The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda Packet 2006-10-24 CITY OF Tony Ferrara Jim Guthrie Jim Dickens Joe Costello Ed Arnold Mayor Mayor Pro Tem Council Member Council Member Council Member Agenda City Council ~~LIFOR~." ~_ry~~'_' Steven Adams City Manager Timothy J. Carmel City Attorney Kelly Wetmore City Clerk AGENDA SUMMARY CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING TUESDAY, OCTOBER 24,2006 7:00 P.M. Arroyo Grande City Council Chambers 215 East Branch Street, Arroyo Grande 1. CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 P.M. 2. ROLL CALL: COUNCIURDA 3. FLAG SALUTE: BOY SCOUT PACK 13 DEN 6 WEBELOS 4. INVOCATION: RETIRED PASTOR PAUL JONES 5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS: 5.a. Honorary Proclamation - Character Counts Week 6. AGENDA REVIEW: 6a. Move that all ordinances presented tonight be read in title only and all further readings be waived. AGENDA SUMMARY - OCTOBER 24, 2006 PAGE 2 7. COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS: This public comment period is an invitation to members of the community to present issues, thoughts, or suggestions on matters not scheduled on this agenda. Comments should be limited to those matters that are within the jurisdiction of the City Council. The Brown Act restricts the Council from taking formal action on matters not published on the agenda. In response to your comments, the Mayor or presiding Council Member may: . Direct City staff to assist or coordinate with you. . A Council Member may state a desire to meet with you. . It may be the desire of the Council to place your issue or matter on a future Council agenda. Please adhere to the following procedures when addressing the Council: . Comments should be limited to 3 minutes or less. . Your comments should be directed to the Council as a whole and not directed to individual Council members. . Slanderous, profane or personal remarks against any Council Member or member of the audience shall not be permitted. 8. CONSENT AGENDA: The following routine items listed below are scheduled for consideration as a group. The recommendations for each item are noted. Any member of the public who wishes to comment on any Consent Agenda item may do so at this time. Any Council Member may request that any item be withdrawn from the Consent Agenda to permit discussion or change the recommended course of action. The City Council may approve the remainder of the Consent Agenda on one motion. 8.a. Cash Disbursement Ratification (KRAETSCH) Recommended Action: Ratify the listing of cash disbursements for the period October 1, 2006 through October 16, 2006. 8.b. Statement of Investment De DOS its (KRAETSCH) Recommended Action: Receive and file the report of current investment deposits as of September 30,2006. 8.c. Consideration of ADDroval of Minutes (WETMORE) Recommended Action: Approve the minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of September 12, 2006, as submitted. 8.d. Consideration of ProDosal to Purchase and Install UDarade to the City's Cable Television Plavback and Presentation System (ADAMS) Recommended Action: Appropriate $12,250 from the Public, Education and Government (PEG) Access Fund and direct staff to implement the proposal submitted by AGP Video for design and installation of the upgrade to the City's cable television playback and presentation system. a.e. Consideration of SUDDort for ProDosition 84 - The Clean Water. Parks and Coastal Protection Bond of 2006 (ADAMS) . Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution in support of Proposition 84 - The Clean Water, Parks and Coastal Protection Bond of 2006. AGENDA SUMMARY - OCTOBER 24, 2006 PAGE 3 8. CONSENT AGENDA: (Continued) 8.f. Consideration of Resolution in Suooort of Prooosition 1C - The Housina and Emeraency Shelter Trust Fund Act of 2006 (ADAMS) Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution in support of Proposition 1 C - The Housing and Emergency Shelter Trust Fund Act of 2006. 8.g. Consideration of Resolutions Establishina the City's Contribution Toward Health Care Coveraae (ADAMS/SISKO) Recommended Action: 1) Adopt Resolution establishing the City's contribution towards health care coverage for members of the Arroyo Grande Police Officers' Association; 2) Adopt Resolution establishing the City's contribution toward health care coverage for members of the International Association of Fire Fighters Local 4403; 3) Adopt Resolution establishing the City's contribution toward health care coverage for members of the Service Employees International Union, Local 620. 8.h. Consideration of Aoorooriation of Funds for Startuo Costs for East Grand Avenue Business Imorovement Association (ADAMS) [CC/RDA] Recommended Action: The City Council/RDA Board is requested to appropriate and authorize the City Manager/Executive Director to expend $2,000 for startup costs for the formation of an East Grand Avenue Business Improvement Association. 8.L Consideration of Authorization to Purchase a Self-Primina Pumo and Motor for Soto Detention Basin No.1 (SPAGNOLO) Recommended Action: Authorize the purchase of a 50 h.p. self-priming pump, motor and suction hose for Soto Detention Basin No. 1 from Godwin Pumps in the amount of $23,537.09. 8.j. Consideration of Award of Bid for Contracted Custodial Services - Service Master (HERNANDEZ) Recommended Action: Award the bid for contract custodial services to Service Master in the amount of $3,834 per month and authorize the Mayor to execute the Contractor Services Agreement. 8.k. Consideration of Authorization to Submit a Prooosal to the Lucia Mar Unified School District to be a Partner in the "Briaht Futures" Proaram (HERNANDEZ) Recommended Action: Authorize the Director of Parks, Recreation and Facilities to submit a proposal to the Lucia Mar Unified School District to become a partner in the Bright Futures Program. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 9.a. Consideration of Vestina Tentative Tract Mao Case No. 04-004 and Planned Unit Develooment Case No. 04-001: Aoolicant: DB & M Prooerties. LLC: Location: 415 E. Branch Street (Continued from Auaust 8. 2006) (STRONG) Recommended Action: Consider an addendum to a certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and a proposal for a commercial retail, office and residential project located in the Village of Arroyo Grande (Creekside Mixed-Use Center), take tentative action on the project and direct staff to return with a supporting resolution. AGENDA SUMMARY - OCTOBER 24, 2006 PAGE 4 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS (continued): 9.b. Consideration of Amended Conditional Use Permit Case No. 06-002: Hampton Inn and Suites Hotel Proiect Located at 1400 W. Branch Street (STRONG) Recommended Action: 1) Adopt Resolution approving Amended Conditional Use Permit Case No. 06-002 modifying Condition of Approval Number 23 for the Hampton Inn and Suites Hotel, including relocation of one additional existing mature oak and an amended landscape plan as requested; and 2) Authorize the Mayor to execute a revenue sharing agreement to provide a reimbursement of $250,000 over a five year period in transient occupancy tax revenue generated from the project. 10. CONTINUED BUSINESS: 10.a. Consideration of Traffic Way Streetscape Plan (STRONG/HERNANDEZ) Recommended Action: Consider the draft Traffic Way Streetscape Plan (TWSP), including street tree planting program by the Tree Guild and street restriping and future improvement plans prepared by Public Works and Community Development Departments for approval and implementation as recommended by the Parks and Recreation Commission and Traffic Commission. 11. NEW BUSINESS: None. 12. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS: This item gives the Mayor and Council Members the opportunity to present reports to the other members regarding committees, commissions, boards, or special projects on which they may be participating. (a) MAYOR TONY FERRARA: (1) San Luis Obispo Council of Governments/San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (SLOCOG/SLORTA) (2) South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District (SSLOCSD) (3) Other (b) MAYOR PRO TEM JIM GUTHRIE: (1) County Water Resources Advisory Committee (WRAC) (2) Other (c) COUNCIL MEMBER JIM DICKENS: (1) South County Area Transit (SCAT) (2) South County Youth Coalition (3) Other AGENDA SUMMARY - OCTOBER 24, 2006 PAGE 5 12. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS (continued): (d) COUNCIL MEMBER JOE COSTELLO: (1) Zone 3 Water Advisory Board (2) Air Pollution Control District (APCD) (3) Fire Oversight Committee (4) Fire Consolidation Oversight Committee (5) Other (e) COUNCIL MEMBER ED ARNOLD: (1) Integrated Waste Management Authority Board (IWMA) (2) California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (CJPIA) (3) Economic Vitality Corporation (EVC) (4) Other 13. CITY COUNCIL MEMBER ITEMS: The following item(s) are placed on the agenda by a Council Member who would like to receive feedback, direct staff to prepare information, and/or request a formal agenda report be prepared and the item placed on a future agenda. No formal action can be taken. a. None. 14. CITY MANAGER ITEMS: The following item(s) are placed on the agenda by the City Manager in order to receive feedback and/or request direction from the Council. No formal action can be taken. a. None. 15. