 6-10 Thanks again for your time and services to our City. Anonymous Resident of North Alpine Street Get Outlook for Android The information contained in this email pertains to City business and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not an intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient and you have received this message in error, please advise the sender by reply email or phone and delete the message. Please note that email correspondence with the City of Arroyo Grande, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt by law. ATTACHMENT 8