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS: Correspondence/Comments as presented by the City Council. 16. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS: Correspondence/Comments as presented by the City Manager. 17. COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS: This public comment period is an invitation to members of. the community to present issues, thoughts, or suggestions. Comments should be limited to those matters that are within the jurisdiction of the City Council. The Brown Act restricts the Council from taking formal action on matters not published on the agenda. 18. ADJOURNMENT AGENDA SUMMARY - OCTOBER 24, 2006 PAGE 6 ************************* All staff reports or other written documentation relating to each item of business referred to on the agenda are on file in the City Clerk's office and are available for public inspection and reproduction at cost. If requested, the agenda shall be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability, as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act. To make a request for disability-related modification or accommodation, contact the Administrative Services Department at 805-473-5414 as soon as possible and at least 48 hours, prior to the meeting date. ************************* This agenda was prepared and posted pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2. Agenda reports can be accessed and downloaded from the City's website at www.arrovoQrande.orQ ************************** City Council/Redevelopment Agency Meetings are cablecast live and videotaped for replay on Arroyo Grande's Government Access Channel 20. The rebroadcast schedule is published at www.slo-soan.orQ. OF 5.a. ~. ~UCALIFOR~(c1f "-~~ .~@ Honorary Proclamation Recognizing CHARACTER COUNTS! Week October 16-22, 2006 WHEREAS, young people will be the stewards of our communities, nation and world in critical times, and the present and future well-being of our society requires an involved, caring citizenry with good character; and WHEREAS, more than ever, children need strong and constructive guidance from their families and their communities, including schools, youth organizations, religious institutions and civic groups; and WHEREAS, the character of a nation is only as strong as the character of its individual citizens, and the public good benefits when young people learn that good character counts in personal relationships, in school and in the workplace; and WHEREAS, scholars and educators agree that people do not automatically develop good character and, therefore, conscientious efforts must be made by youth-influencing institutions and individuals to help young people develop the ~ssential traits and characteristics that comprise good character; and WHEREAS, character development is, first and foremost, an obligation of families, though efforts by faith communities, schools, and youth, civic .and human service organizations also playa very important role in supporting family efforts by fostering and promoting good character; and WHEREAS, an effective character education .is based on core ethical values which form the foundation of democratic society - trustworthiness, respect, responsibility, fairness, caring and citizenship - and these "Six Pillars of Character" transcend cultural, religious and socioeconomic differences; and WHEREAS, the character and conduct of our youth reflect the character and conduct of society; therefore, every adult has the responsibility to'teach and model the core ethical values and every social institution has the responsibility to promote the development of good character. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that I, Tony Ferrara, Mayor of the City of Arroyo Grande, on behalf of the City Council, and the citizens of Arroyo Grande do hereby proclaim the week of October 16-22, 2006 as CHARACTER COUNTS! Week, and do hereby endorse the "Six Pillars of Character" and encourage all citizens, corporate and individual, to model these traits of good character in an ongoing commitment to promote character development and ethical behavior in the youth of our community. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the City of Arroyo Grande to be affixed this 24th day of October, 2006. , TONY FERRARA, MAYOR 8.a. MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL A JI ANGELA KRAETSCH, DIRECTOR OF FINANCIAL SERVICESI(~ FRANCES R. HEAD, ACCOUNTING SUPERVISO SUBJECT: CASH DISBURSEMENT RATIFICATION FROM: BY: DATE: OCTOBER 24, 2006 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council ratify the attached listing of cash disbursements for the period October 1 through October 15, 2006. FUNDING: There is a $776,510.08 fiscal impact that includes the following items: . Accounts Payable Checks 128471-128663 . Payroll Checks &.Benefit Checks $ 321,057.96 $ 455,452.12 All payments are within the existing budget. DISCUSSION: The attached listing represents the cash disbursements required of normal and usual operations. It is requested that the City Council approve these payments. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration: . Approve staffs recommendation; . Do not approve staff's recommendation; . Provide direction to staff. Attachments: Attachment 1- October 1- October 15, 2006, Accounts Payable Check Register Attachment 2- October 13, 2006, Payroll Checks & Benefit Checks Register ~ ~ ~ m r-- '" 0 ~ r-- N 0 ~ CO 0 0 0 0 m 0 ..,. 0 CO '" 0 ~ I- iD "! r-- ..,. "' """: m N 0 r-- 0 0 0 0 "' 0 0 m m "' Z 0 ..,. '" "' en ~ 0 N 0 ex:> cD 0 0 CO m en r-- 0 0 cD ... ... ., W Cl .... ..,. N '" ..,. "' '" N N "' '" '" m N co ..,. co ~ co Cl co '" ~ '" N N "'. co ::!! lL u N ..,: lL J: " r-- N J: 0 0 < l- I- < '" m r-- '" 0 ~ r-- N 0 ~ 0 CO 0 0 0 0 '" CO 0 ..,. 0 CO '" 0 "" CO r-- ..,. "' ~ m N 0 '" ..,. ~ 0 0 0 0 ~O ~ 0 0 m m "' lL ... M .,.; en ~ 0 N 0 N cD cD 0 0 co en '" ~ r-.: 0 0 cD ... ... - ..,. ~ N '" ..,. "' '" N ..,. '" "' '" '" m N co ..,. co ~ co c '" ~ O. N ~ '" " r-: ..,.. N 0 E ~ <( CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO .!l 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. N N ~ ~. N N N N N N N N N N N ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ N N C CO CO CO CO N N (0 (0 ;:: ;:: ;:: in CO in m C;; ,: '" '" ~ r-- "' N ~ N N N N N N 0 ~ ~ N N N ~ 0 ~ '" N 0 N 0 N N 0 .5 m m m m m m <3 m m - <3 - m m m <3 m m <3 m m m m m '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" ..,. "' 0 m "' r-- CO ..,. '" N N N N N N cD ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,. ClW ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "' 0 r-- r-- r-- r-- r-- r-- ..,. CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N ..,. ..,. ~ 0 ._ Z " 0 0 0 0 0 0 on CO '" 0 CO CO CO CO N CO '" ..,. CO -<( ... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "' "' 0 0 0 '" r-- "' 0 ~ '" "' 0 .!!! 0:: '0 !2 ~ 0 !2 0 0 ..,. N N ..,. 0 r-- r-- "' CO ~ N "' '" CO r-- 0 '" '1i; - - "' N '" 0 Cl: N N 0 m 0 0 0 m "' CO N 0 ...JCl > ., ., Q) Q) 0 m "' 0 m m m 0 r-- '" '" m N 0 ..,. CO 0 ~O .5 Cl: Cl: Cl: Cl: Cl: Cl: ~ 0 ..,. 0 CO 0 0 "' 0 '" 0 CO 0 0>- .!l _0 .. 1/)0:: c .- 0:: '" :1:<( '0 .>l:u. ~ 00 .. Gl>- " ..c::1- (3 0- 0 il lL ;;( <( ..i ...J ::;! lD Z ...J e- O 0 0 >- Cl: w 1i: Cl: Cl: f- I W ..: CfJ 0 CfJ w f- w f= w f- l- N I C.9 ~ w ;;S Z lD 0 U ...J Z W ::;! ::;! ;:) 0 <( W ;:) Cl: CfJ Z 0 0 <( 0 Z 0 W C.9 w 5 Cl: CfJ :> lD 0 ;:) Cl: CfJ I 0 0 l- lL U. ...J I- w Z CfJ W 0 ::;! Cl: Cl: a I- CfJ ill 0 u. u. >- w ;;S CfJ w <( f- CfJ o/l Cl: w 0 0 Cl: >- ::;! w <( w z <( w 0 CfJ Cl: Z w f- CfJ lD W CfJ W ...J a u:: Cl: a a ::5 f= 0 f- a.. :! l- I- 0 ...J Z Z W I ;:) 0 o/l a.. a.. 0 ::;! z o/l ;:) ::;! CfJ a <( <( a.. z <( l- f- a z w w >- I ~ ...J ;:) CfJ W <( W I Z ><:: ...J lD Z W W 0 W 0 a C.9 Cl: 0 0 ...J I Z >- W ...J a ::;! a 1i: ~ lD lD CfJ 0 0 a <( f- f- 1i: z 0 ~ a 0 ;;S N CfJ ;:) f- a.. CfJ CfJ (9 I Z 0 Z 0:: W >- >- w 1i: a Cl: co W 0 <( a <( 1i: ::;! 0: :; ::;! 0 Cl: Cl: ;:) <( <( <( <( ...J -, U 0 Z 0 0 f- <( <( w <( lD lD lD co co U 0 0 0 ~ "' ~ '" N 0 ..,. '" '" 0 N r-- m "' r-- 0 N CO N 0 CO "' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ..,. ..,. "' '" 0 0 0 co m ~ m ~ ~ r-- '" '" co '" '" co co co "' ..,. 0 CO co '" 0 0 0 '" 0 ~ ~ r-- CO c "' "' "' "' "' "' ..,. "' ~ N "' "' "' 0 0 "' 0 0 0 N ..,. ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO co CO CO CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ::!! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 lL .!l N N N N ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ N N N N N N N N N N .. N N N N N N '" ~ CO co co co (0 (0 (0 (0 (0 (0 (0 (0 (0 ~ c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 oii <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 .. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 .c .. ~ N '" ..,. "' CO r-- co 0 ~ N '" ..,. "' CO r-- co m 0 ~ N '" '" r-- r-- r-- r-- r-- r-- r-- r-- m m m m m m m m m m 0 0 0 - 0 iU ... ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,. "' "' "' II) 0 '" " '" '" co co co co co co co co co '" co '" co co '" co co '" '" X N 0 J: N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N (D U 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .l< '" O:!: c CoO .. co~ In N .. ~ '" '" " '" '" " 0 0 CD 0 r-- CD 0 0 0 N -0 00 '" ~ a> r-- '" a> '" 0 '" '" '" 0 0 a> N Q) en 0 r-- <ri ~ r-..: ~ " 0 .,.; r-..: '" '" ..,: ~ '" a; Cl .... a> '" 00 CD r-- 00 00 N 0 a> '" '" '" '" 0 N Cl cu "" N "'- '" ~ r--_ ~ '" N cu ll. u ll. Q) " N '" '" 0 "0 a> N '" 0 ~ 00 '" CD '" " '" N N a> N N 0 0 N" 0 r-- CD 0 0 0 .; 0 r-- CD ": "'''00 ~ a> ": 00 00 CD """: 00 '" 0 00 '" '" '" 0 0 a> N D.. " .0 <ri r-..:~ aj("'jci r-- <ri ~ .,.; a N ~ a ..,: a ~ro r-..: .0 .,.; ..,: ~ '" - 00 ~ 00 NN 00 CD r-- 0 00 ~ r-- N 0 000 '" '" '" '" 0 N c: ~ '" '" ~ "- '" ~ "'N N " ,,- .,.; 0 N E c( CD CD CD CD(!)<DCOCD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD J!l 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. ~ ~ ~ NNNNN ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ N N N N N N ~ ~ ~ ~ c NLOa;;::::;:::: ;0 co ;0 N M m :> 00 a> ~ ~ '" 00 CD a>~ N N N '" N '" N ~ ~ ONNNN 0 N ~ ~ ~N ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 N 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ .E - om05mm 25 m me>> - 25 m 25 m 25 - - a> a> r-- a> a> a> a> 0 a> 0 0 a> 0 0 0 ~oooo 0 0 0 00 0 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 0 00 ~ ~ CD ~ " 0 ~ ~ mW r-- " " ~ " '" 0 CD CD a> a> '" CD " r-- 0 CO 0 0 , a> " 0 '" 0 " 0 r-- N ._ Z Q) N ~ a> ~ ~ 00 CD '" 00 CD '" '" N '" r-- CD CD CD CD ....c( u '" , 00 ... 0 0 CD 0 r-- 00 CD N r-- .... 'It ~ r-- 0 " 0 0 0 a> .!!! 0:: '0 00 a> 0 " N a> a> 00 '" 00 '" 00 0 u '" ~ '" 0 N '" N r-- 0 0 0 ~ 00 ~ 00 00 " N N 00 r-- 00 0 0 CD CD CD 0 a> 0 0 0 r-- ...JO > 0 0 00 '" 0 '" 0 0 r-- 0 a> 0 0 0 0 0 u 0 ~ ~ 0 '" 0 0 0 N ~o .E r-- r-- " r-- r-- 0 ~ a:: a:: <( ...., ~ ~ N ~ ~ N 0>- J!l ....0 .. 00:: c .- 0:: "0 :1:<( '0 ....:... ~ 00 .. Gl>- Q) .r:.... 0 u- 0 II ...J (f) (f) <( LlJ (f) a: >- 0.. LlJ :r: .... a:: <( >- (f) u C> a:: 0 ~ ~ u C> a: >- <( o<S z tt t: (f) 0.. n:: 0 0.. LlJ LlJ (f) i= z CD 0 ...J .... a:: a:: :r: CD a:: z w ...J :.: w :r: 0 <( <( 0 z C> Z LlJ ~ n:: w C> .... ...., (f) w :S z w ci .... 0 o<S 0.. W ...J ::; :::> 0.. C> i= w z >- :.: 0.. LlJ > ~ ...J 0 a:: <( w 0 w w 0 LlJ 0 U C2 0 ::!; w <( ...J 0 CD .... .... C3 w a:: :.: :::> z ...J ...J a:: z (f) ~ w a:: 0 w 0 II. ...J II. <( C> :.: a:: (f) a:: LlJ a:: w <( ::; o<S (f) <( (f) a:: C> u 0 :::> w 0 :2 :::> z ~ LlJ II. 0 Z W ;:: a:: ~ 0 II. 0 <( :;: 1= z ...J W C> z z :;: u ::; a:: w :;: :r: ...J ...J 0 a:: <( C2 :;: >- <( <( <( ...J 0 :::> 0 w W ...J W W :::> .... w U U U U U ...., 0 0 W II. 0 LL (f) LL C3 :r: ~ '" '" ~ a> a> ~ 0 a> CD '" 0 N 00 '" 00 ~ 0 '" 0 ~ a> a> a> " '" 0 N a> CD N N 00 0 "0 00 CD " '" ~ 0 00 0 00 '" r-- N '" 00 N '" c: '" 0 '" '" 0 '" ~ N '" ~ " 0 N " 0 0 Q) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 :;; 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ll. J!l ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ N N N N ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ N .. CD <0 CD CD CD CD <0 <0 <0 <0 CD CD CD CD <0 CD - C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .;; - 25 - - 25 25 25 25 25 25 - - - 25 25 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 .c '" '" " '" CD r-- 00 a> 0 ~ N '" " '" CD r-- 00 '" ;; -" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ u:; ~ ~ ~ ~ - 0 u '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" l/I 0 "0 Q) 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 :i: N 0 '" N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N - U U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -" '" -" O:!:: c: 0.0 .. cu- m M 1; 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD N on 00 .... M on 0 0 0 0 N I'- '" CD 00 .... I'- CD 0 N 0 '" Qj .... I'- 0 on .... 0 ~ 0 I'- N '" CD '" I'- M M on ~ '" M 00 CD '" .. '" '" 0 N 0 '" ...., .. ll. u ll. .. M on on ~ .c N .... 0 'C 00 0 0 0 0 I'- mco"'l:tl'- 0 ~ 00 I'- .... I'- CD.... CD .... '" CD M on 000 1'-1'- '; oon 0 0 0 0 CD O"l:t"l:tCO I'- I'- CD M I'- <q ....N '" M ~ on on 00 on", MM II. LON 0 <ri '" 0 ,..: mr....:crio on 0 0 <<i M N Lria.ri I'- 0 N <ri '" N .r....: N NN - ....N '" I'- M M .... ('1')<"')('1')("") N on on '" 0 N ~ CD~ MM C '" 0 CD M '""".1.0. 1'-1'- ::I ri " 0 ~.... E N M~ <( CD CD CD CD CD CD CD co <0 <D co (0 CD co co co <D CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD .!l 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ NNNNN N NNNN ~ N N N N N N N N N N N ----- ;0 - --- " <D ;0 ;0 NN ;;; ;::: 0 0 0; ,; .... M M '" I'- I'- 0 CJ) C>> co ..... co ('0')1"---1.00> I'- 0 0 0 N N N M NNNNN N ONNN N 0 ~ ~ ~ NN 0 ~ N ~ ~ .E 0 0 0 0; 0; 0; 0; ----- 0; ommen 0; 0 - - -- - 0; mO)CJ)O)co '" '" "''''''' 0 '" '" '" ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 00000 0 .....000 0 ~ 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 '" ~ ~ ~ ~ on on 0 0 0 0 on CD 0 0 <;> 0 0 cO I'- N cO 0 , ClW '" I'- .... ~ '" , ~ CD 00 0 '" I'- 0 ~ CO 0 M '" 001'-1'- 00 .... ._ Z .. CD CD CD CD CD I'- 00 I'- 0 '" ~ I'-CD NCDI'- M .... CD ~ '" on 00 CD '" '" ~ ..>CX)DQ) ",on 1'-....0 ~ 0 on on 1'-'" M N 0 '" ~ 0 0 0 I'- N N M M NNNCO 00 M NNM N M N NMM 0 M N M ....Ie! > 0 0 0 ~ '" '" 0 0 0000) ~ 0 000 0 I'- M on on on on 0 on N M M ,=,0 .E ~ ~ ~ on 0 0 ...............0 ~ D.. '" M MMM 00 0; 0>- .!l ..0 co tIlO:: c '-0:: 'C J:< '0 -"LL ~ 00 co (1)>- .. .l:1- C3 0- 0 il z 00 0 w z u f= 00 oil 0:: 0 ii: ;:s W <9 ~ f= l- ll. Z <( U :J <( 0 u W m u II) 0:: 0 Z ...J ~ 00 :;; <( ::::> <( W 0:: 0:: 0 ::::> ~ :c 0:: :;; I- <9 oil 00 W W Z ...J 0 0 W D.. W LL :;; I- 00 ...J Z z :'5 ~ D.. l- I- W U >- 0 W 0:: <( 0 Z Z ~ I- Z <( W U 0 0 <9 00 :J :J <( ~ W 00 :c ...J W :'5 u u 00 <9 0 w D:: :'5 w u g; u:: ii: 00 ...J W I- W ::::> W 0 >- Z ...J >< u:: 0:: U U :c 0 > ~ ~ ~ ::::> w LL ~ <( <( U 0 :J :;; Z 0 D.. D.. ~ ~ CD 0 '" 00 '" ~ '" 00 0 ~ M 0 ~ M ~ I'- 0 N .... .... CD ~ 00 ~ 'C on ~ I'- N 00 .... .... 00 .... 00 .... .... C on ~ on .... on 0 0 N 0 on 0 N .. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD :::;; 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ll. .!l N N N N N N N N N N ~ N N co <D <D <D <D <D <D <D <D <D <D CD <D ~ c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 on 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 co ~ ~ ~ 0 .., .. '" 0 ~ N M .... on CD I'- 00 '" 0 U> iIi '" ~ N N N N N N N N N N M - 0 U on on on on on on on on on on on on .!!l 0 'C .. 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 N 0 .c N N N N N N N N N N N N :I: U; u 0 ~ ~ ~ '" '" O~ C 0.0 co ..~ III .. fti r-- 0 r-- 00 .. "' 0 "" CD 0 .. a; - N '" r-- N .. .. "' CD ~ 0 0 ~ ~ .0 ID a; .... "" r-- '" 0 ~ CD Cl ~ CD '" "' r-- "' ~ '" N "" Cl .. "" .. "" '" "'- .. .. Q. " '" Q. " 00 J:; 0 'C "" '" O......COC")Q) '" 0 "' 0 r--O 00 0 .. "' 0 00 "' N ""'" "" CD r-- NCDCD N 0 "OJ "" CD OMMNLO CD 0 0 '" "'00 N 0 .. .. "' '" ..r-- 00" ~..", r--r--r-- CD 0 11. r--o Lrir--.:MNOO ci ci <Xi ~ aID "' r--o '" 0 ...; cOO:> MID cci-.i(J) .1'- cO cO .0 ID - "'''' 1'-0) en vM 0 .. "" CD '" "' "'00 "' ~ 0 '" .. ~ 0 0000.... 000 "" r:: N.CD MNN............ ~ ~ N '" "' ~ ~ ~ N ::l .; 0 E ~ <( CD CD CD (()COCOCOCOCOCD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD co co co co co CD <D CD CD CD CD CD " 0 00 0000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000 0 000 0 - 0 00 0000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000 0 000 0 .. N NN NNNNNNN !:::' N N N N N N N !:::' NNNNNNN !:::' ~~~ N C 0 00 ------- r::: iD N r::: r::: in r::: ------- (;; ,: 0000000 "' ~ ......NCOaJLOCOLO ~ ~ ~~ N NNNNNNNNN !:::' N N N N N ~ N .0 ON 00.................. 0 000 0 .E m --------- m m m m m m m m ------- 0 000 0 mmm(J)CJ)mmmm '" mmmmmmm 0 000000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000 CD CD ClW ~ CD r-- .... ~ "" N '" "" "' ~ 00 cO 00 ....ON ~ ~ OOOCD ~ N .... r-- CD 00 .... r-- '" ~ ~ N .... 0 "" ._ Z " CD ""...."" CD "" I'- N N C> "' .... N ~ ~ CD CD.... '" '" '" "' CD 0 ~CDCD CD -<( " 0> CD CD CD N CD mcoCD"It" CD 0 N ~ 00 "" ~ 00 N '" '" 0 "' r-- 0 "' ~ '" 0 .!!l 0:: '0 0 000 0 0 0000 N r-- "" 0 r-- CD 00 "" CD "' I'-COOOV"It" "" 0 ........ r-- "" "" "" "" ~ 0 0 .... 0 .... vLOvvLOLOLO 00 r--oo r-- 0 ...JCl > !:::' NNNNNNNNN N CD CD CD "" "" N 0 .... vvvvvv..;;t "' "' "' "' 0 .E --------- ~O '" mmmmmmmmm ~ .... .... 0 CD CD "" 00 CD COCOCO<DCO<O({) ~ ~ ~ ~ 0>- .$ _0 .. t/l0:: c .- 0:: 'C :1:<( '0 ..ll:LL ~ 00 .. ~~ " 0 o- Il 0 en () Ct: >- en z W Ct: ::;; 0.. ~ () W ~ <( Ct: Z >- f- 0.. Z 0 ...J en Z en <( Cl Q. >- <( ?: LL Z 0.. en 0.. en en Cl ::> ::;; W >- ::> lD Z en Z 0 Z f- ...J ::;; Ui z W () >- Z 0.. ::> W f- ::> Ct: ...J Lli 0 ...J ...J Z 0 <( ::;; 0.. en ~ ::> () ...J f- , 0 ::> () W Z Ct: z Ct: ~ en 0 I 0.. f= w I W :;; () f- en ?: ci 0 W :'5 () lD LL 0 ::> lD 0 ~ 0 <( ...J ...J 0 0 0.. 0.. ii: Ct: en Ui en en lD ~ "' ~ .... 0 ~ '" 00 .... '" 0 CD ~ 00 r-- "" "" "" CD .... 0 'C N 00 ~ CD 0 "' 00 "' CD CD r:: "" "' .... N "" 0 "" 0 "" 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 :;: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q. .$ !:::' N N N N N N N !:::' !:::' N .. CD iD iD iD iD iD iD iD CD CD ~ C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 on - 0 - 0 0 - 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. ~ 0 .Q .. ~ N "" .... "' CD r-- 00 '" 0 <D "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" .... - 0 iP " "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' .. 0 'C " 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 :i: N 0 J:; N N N N N N N N N N CD " 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "" "" O~ r:: <:LO .. ..~ III It) s 0 lD ~ '" 0 .,., 0> <Xl 0 0 0 '" 0 .,., <Xl 0 0 0 0 0> It) 0 N '<t 0 N '" <Xl '" 0 0> 0 0> 0 0> N 0 0 0 .,., I-- Gl 0 .,., I-- ~ r--: ~ lD ,.; .,., .,., '" 0 '<t m 0 0 N <Xl 0 N ..,: Gl Cl ..... '" 0 lD ~ ~ '<t <Xl 0 <Xl ",. .,., '<t I-- .,., <Xl I-- '" 0 <Xl Cl C<l ~ <Xl '" "'- lD N <Xl N <Xl .,., .,., '" ~ C<l 0.. " m 0.. Gl ~ ~ ~ '<t J:: N ~ <.> 'tl 0 lD o~ .,., <Xl 0 0 .,., 0 0> <Xl 0 0 0 '" 0 .,., <Xl 0 0 0 0 0> '; 0 N NN lD '" "'- 0> 0> .,., 0Cl '" 0 0> 0 0> 0 0> N C> 0 0 .,., I-- ll. .,.; r--: criLO ..,: N ~ ~o I-- '" '" '" '" 0 ..,: m 0 0 N <Xl 0 N '<t - '" 0 '<t~ I-- '<t ~ <Xl~ '<t <Xl 0 <Xl '" .,., '<t I-- .,., <Xl I-- .,., 0 <Xl c: .,., N '" .,.,<Xl <Xl lD N <Xl N <Xl .,., '" ~ '" " ~ ro' m ~ ..,: 0 E ~ ~ < lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD <0 lD lD lD lD Gl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. ~ N N N N N N ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N N ~ N N ~ ~ N ~ ~. 0 ;0 ;::: ;::: 05 ;::: N ;::: (0 <3 m N ,; .,., '" "'''' .,., 0 '" N ~ 0> 0 ~ '" ~ N ~ N N N 0 ~ ~~ N N 0 0 ~ 0 ~ '" 0 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 .5 m m m m <3 m me>> m m <3 - <3 m m <3 <3 <3 - - - 0> 0> 0 0> 0 0> 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 ~ 0 ~ mW 0 '" , N CO '<t I-- .,., N '<t I-- lD lD 0 lD 0 lD lD lD lD lD lD lD 0 ._ Z Gl 0 ....<( " lD '" 0 0 0 lD <XlI-- I-- 0 N 0 0 0 lD 0 0 0 0 0 .!!! a: '0 .,., '" .,., .,., lD N N ~ ~~ '" '<t '" I-- N ~ 0 0> 0> 0> N 0> I-- lD '" ~ ~ N ~ 0 <Xl <Xl <Xl ~ I-- 0 ~ N 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 ~ lD '" ...JC> > 0 I-- 0 0 .,., .,., 0 0 00 lD '" 0 0> 0 0> '" 0 0 0 0 <Xl 0 ~o .5 .,., I-- ~ ~ '<t '<t N NN I-- '" 0.. 0 ~ 0 0> ~ 0>- $ ....0 .. fila: 0 .- a: 'tl :I:<( '0 ..Il:IL ?; "'0 .. CI)>- Gl ..c:..... <3 0- 0 II ...J IL W W U ::i c:: > C> 0.. Z W W <( U 0 w o/S c:: f- ...J 0 t? ><:: u z 0:: f- ...J ~ ~ u z u <( u w f- Z 0 c:: ...J U U t? w U u w >- <( ::i 0 0.. Z Z W W Z :;;: W Z IL c:: 0:: u ...J ::> f- 0 ~ c:: W ...J U <( w >- ::> 0 ui Z ...J :;;: >- IL U) ...., 0 u U) f- w f- w 0 0 w 0:: ~ f- Z U) U c:: c:: c:: c:: ~ ...J <( >- U) w u: ::> w f- t? F :;;: <( z .s ...J f- <( U) a:l f- w 0 c:: >- >- 0 IL 0.. 0.. 0:: 0 z 0 ~ w 0 w U) <( :c U) :;;: w u ::> w ~ c:: ~ :c :c u ~ ~ W a:l c:: :;;: 0 f- Lu 0.. ...J W 0 0 U) U) ::i t? <( ~ w U) z w 0 Z f- w ~ 0 ::i t- t- U Z U '> <( ~ ~ ~ 0 c:: ...J ~ U) :;;: w z U) U) z '> 0 0.. t? w c:: 0 ~ w <( w <( ...J <( <( 0 <( W ...J t? c:: U) t- F f- 0 ~ ...., ...J U) '> u u u U) ><:: U) <( <( ~ '" I-- 0 0> '" '" I-- 0> lD 0> N '<t 0> .,., '" <0 <Xl '" 0> .,., 0 ~ '" I-- 0 '" <Xl <Xl <Xl lD 0> 0 <Xl N N .,., I-- 0> '" .,., ;;; 'tl lD <0 '" lD lD lD lD lD <Xl lD '" lD 0 0 0 '" '" '" N c: 0 0 N '<t 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 '" 0 0 0 ~ '<t ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 lD <0 lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.. Gl ~ ~ ~ N N N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N N N N N N N '" - lD lD lD (0 (0 (0 lD lD lD <0 lD lD 0> m <3 <3 <3 N c;; c;; .. ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ on <3 - - <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 0 0 .. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 .Q .. ~ N '" '<t .,., lD I-- <Xl 0> 0 ~ N '" '<t .,., lD I-- <Xl 0 ~ CD ~ '<t '<t '<t '<t '<t '<t '<t '<t '<t .,., .,., .,., .,., .,., '" .,., '" .,., lD lD - 0 ;; " .,., '" '" .,., .,., .,., .,., .,., .,., '" .,., .,., .,., .,., .,., .,., .,., .,., .,., .,., III 0 'tl Gl <Xl <Xl <Xl <Xl co co co co co co <Xl co co <Xl <Xl <Xl co co co co :i: '" 0 J:: N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N CD " <.> ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0- c: c.o .. C<l_ lD CD .. 0 0 N CJ) N ~ CJ) ~ 0 0 0 CO '" 0 0 N '" I'- CD a; '0 " 0 0 CO 0 CO '" I'- CO 0 CJ) 0 CO 0 '" " CO N 0 '" ~ ,...: " cO " '" 0 <'i 0 0 ~ U; N m '" '" I- CO ~ I'- I'- 0 N I'- '" CO '" '" CO '" I'- ~ I'- " '" .. "" 0 ~ " N N '" " CO .. 0.. " 0.. '" .s:: 0 " 0 0 0 N 0 CJ) N ~ '" CO ~ " ~ 00 '" 0 0 CO '" 0 0 N '" I'- 'n; " 0 N CJ) CJ) CO ~ 0 "'~ '" 0 '" ~""'": CO CO 0 CJ) 0 CO 0 '" " 11. CO N " m U; <'i ~ ,...: O~ cO m 0 "'''' " '" 0 <'i 0 0 ~ '" ('oj m - co ~ '" N ~ I'- 0 1'-'" I'- CO '" CO '" '" CO '" I'- I'- " C 0 ~ " N ~ N " CO ::l 0 E <( CO CO CO CO CO CO CO <D CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO <D <D CO CO CO CO 2 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. ~ ~ N NN N N N ~ ~ N ~ ~~~ ~ N N ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c <0 ~a a; 25 N 05 ~ a; N :> '" ~ 0 0 CO ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I'- ~ CO 0 ~ ~ ~~ ~ '" N '" '" 0 ~ ~~~ ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 N N N .E 25 25 a; - - a; a; a; a; a; mOl 05 a; ;::: 25 25 - 25 25 a; a; a; CJ)CJ) CJ) CJ) 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 ~ ~ 0 0 0 CJ) I'- CJ) mW N '" N 0<0............. CJ) N ~ CO '" '" I'- I'- ....... co ....... to CJ) ~ '" ._ z '" CO 0 ;::: CO '" M(",)M(",) CO CO 0 CO ~ N ~ -<( " '" 0 '" CO N I'- 0 I'- CJ) CO CO ,...................,..... '" 0 0 '" 0 CO CJ) CO CO .!!! a: '0 0 ~ '" CO '" " 0 CJ) '" ~ CJ) '" 0) 0) 0) 0) I'- CJ) ~ N ~ CO N '" " " ~ " " " " x ~ '" CO rb '" 1.01.01.01.0 " 0 ~ '" ~ 0 CO N 0 ..ICl > '" 0 I'- I'- I'- I'- CJ) '" N N '" LOl.OLOLO " 0 0 0 0 CJ) 0 '" .E - u; ~o " N N N N CO N '" '" CJ) I-- 1--1--1--1-- N ~ N N " ~ 0>- 2 _0 .. 1/1 a: c .- a: " J:<( '0 ....:... ~ 00 .. Gl>- '" .s::.1-- c::; 0- 0 II 0 C/l <( Cl: <( Z ~ al W >- a: Cl: e. () s I al ...i W 0 u: 0.. 0 Cl: () <( s s C/l i= 0 ~ en w z W ...J al Z 0 (:l () z u.. C/l :;; C/l 0 0.. W W (:l ~ w z :> C3 0:: 0 ::> 0.. i= 0 0 ...J ...J :;; <( 0:: Z 0:: C/l Z I-- <( <( >- 0.. 0.. Z W Z 0 w w ~ 0 al 0:: ~ 0:: W X C/l o/l I-- 0:: 0 0.. C/l 0 I 0:: 0:: :;; 0:: W W W ...J W 0 0:: w <( Cl 0.. ;1i <( w W al I-- 0:: ...J Z I-- <( I-- W al al 0:: z u.. ~ <( I-- I C/l I Z ::> I C/l 0 () ...J <( () ...J W ii: u.. () 0 C/l <( S >- :;; z w 0 >- ~ 0 0 ii: I-- 0.. () 0 >< X S 0 0 i== i= ::> z () 0:: w w () w W 0:: 0:: o/l o/l C/l Z W u; W w ::> S C/l :;; 0.. 0.. 0.. 0.. 0:: 0:: I-- !< ::> <( 0:: <( I '" ...J :;; ii: <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( :;; al al () <( '" '" al ~ 0 " 0 " N '" N I'- '" 0 '" '" " " I'- CO '" 0 0 '" '" CO '" '" " " 0 ~ '" ~ CO " N I'- I'- CO CJ) " 0 CJ) ~ 0 CO I'- 0 '" CO 0 CO 0 CJ) CO 0 0 '" 0 c ~ '" '" 0 N '" 0 '" '" 0 '" 0 ~ '" 0 0 '" 0 '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a > a a a a a a 0 a a 0 a a 0 a a a a a <D <D <D CO CO CO CO <D CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO a a a a a a 0 a a 0 a a a a a a a a :;; a a a 0 a a a a a a a a a a a a 0 0 0.. 2 ~ N" ~ N N N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N N N N - M M M M M M M N .. '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" ~ C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ on 25 - 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 a .. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 " .. N '" " '" co I'- co CJ) 0 ~ N '" " '" co I'- co CJ) CD "" co co <D co co co co co I'- I'- I'- I'- I'- I'- I'- I'- I'- I'- - <> ;,; " '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" l/l <> " '" co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co J: N 0 .s:: N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N u; " 0 ...., ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "" "" o~ C <:LO .. ..~ III .... 19 CD 0 0 0 0 0 '" CD 0 CD 0 0 '" .... 0 0 .... c,; ~ 0 0 0 eo 0 a> .... 0 ~ 0 0 N 0 0 0 c,; 0 ~ 0 r--: 0 a> 0 '" m 0 0 eo 0 .,; '" 0 cO Ol I- .... ~ '" '" 0 0 a> 0 0 CD a> '" ~ '" .... Ol .. "" ~ CD a> .... ~ 0 CD '" c<"> c<"> ~ .. 0.. " cD 0.. ~ J: N 0 " c<"> c<"> 0 0 0 00 0 '" ("')CONO ~ ~ CDI'-- 0 0 CD 0 0 '" I'-- 0 0 .; eoN 0 0 0 "'c<"> 0 a> om<ol'--- N O"'c<"> 00 ~ 0 0 N 0 0 0 0.. LOu) 0 r--: 0 MID 0 '" cw:i""':Oo) '" OMci 00 0 .,; 0 .,; '" 0 cO - ~ N ~ '" '" 0 0 a> O>VO':l(O c<"> c<">NN "'''' CD a> '" ~ '" .... C ~ CD a>. .... ~ 0 ~ ~~ NN c<"> c<"> ~ ::J cD 0 ~ E N <( CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD co co CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. C:' C:' C:' N C:' N N C:' C:' C:' ~~~~ NNN C:' C:' C:' C:' C:' N N N N 0 j::: C; <0 --- N N ~ co ,; N N I'-- ~ N N '" T""" to <0 'I"""" eol'--eo ~ ~ CD CD N ~ ~ C:' 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ONOONOO c<"> c<"> C:' 0 0 C:' 0 ~ N .E Q; Q; - - - C; C; C; Q; C>>o)o)O;o>mO; j::: co - - C; Q; Q; a> a> 0 0 a> 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0000000 0 0 0 ~ ~ 0 0 c<"> 0 .... .... I'-- c<"> CD .... N 0 .... 0 eo N ClW 0 '" eo a> a> CD cO a> a> ~ M .... .... 0 0 a> a> 0 CD I'-- ~ CD I'-- ~ ~ a> CD a> CD ._ Z ~ 0 0 0 a> -<( " N ~ a> CD 0 '" ... 0 .... .... .... 0 Neo '" I'-- eo 0 0 I'-- 0 ~ 0 N N 0 Neo ON '" eo ~ 0 CD .... N N .... CD ~ N ~ ~ .... N.... c<">N '" N c<"> 0 0 c<"> 0 0 ~ CD ~ CD ...JC) > c<"> c<"> .... eo 0 ~ c<"> 0 C; a> a> a> a> a> a> a> a> In In N 0 c<"> 0 .... a> '" ~O .E N N '" '" ~ I'-- <( <C ~ a> '" c<"> 0 Z 0> S _0 .. 1/)0:: 0 .- 0:: " :I:<( '0 -"u.. ~ 00 .. G/> .t:1- (3 ()- u il z O/l U cj en !:: ;i; ...J en W en en c en ;:': <( <( U l- ll.. en W Z 0:: w 0:: u.. en i= <( 0 z en 0 z en u 0 0:: en 0.. 0:: (j) W 0.. i= w w w ::> 0 0.. ::> ...J ci 0 <( :;: U ..., Z U I- W In W W en u ~ <( u: "- en > 0:: "- 0 0.. u.. 0 W ::> u: w I- ~ ...J 0:: I- Z 0:: 0 ...J <( Z Z en :5 0 W ::> > c I- <( I- > ::s ...J l- ll.. :;: 0.. 0 0:: ...J U Z w 0: en 0:: 0:: U 0:: :;: Z <( W 0.. <( I 0:: w U C In W 0 W > W ...J W ~ W 0 W <( <( ::> (!) I- 0:: U ::> I- :;: I- U :.: :.: w I- U 0 W 0:: 0:: 0 (!) en I- Z W 0:: 0.. en 0:: I- <( W C5 :;: z ::> x w ::> <( <( C <( <( I' I I Z 0 0 0 0 0:: In U u <3 u u u u u <3 u u u u u u ~ '" .... .... c<"> c<"> ~ 0 c<"> 0 I'-- ~ N I'-- N .... 0 0 a> ~ c<"> '" 0 I'-- a> CD .... 0 N .... I'-- N ~ a> " 0 ~ ~ 0 CD I'-- a> ~ .... .... eo eo I'-- eo eo C; c 0 0 0 c<"> 0 '" ~ 0 .... N '" N '" '" '" ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 :;; 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.. S ~ N N N N C:' C:' C:' N N N N N N N N N .. c<"> M M M M c<"> c<"> c<"> M M M M M M M M ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .;; - C; C; - - - - - C; C; - - - - - - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 .<:l .. 0 ~ N c<"> .... '" CD I'-- eo a> 0 ~ N c<"> .... '" U> "" eo eo eo eo eo eo eo eo eo eo a> a> a> a> a> a> - 0 a; " '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" en 0 " eo eo eo eo eo eo eo eo eo eo eo eo eo eo eo eo :f N 0 J: N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N CD " 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .>< "" U:!: c <>-0 .. ..~ lD L____ .. J! '" 0 ..,. 0 '" 0 CO '" 0 CO '" 0"> 0 CO .. a; I'- ..,. 0"> 0 I'- 0 N 0 0 N <D CO '" 0 0 0; cx:i cD 0 0; u) u) cx:i cD cx:i 0 a; .... '" I'- 0 Cl I'- CO '" CO ..,. I'- 0"> N '" 0"> N CO N Cl .. .l< CO <D <D <D N '" 0"> N .. n. " n. " ~ U "0 0 '" 0 '" I'- ..,. 0 '" 0 <Xl '" 0 ..,. 1'-"""" '" '" ""I'-CO '" 0"> 0 0 0">0"> 'Ii 0 N '" 0'" 0"> 0 I'- 0 N 0 ~ N "'..,...,. ~ "": O"'N <D CO '" 0 00"> II. ~ I'- ~ cDN cD 0 0; u) u) ,...: 0 ~ -q:c:ici ~ ~ cricd cx:i CO <Xl 0 CO '" - '" ~ ~ ..,...,. '" CO ..,. I'- 0"> N '" N NCOCO CO CO "''''0 N <Xl 0"> ~~ c: CO CO CO CO N '" '" N ~ N ::l , 0 E <( CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO <D <D CO<D COID<O<OCOCD CO CO CO CO <DCO $ 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 000000 0 0 0 0 00 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 000000 0 0 0 0 00 .. N NN t:' t:' t:' t:' N N N N N N NN NNNNNN t:' N N N NN C - - - a; M ;:::: N a; a; -- ------ ;:::: ii5 '" ~m ,: '" 0'" ~ CO 0"> '" ..,.~ Nt--NNcnl.O CO 0 "'0 ~ 0 t:' ~ t:' ~ N 0 ~ ~ NNONN'I"'""N 0 N N ~ ON .E 0 mo - - - 0 a; 0 (0 a; -------- - a; a; a; -- 0"> 0"> 0"> 0 0"> mmQ)Q')mmmC') 0"> 00"> 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 0 0 00000000 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 N CO ~ OlW N I'- CO 0"> <D 0"> ~ 0"> ~ 0 '" 0 0"> CO I'- '" CO CO I'- CO CO N ._ z " ~ <Xl ~ ..,. 0"> CO <D 0"> CO 0 '" I'- NI'-CO I'- ~ 0 0 ..,. I'- CO ...c( " 0 ..,. 0 CO CO 0"> 0 '" 0 0"> ..,. ~ 0"> NI'-'" ..,. CO '" ~ 0 I'- 0 N CO I'- .!!! II: '0 M 0 M I'- CO '" '" N '" ..,. '" <D '" CO "'''' '" I'- '" CO 0 0 ~ CO <Xl COCO '" '" 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ CO <Xl I'- N 0"> 0 CO 0"> 0 ~ N CO N CO 0">0"> 0 '" 0 ..,. ...JCl > N N 0 0 ~ 0 0 I'- <D N N N'" ~ N '" N '" , ~ 0"> '" "'''' ~O .E a; '" '" ~ ~ OC ~ N 0 N ~ CO ~ 0 N NN 0> $ ...0 .. U)II: c .- II: "0 J:c( '0 -"LL ~ UO .. ell> " .1:1- 0 O- il 0 u OC Z 0.. ui W 0.. OC W I- 0 OC 0.. 0 (f) ~ U 0 ...J U 1'2 I- U 0.. ...J (f) > Z ...J 0 W 0.. W (f) Z C) OC l<: C) W 0 C) U U Z 0 W Z ::;; (f) Z <>/s' :> i= u I- :I: <>/S 0.. U 1'2 :J i= (f) u OC (f) > Z l<: 0.. :::J ...J W z !f w W ...J W '" U (f) 0 4= > l<: ;; 6 (f) I- 0.. Z u:: 0 w (f) c( OC l<: W 0.. 0 W ...J ...J 0 c( OC :::J ~ ~ Z W Z LL (f) (f) U (f) w ::;; ...J :J c( X :::J Z S<: (f) (f) ::;; Z ...J ..i w > (f) ::;; W C) W Z ::;; :I: (f) > W c( ...J W W (f) ...J OC 0 OC OC ~ OC :::J :::J :I: W c( ~ c( W W W () U () (f) 0 is is w LL LL LL l- LL ~ '" <D I'- I'- 0 I'- 0 N I'- 0 ..,. '" I'- N 0 0"> 0"> 0"> N ..,. N ~ ..,. CO ..,. CO N ..,. CO "0 ~ ~ ~ N <Xl CO N ..,. CO N ~ '" N N c: 0 0 0 '" ~ '" 0 '" 0 0 ..,. ~ 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO <D CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 :;; 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 n. $ t:' N t:' t:' t:' N N N N N t:' t:' N N N .. '" M '" '" '" M M M M M '" '" M M ~ c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,;; 0 0 0 - - 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 .Q .. CO I'- CO 0"> 0 ~ N '" ..,. '" CO I'- CO 0"> CD .. .l< 0"> 0"> 0"> 0"> 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 " '" '" '" '" <D CO CO CO CO CO CO CO <D <D ,!!! 0 "0 " CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO N 0 ~ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N :I: - " U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .l< CD .l< 0"= c: c.o .. ..~ III '" 13 ID 00 0 N 0 .... 0 0 0 0 0 .... 0 '" Qj 0 N 0 ID 0 m 0 0 0 0 0 r-- ~ 0 .... .,.; 6 N 6 r--: 0 6 .,.; .,.; 6 6 .,; Qj Cl ~ '" '" 00 ~ ID N '" '" .... '" ID ~ '" Cl .. .. N '" '" N ~ N N .. Q. " Q. .. J:: U ." 'ftj Do - c: " o E <( OC")T"""CONN CD 0> ('<') ll) 1.0 N....:~T"""OO LO'VMM 00 N .,.; '" ~ o o 6 00 '" N ID N ~ '" o o 6 ID .... m r--: N o o 6 '" o o 6 '" o o .,.; .... o o .,.; '" N o o 6 ID or--r-- co~~ r--: .... ~ ~ "'''' m~o ",r--oo ""':mm OIDID ~ O>"It'MCOT""" (0 ID"I"'""OCONCO ONa)!"--cON I.OMNNT""T"" .... .. - .. c ,; .E (0 <0 co (0 (0 (0 000000 000000 NNNNNN mML005r:;m t:!!:2!;2~ee 0>000>00 Q'I"'"""I"'""QT""T""" ID o o N m o - o ~ ID o o N - ~ ~ o ~ ID o o ~ '" N m o ID o o ~ N ~ o ID o o ~ r-- ~ co o ID o o N - m o o ID o o ~ ~ ~ o ~ ID o o ~ ~ ~ o ~ ID o o ~ ~ ~ o ~ ID o o ~ ~ ~ o IDIDID 000 000 ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 m ~:!:~ m mm 000 ID ID ID 000 000 N~~ MI"--CO ~ ON - -- m mm 000 co co CO COCO CO 000000 000000 ~NNNC\lN CO;:::LO~LOi:O aaoaae ------ aaoace ~ ~ ClW Wo WW CO 0 00 ~ "'.... ._ Z .. .... 000 ~O~ ID ID m ID ID ID ID ID ID N ID ~ ~ r--oor-- N r-- ....<( " ~ N~ NNN 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" ....0 '" N 00 ID ~ "'0 .... m .!!! 0:: '0 d, rh.D ' , , m ~ '" ~ ~ m ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 IDO m ID r-- '" 0 r--ID '" ID m",,,, 0 ~ 00 ~ .... 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ .... ....00 '" '" m '" ...."'''' 0 '" ..JCl > N ca N-- - _00 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0000 ~ ~ ~ 0 000 N 0 ~o .E m m~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ 0> .$ ....0 .. 00:: C .- 0:: ." J:<( '0 ..ll:1L ~ UO .. Gl> .. .t:... (3 0- 0 II u u -" 0 W 00 z u 00 W ex: > z <( W Q. ~ ::> <( u <.') u u > z z 0 z :> 00 0 z :s 0 u I ex: <( w z f= 00 ex: 0 Q. Z <.') W 0 Z ...J :J w z <( :a; 0 ex: ex: 0 00 w ::> 00 :s I X W W 0 ... Z 0 00 U W 0 <( IL :a; U W I 0 Z Z U 0 U U IL ><: ... 00 <.') W W ...J ex: 0 <( <.') 0 :a; ::> 0 <( 00 W I I ... <( -, :a; Z U <( <( ex: 00 <( ...J > U z :a; I ><: <( z 00 00 m ~ <.') ...J ...J W ~ Z :a; c:: w <( ex: w W U ...J ... U 00 ~ W 0:: 0 W Z I ::> w ...!. U '-> <( 0 ::1i w ::E ::E ::E ... ...J ><: I -, 00 u.. -, ... ~ 00 00 '" '" 0 '" ID 00 0 ID 0 m ID m 0 0 ~ 00 N r-- N N N N ID 00 ~ N N ." ID '" ~ m r-- '" N '" '" ~ m .... .... .... c: 0 00 ~ 0 '" 00 00 00 00 '" ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ::;; 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q. .$ N N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '" .. M M '" '" '" '" '" '" M '" '" '" '" '" ~ C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,;; - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - - 0 0 0 .. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 .0 .. 0 ~ N '" .... 00 ID r-- '" m 0 ~ N '" CD Qj .. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N N N N - 0 " ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID I/) 0 ." .. '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" J: '" 0 J:: N N N N N N N N N N N N N N - " U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "" CD .. O:!:: c: <>'0 .. ..~ III 0 ~ 00 0 CO 00 I'- 0 .... .0 en 0 N CO 0 0 I'- 0 - .0 0 en 0 .... 0 en .0 0 .0 I'- N 0 0 en - a; 0 - 0 ,...: N ,...: 0 0') co to N ..,: ,...: 0 ,...: cO .... a; Cl "" 00 0') .0 00 - co N 0') co 0 co 0') 0 en co 0') N. I'- "'- N N. Cl co " co a.. " I'- a.. .r:; .... 0 ClW c:C ._ Z -<( .!!l It: ...JCl ~O 0> _0 t/l1t: .- It: J:<( ..lI:u.. 00 (I)> ..c:.... 0- o CD _ 0 1110 :eN .><00 0- c.C5 co_ :0 a.. CO< - .;; co o .0 Q; " o " "" " .. III "'C co ~ 0 "C; T""" t'; 0 Q. 0)..- ci _ 0') " ::> o E <( $ .. C :> .5 " " .0 > .E " - .. C " ~ co " u II ~ o " " ~ $ .. c .. "" " " .r:; o .0.0 00 00 ~~ -.... ~:!::: en en 00 01'- .....0 0') _ 00 _ _ 0 - - .0 o o ~ en !2 o .0 o en o o > W ...J CI) o :2 W ...J ...J W :.:: .0 - 00 co o o .0 o o ;;j - o - .... N .0 00 N LO aotOco'l"'""I.OCO en OO~OOO'>CDV r....: oo'V..-o-ic:i co aOLO......."I:tO>N ("') .............. C!.N N N-N" NN .0 o o ~ - - OJ o CD (0(0(0<0 00000 00000 ~t:!~~~ OOmNI.O ....... NON aamoen 0_0 .0 I'- .0 - N 0') 0') .0 .0 .0.0 - - - - XX I'- I'- .0 00 551'-co....coOO ..- ...-omLOOll!) t- .......~oc:o......'V a.. a......... ~....... ~ f'- u.. u.. <( <(................... 'I"'"" ..- U. u.CfJ(/J(/)C/)(/) N NUUUUU .. ..00000 > >U.u..LL.LLLJ... U Z 0- o I CI) 0- a U 0:: a .... a :2 I'- - 00 co o o .0 o o ~ 0') - o - o 0:: a u.. > W I ~ ...J ::J :2 - .... .... o o o .0 o o ~ 0') - o co N .0 00 N .0 N .0 00 N .0.0 00 00 N N LON 0_ - - oen o I'- .... ,...: - .0 o o ~ - - - o .0 o - - o z o CI) ...J W z ii' W :.:: 00 N N co o o .0 o o N M - o I'- N .0 00 N - o o o co .0 o o ~ - - - o .0 o - - o - ~ Z ::J :2 :2 a U W u.. ::::; ~ z o co I'- o o o .0 o o N M - o 00 N .0 00 N .... en 0') N I'- .0 o o ~ - - o .0 o - - o - W 0:: u:: ...J .... <( z <( 0- u.. Z .0 .... - N o o .0 o o ~ 0') - o - en N .0 00 N .0 .0 co 0') .0 o o ~ 00 N OJ o 00 .... I'- en co - U Z ~ W ...J '" o Z .0 .0 .... o o o .0 o o N M - o o 0') .0 00 N 0> co.........-............. o c.oOVNCO <ri cO 0""'; r....: N LO co..........,. I "'- - .0 o o ~ 0') - - en o .0.0.0 000 000 ~NN 0>(:\;0; N NN mcne>> 000 .0 .0 00 00 NN 0;0; N N me>> 00 I'- o - o o N 0') _ _ LOOO 0 ~ 00 0 ....... ~~CON 00 ("')..- ('<") 0 V .......MO><O LON""-CO..- C"') oveco (J) LO..- N V C"') C") LO LO 1.0 1.0 LOLOLOLO ("') MMMM a:: w Z I .... ::J C9 Z <( :2 <( CI) CI) o z .... I'- - N o o .0 o o N M - o .... a 0- w o W U u:: u.. o 00 .0 .... o o o .0 o o N M - o - 0') .0 00 N - N 0') .0 00 N N I'- .... .0 o o ~ o ~ en o - .... 0') .... - o o o > ...J 0- 0- ::J CI) o 0:: <( I U 0:: a N I'- .... o o o .0 o o ~ 0') - o 0') 0') .0 00 N co 0 0 N 0 0 r....: ci r....: co 0') 0 - .0 o o N o - o .0 o o - o I CI) ii' 0:: <( 0- W 0:: '" :2 <( .0 N 00 co o o .0 o o ~ 0') - o .... 0') .0 00 N - .0 o o ~ - - o .0 o - - o - :.:: U a z z W 0- Z <( Z .0 00 - co o o .0 o o N M - o co 0') .0 00 N - 00 en en en 00 en coO') "'- - .0 o o N OJ - OJ o .0.0 00 00 N N CD~ - - mm 00 I'- co - .0 o o N 00 I'- co co - .0 I'- 00 Z CI) o o I'- '" .0 .. 0 0:: I'- .... - :2 ~ 0- ::J a 0:: C9 ~ z w a I 0- 00 co - .... o o .0 o o N M - o w CI) <( I U 0:: ::J 0- CI) w 5 a '" > w Z l- e:: co I'- en o o o .0 o o ~ 0') - o .0 0') .0 00 N - I'- 0') .0 00 N - ~ s 0 '" 0 0 <0 N ..,. M 0 0 0 0 0 '" <0 N ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 0> 0 0 M M <0 <0 0 0 ..,. 0 0 M 0 ..,. 0> N <0 ~ 0 ... m .,.; ... N 0 .,.; ..; 0 ... cD a; .... M <0 0 0> <0 M 0> <0 Cl -" 00 N 00 ~ t- t- ~ 0> <0 0> N 0> 0> <0 00 ~ <D 00 ~ .. ..,. "'- <0 "'- <0 '" M ~ <0 ~ M N N Cl .. " .,; .. 0.. " ~ 0> ~ 0.. .c 0 '0 '.. D.. - c " o E c( o o ..; 00 ..,. '" 0> ... N "'- ~ o o 0> 00 o o .,.; <0 M ... t- <0 N M .,.; t- N oi ..,. <0 o ~ <0, ~ M <0 N 0> '" o o o <0 M o o <0 0> N 00 0 0>..,. 0 C'\I cO tri t- <0 0> o o ..; 0> '" M M <0 0(00(')<0 N OaJOvt--. V LOMvcDo 0) Q)LO,.....~V 'r" CONO>'I:t 'I"'"" N"""': ~ 0> .,.; '" M ~ N ... 00 N Mt- NN tri......: "'<0 -Sl .. (} ,; .E '" o o N C;; ~ - 0> o '" o o N N N as o '" o o ~ ~ ~ o '" o o ~ ~ o o <D o o ~ o ~ o '" o o ~ <0 ~ - 0> o '" o o N C;; o - o ~ '" o o N ;0 ~ 0> o '" o o N it; o - 0> o '" o o ~ ~ ~ - o ~ '" '" '" 00 0 00 0 C'\I N ~ 25 in v M ~ ~ 0; m m 00 0 <D o o ~ ~ ~ o '" o o N it; o - o ~ <0 CO CO CO (0 (0 00000 a 00000 a NN~~N ~ OM..-MlO LO ~E!!:2e~ 00- c>> aoo >.N 0'1"'""'1"'""'1"'""0 <D o o ~ ~ co o '" o o N as N - 0> o '" '" 00 00 NN COCO 00 00 ~ '" 0 0- '" ClW en <0 <0 ,;, t- o 0 CO t- ~ '" M N 0 '" 00 t- ._ Z " <0 '" '" ..,. M 0> 0> I- '" 00 M 00 <0 t- N N N N .!Il 0:: '0 00 t- ~ t- o M 0> 0> M Z Z <0 0- N 0 t-M 00 00 00 ~ <0 <0 <0 M ~ t- ~ M 00 '" ~ ..,. 00 ~ ~~O ~ t- oo ~ ~ > ~ 0 u.. u.. W ...Jel '" N 0 <D 0 00 0 , 0 0 <0 N NNC"\IN 0 00 M 0 0 ~O .E t- ..,. ..,. M Cl '" ~ U U 0 en ~ N NNNN ~ 00 M 0>- -Sl _0 .. UlO:: (} .- 0:: '0 J:c( '0 "":u.. ~ 00 .. ~~ " 0 0- (,) il a:: en w w >- >- I i u a:: en z :> 0 ...J <( 0 0 0- U 0- a:: .... 0- 0- S ~ a:: <( a:: z w ...J W 0 a:: ::::> a:: u I- ...J en 0 en >- U u.. 0 <( Z Cl w ci Cl u.. U oil U I- ...J Z ...J en <0 :J <( Z w Z :J ::i en w vi m 0- l- I <( Ei: ::::> :;; ~ :J z U ...J ...J 0- I- W :;; :;; , 0 0 ::::> I- ~ 0 U :;;: :;;: W >- >- 0 a: a:: 0 en ::::> :;; >- ::::> :;; ~ Z l- I- 0 ...J 0 U I- 0- Z Z I- a:: a:: ::::> 0- <( Cl Z 0 <0 0- U ~ oil ~ ~ en U ::::> ::::> z 0 0 0- I- i= z l- I- Z >- a:: z Ei: z ::::> ::::> z en en 0 0 0 :J <( w Ei: w w <( w ~ ...J ...J <( 0- <( U U c.. a:: w en w z z ~ Cl I <( Z Z en a:: <0 0 0 <( w a:: z 0- ~ I- ~ (,) Z ::::> <( <( ::::> <0 W ...J ...J Z l- I- ::::> ::::> a: 0- Ei: z a:: en en en en en en en en en en en en i= ~ 0 ~ ..,. ~ M N M 0> ~ <0 t- '" t- oo '" 0 M ..,. 0 0 00 ~ 0 '" M 0 <D 00 N 00 <0 N 0> ~ N N N t- '0 0> 00 t- <0 M 0> 00 <0 <0 <0 <0 <0 <0 <0 '" '" '" '" M C M <0 <0 0 M N 0 0 0 M 0 0 ..,. 0 0 0 0 0 N " 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" <D '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" <D <D '" '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 :;; 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0- -Sl N N N ~ ~ ~ N N N N N N N N N ~ ~ N ~ N .. C;; C;; C;; M M M C;; C;; C;; C;; C;; C;; C;; C;; C;; M M C;; M ~ (} ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ on 0 0 0 0 - - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - - 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 .c .. 00 0> 0 ::;: N M ..,. <0 '" t- oo 0> 0 U; N M ..,. <0 <D '" a; -" M M ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,. <0 <0 <0 <0 <0 <0 - 0 " '" '" '" '" '" <D '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" III 0 '0 " 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 :r ~ 0 .c N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N " 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ""'" -" (,)~ c c.~ .. ..~ III N 79 I'- co 0 0 0> 0 0 CD CD N ~ 0 '<t 0 0 I'- 0 0 ." ." ~ 0 c;j c;j c;j <ri ,..: ,..: Q) .... '<t CO 0 Qj I'- CO CD CD 0 I'- I'- on on '" ... 0 ~ 0> q q '" ., <.l cD ., lL Q) ~ ~ ~ lL "" N N 0 .., .., 'C I'- co 0 0 CO N CO ~ 0 0 ';;; 0 "': 0 0 ~ CO CD ~ 0 0 "- '<t CO 0 c;j N M ai .,.; c;j cO - I'- CO CD CD CO 0 0 0 I'- I'- C '<t '" 0> " cD ~ II> 0 E '" 0 u c( .... Q) ., .<: 0 0 CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD .c iG .2l 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 .. .... c ~ ~ N N N NNN ~ ~ :> 0> ~ CD a j:::: ~NN on ~ N 0 0 '" 0 ONN 0 0 .5 Oi a - - - mmm a a 0 0> 0> 0 ~ ~ 0 0 000 I'- co CD CD ClW 0> 0 on '" ~ O>I'-N l::0 ~ co NN ._ Z Q) CD CD CD co ~N ....c( <.l I'- 0 I'- co 0> I'- on 0 ~ .!!! a: '0 CD I'- CD 0> ~ OCDCD co 0 '" N 0 '<t I'- 1'-1'-1'- N 0 ...JCl > on '<t 0 '" 0 000 '<t 0 ~o .5 '<t ~ N N NN ~ 0 " 0>- - ....0 .. III a: c .- a: 'C J:c( '0 -"LL ~ 00 .. Gl>- " ~.... 0 0- 0 il ...J c( U :J Z Z (9 <( z 0" :;; ;n U) U) z z .... U) :;; :J 0 ...J W :J 0 u f= :J ...J ...J 0:: >- <( ~ W lL 0 U U ~ 0:: U) LL U ...J W u:: w 0 ~ >- I 0:: f= 0:: 0 0 I Z Z <( z m S U) w ~ :J 0 0:: W 0 (9 N W 0 0 :;; z oc .... <( 0:: U) <( ~ w ~ I .... :J n. > U ~ 0> on co CD I'- 0> 0> 0 0 CD co '" '" 0 ~ t:: 'C CD CD I'- ~ CD co C '<t 0 on '<t N N on 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a. 0 0 0 0 0 0 C> i!! CD CD CD CD CD CD CD II> C> C> C> 0 C> C> C> ~ ::;; C> C> C> 0 0 C> C> lL " N N N N ~ N N .!: N - M M M M '" M M ~ .. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ II> C '" .;; a a a a a a a <) .. ~ <1> 0 .<: .Q <) .. I'- co 0> 0 ~ N '" CD ... on on on CD CD CD CD ~ - 0 ;; <.l CD CD CD CD CD CD CD co II> 0 'C " co co co co co co co i: N 0 "" N N N N N N N CD <.l '-' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '" ... O:!:: c 0.0 .. .,~ lD ATTACHMENT 2 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DEPARTMENTAL LABOR DISTRIBUTION PAY PERIOD 09/22/06 - 10/5/06 10/13/06 FUND 010 FUND 220 FUND 284 FUND 285 FUND 612 FUND 640 412,141.06 16,583.63 681.28 681.32 6,909.80 18,455.03 455,452.12 5101 5102 5103 5105 5107 5108 5109 5110 5111 5112 5113 5114 5115 5121 5122 5123 5126 5127 5131 5132 5133 5134 5135 5143 5144 5146 5147 5148 5149 5150 Salaries Full time Salaries Part-Time - PPT Salaries Part-Time - TPT Salaries OverTime Salaries Standby Holiday Pay Sick Pay Annual Leave Buyback Vacation Buyback Sick Leave Buyback Vacation Pay Comp Pay Annual Leave Pay PERS Retirement Social Security PARS Retirement State Disability Ins. Deferred Compensation Health Insurance Dental Insurance Vision Insurance Life Insurance Long Term Disability Uniform Allowance Car Allowance Council Expense Employee Assistance Boot Allowance Motor Pay Bi-Lingual Pay 218,673.04 22,816.95 10,432.34 25,085.48 383.27 8,738.91 6,428.39 9,604.18 2,986.87 4,553.74 75,204.91 21,525.90 397.17 1,170.80 775.00 39,440.33 4,492.32 1,018.69 573.83 875.00 75.00 200.00 455,452.12 8.b. MEMORANDUM CITY COUNCIL ~/ ANGELA KRAETSCH, DIRECTOR OF FINANCIAL SERVICES Hf\ FRANCES R. HEAD, ACCOUNTING SUPERVISO SUBJECT: STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT DEPOSITS TO: FROM: BY: DATE: OCTOBER 24, 2006 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Council receive and file the attached report listing the current investment deposits of the City of Arroyo Grande, as of September 30, 2006, as required by Government Code Section 53646 (b). DISCUSSION: This report represents the City's investments as of September 30, 2006. It includes all investments managed by the City, the investment institution, investment type, book value, maturity date, and rate of interest. As of September 30, 2006, the investment portfolio was in compliance with all State laws and the City's investment policy. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration: . Approve staff's recommendation; . Do not approve staff's recommendation; . Provide direction to staff. Attachment: Portfolio Summary ~u5 c ~-5 t9 c o i" >d" e ~ uj '" ON :;0- (3 II. o > I- U 00 "'0 "'''' "'''' 0>0, <(r-- 0'" ,'" "'0 -g~ '" " ~ o 0 >- .c eCL ~ w c Z.... <( lii ~:g II::EOlo Cla>E'" Og'Eci )0 c :l C') OOlIl)~ lI::::Eoll II:: 0 == E <(==.gS LL.gl:Q, Ol:oa> )000.11) 1-0. <3 'Iii> eCL .$.$ .5~ ~~ ~ g ~,., W4t .2 ~ o CL ~ o *' .$ .. c .~ = - .. ::; E ~ '" .. .. .c l! = Q. ~ o .$ .. c .$ .. ll: - .. e .$ .E '" = ~ '" o o III J!l c .. .s .. ~ .E :R o N N ..; co :R o N '" ..; :R N o .,; r-- N cO co co ai '" co cO ... ~ t: .r - t: " .s II) " :> .s ~ t: " '" <( ;; " o .... *,*,*-~*,*-#,';fl.*-#, ("')("')("}("')OOLO'o::t("')("') O)O)())())r--r--CO())())()) c:ic:ic:ic:i-.i-.ic:ic:ic:ic:i cor--I'- 000 000 NN N N'r---oi Q):C..c ..c a. e E <( C1J '" ~ " " o 1'-1'-1'- 000 000 N NN r--r--I"---co 0000 0000 NNNN cilfiN' ~N~ ~:?:-w "".0 "E " a " CI) aOM'r'ci _ N.....N .~:c ~ Q) <( c.. ro c <( " " ~, .0 '" lL LOuiLOLOLOuiOLOLOO COo<DCO<Docococo("') ("')~("')("')("')~("}("')("')r-- '" 0> LO<DCOCOCOCO<DCOCOCO 0000000000 0000000000 NNNNNNNNNN N'aioilfiM''''':cicico-N' W ~..c=N"'" N.....N..... ..crooi5..=>'Q)..?:-~w E ::::J (ij <t: i5.. ro C ::::J ::::J..c Q).c~ <(~~-')"""")E u " '" Q)u... a. o CI> CI) '$.#.'$.~~#'QR.#'#'#' COLOLONOCONLOOLO ())())ONN'o::tCOr--r--CO ...r-.i..o.o..oLOLOLOLOLri 0000000000 0000000000 c:ic:ic:icic:ic:ic:ic:ic:ic:i 0000000000 0_000000000 moioioicicicicioioi mO)())CJ)oo())O())()) '" '" .t! t: C1l III . ,.."" iii c: o C1l g.m 01:! ... C1J 0-0 II) c: "S 'lOCI) ,,- i~ o l'l Ii; E gs () .~ 00 "" C1J ffic m~ "'- c: 0 u~ -0 c: Ql C1l "'m Ql U "" Ii; ~ ffi E cmE~ ro >. 0 ro m:=:()m ~ >.C_ ~ c :!=:::::JO>' cro ()E~=E: rom -Ec::::J CC-o ~o~~CC-$ ou U)zu'c ~ en ell>=> roll>CCoU E~u~.tii e $~-go.~~Q) .f:C>O::(9~U:~ :R o co I'- cO - :oR o o o c;; o o o c;; o o ..j co I'- I'- N cO CO co M '" co o ~ ... ... - .~ Co " C - o II) " - CO " '" :e " '-' B o I- .l!.l c: " E - II) " > c: n; - o I- B.c. MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 2006 COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 215 EAST BRANCH STREET ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor/Chair Ferrara called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL City Council/RDA: Council/Board Members Jim Dickens, Joe Costello, Ed Arnold, Mayor Pro TemNice Chair Jim Guthrie and Mayor/Chair Tony Ferrara were present. City Staff Present: City Manager Steven Adams, City Attorney Tim Carmel, City Clerk Kelly Wetmore, Director of Financial Services Angela Kraetsch, Chief of Police Tony Aeilts, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Don Spagnolo, Associate Planner Kelly Heffernon, and Assistant Planner Ryan Foster. 3. FLAG SALUTE Members of Arroyo Grande Lions Club led the Flag Salute. 4. INVOCATION Pastor George Lepper, Peace Lutheran Church, delivered the invocation. 5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS 5.a. Mayor's Commendations Recognizing John Godfrey and Diane Mead for their Participation In the Traffic Way Tree Program. Mayor Ferrara recognized John Godfrey and Diane Mead for their participation in the Traffic Way Tree Program. Mr. Godfrey and Ms. Mead were not present to accept the Commendations; however, Mayor Ferrara noted that the Director of Parks, Recreation and Facilities would forward the Commendations to the recipients. 5.b. Presentation of Sewer Rate Study by South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District. Clayton Tuckfield, Tuckfield and Associates, gave an informational presentation on the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District's Wastewater Rate Study which included an overview of the District's current financial challenges; how rates are going to change; how the rates compare to other wastewater treatment service providers; future wastewater capital improvement projects; the District's financial plan; implementation dates; proposed annual rates by customer classification; a survey comparison of single family residential user charges; and proposed meter connection charges. Mr. Tuckfield then responded to questions from Council. There was no formal action on this item. 6. AGENDA REVIEW 6.a. Ordinances Read In Title Only. Council Member Costello, Council Member Arnold seconded, and the motion passed unanimously that all ordinances presented at the meeting shall be read in title only and all further reading be waived. Minutes: City CounciVRedeve/opment Agency Meeting Tuesday, September 12, 2006 Page 2 7. CITIZENS' INPUT. COMMENTS. AND SUGGESTIONS Gary Fowler, San Luis Obispo, spoke in opposition to Measure 0-06 stating that seniors, businesses, fixed and low-income persons will be negatively affected. Bob Lloyd, AGP Video, announced that the government access channel has been experiencing some technical problems and if any member of the publiC notices a problem to please contact them at 772-2715 and they will respond immediately. Don Schultz, Myrtle Street, asked the City to give back the ten feet of land that was taken from him and his neighbors on Noguera Place as the land would not remove the City's drainage problem. 8. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor/Chair Ferrara invited members of the public who wished to comment on any Consent Agenda Item to do so at this time. There were no public comments. Mayor Ferrara requested that Item 8.g. (Consideration of Revisions to the City's Travel Policy) be pulled from the Consent Agenda and continued to a future.meeting in order to form a subcommittee to research the provisions of AB 1234 as it relates to restrictions on travel expense reimbursement for legislative body members. Mayor Ferrara and Council Member Arnold volunteered to serve on the subcommittee with City Manager Adams. The Council concurred to continue Item 8.g. and direct staff to establish a subcommittee to review potential changes to the proposed travel policy. Mayor Ferrara moved to continued Item 8.g. to a date uncertain, Council Member Arnold seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Ferrara, Arnold, Dickens, Costello, Guthrie None None CounciVBoard Member Arnold moved, and Council/Board Member Costello seconded the motion to approve Consent Agenda Items 8.a. through 8.i., with the exception of Item 8.g., with the recommended courses of action. The motion passed on the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Arnold, Costello, Dickens, Guthrie, Ferrara None None 8.a. Cash Disbursement Ratification. Action: Ratified the listing of cash disbursements for the period August 16, 2006 through August 31, 2006. 8.b. Consideration of Award of Contract with Wohlford Consulting for a Full Cost of Services (User Fee) Study. Action: Authorized the City Manager to execute an Agreement with Wohlford Consulting to conduct a full cost of services (user fee) stUdy and appropriate an additional $2,000 from the General Fund. Minutes: City CounciURedeve/opment Agency Meeting Tuesday, September 12,2006 Page 3 8.c. Consideration of Approval of Minutes. Action: Approved the minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of August 8, 2006, as submitted. 8.d. Consideration of Conflict of Interest Code Biennial Review. [CC/RDA] Action: 1) Adopted Resolution No. 3949 as follows: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande Amending the City's Conflict of Interest Code Including an Amended Appendix of Designated Positions and Appendix of Disclosure Categories"; and 2) Received and filed the 2006 Redevelopment Agency Conflict of Interest Biennial Notice. 8.e. Consideration of Authorization to Purchase Self Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) Test Equipment. Action: Authorized the purChase of Self Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) test equipment. 8.f. Consideration of a One-Year Time Extension (Time Extension Case No. 06-003) for Amended Conditional Use Permit 03-004; 1220 Farroll Avenue; Applied for by Coastal Christian School. Action: Adopted Resolution No. 3950 as follows: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande Approving a One-Year Time Extension for Amended Conditional Use Permit 03-004; 1220 Farroll Avenue; Applied For By Coastal Christian School" . 8.h. Consideration of Resolution Establishing a Citywide Ethics Policy for City Employees, Elected Officials and Appointed Officials. Action: Adopted Resolution No. 3951 as follows: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande Establishing a Citywide Ethics Policy for City Employees, Elected Officials, and Appointed,Officials". 8.1. . Consideration of Replacement of Copier Systems for City Administration and Community Development and Appropriation of Funds. Action: Authorized the purchase of two rebuilt copier systems (Panasonic DP-6010) from Superior Quality Copiers, Inc. for City Administration and the Community Development Department and appropriate funds in the amount of $3,217.50 from the Unappropriated General Fund balance. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS Mayor Ferrara requested, and the Council concurred, to move up Item 9.d. on the Agenda for consideration prior to Item 9.a. Council Member Dickens declared a conflict of interest due to his indirect financial interest in the Dixson Ranch and stepped down from the dais. 9.d. Consideration of Development Code Amendment 04-007, Neighborhood Plan 04-001, Vesting Tentative Tract Map 04-002, and Planned Unit Development 04-002; Applicant: Creekside Estates of Arroyo Grande, LLC; Location - 22 Acres Located East of Noguera Court and North of East Cherry Avenue Extension (Cherry Creek). Minutes: City CounciURedeve/opment Agency Meeting Tuesday, September 12,2006 Page 4 City Manager Adams reported that subsequent to distribution of the Agenda, a few issues have come up thafwere unable to be fully resolved prior to the meeting. He noted that one issue was identification of some potential impacts on a neighboring private property as a result of the proposed drainage system, which is an issue that requires additional analysis; and the second issue is a discrepancy in the public hearing notice requirements. He said in response to notification received from a neighboring property owner who had not received a notice, a thorough review of the mailing list was conducted and it was discovered a few addresses had not been included. He recommended the Council continue the public hearing to the Regular City Council Meeting of October 10, 2006. He also recommended the Council take the opportunity, without deliberation, to identify any items or requests for additional information that should be included in the staff report. Council Member Costello: - Include information regarding the Planning Commission's recommendations concerning environmental review in the body of the staff report; - Provide clarification in the staff report regarding differentiation between the 25' setback for the creek and the 25' setback from the contour lines. Council Member Arnold: - On page 6 of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, there is reference that the loss of prime soils is not subject to mitigation under CEQA - expand explanation of how CECA applies to prime soils; On page 7, the LESA model is used for evaluation of the property; discuss the City's ability to develop its own model; On page 15, MM4.2, develop the Mitigation and Monitoring Plan; On page 15, MM4.4, determine if any of the trees have historic value; On page 29, reference to wastewater sewer line is restricted at the Fair Oaks Ave trunk; determine if 18" upgrade line would be in place prior to the completion of this project; Address whether traffic counts should have been taken during school hours and included in the traffic model. Mayor Ferrara: - Take another look at the criteria for a Negative Declaration as it relates to the Subareas individually (I.e., look at environmental factors as they relate to Subarea 1 and Subarea 2 separately); - Tie together the Newsom Springs drainage plan with the drainage strategy that is incorporated into the proposed project. Council Member Arnold moved to continue the public hearing to the Regular City Council Meeting of October 10, 2006. Mayor Pro Tern Guthrie seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Arnold, Guthrie, Costello, Ferrara None Dickens Council Member Dickens returned to the dais. Minutes: City CounciURedeve/opment Agency Meeting Tuesday, September 12,2006 Page 5 9.a. Consideration of Use of State 2006-07 Citizens Option for Public Safety (COPS) Funds. Police Chief Aeilts presented the staff report and recommended the Council approve the expenditure of $100,000 as authorized by the State for law enforcement services under the Citizens Option for Public Safety (COPS) Program. Chief Aeilts responded to questions from Council regarding potential inter-agency operability improvements with the proposed radio communication system. Discussion ensued concerning the study currently underway with other agencies on joint dispatch operations as it relates to system compatibility. Mayor Ferrara opened the public hearing and invited comments from those in the audience who wished to be heard on the matter. No public comments were received, and the Mayor closed the public hearing. Council Member Costello moved to approve the Chief of Police's recommendation to utilize the FY 2006-07 COPS funds to be used as part of a multi-year program for the replacement and enhancement of the Police Department's base radio communications equipment; and further moved to authorize the expenditure of $101,563 carried over from the City's FY 2005-06 COPS Program. Council Member Dickens seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Costello, Dickens, Guthrie, Arnold, Ferrara None None 9.b. Consideration of Conditional Use Permit Case No. 05-013 for a Proposed Wireless Facility located at 300 Reservoir Road (City Reservoir No.1), Applied for by Cingular Wireless; and Consideration of land lease Agreement with New Clngular Wireless PCS, llC dba Clngular Wireless. Associate Planner Heffernon presented the staff report and stated the Planning Commission recommended the Council: 1) Adopt a Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit Case No. 05- 013; and 2) Approve and authorize the Mayor to execute a land lease Agreement between the City and New Cingular Wireless PCS, llC, dba Cingular Wireless for use of 800 square feet of property located at 300 Reservoir Road. In response to questions concerning landscaping, staff was requested to investigate whether approved landscaping at the Reservoir #1 project has been completed. Mayor Ferrara opened the public hearing and invited comments from those in the audience who wished to be heard on the matter. Allen Stevenson, Old Ranch Road, stated he lived closest to the proposed site; he has not seen any landscaping installed at the -Reservoir No. 1 site; expressed concern regarding the review process as it relates to determining other suitable site locations such as the Methodist Camp; expressed concern about FCC regulations; and stated that although he was not objecting to the proposal, he still had misgivings about the review process as it relates to other alternative sites. Minutes: City CounciVRedeve/opment Agency Meeting Tuesday, September 12,2006 Page 6 Gordon Bell, agent for Cingular Wireless, clarified FCC regulations as it relates to the local regulatory review process; noted they had entered into discussions with the Methodist Camp about the proposal; and explained why the project as proposed is the environmentally superior alternative. Steve Tallant, Site Director for the Methodist Camp, stated he did not feel that proper contact was made to consider the Methodist Camp site. He expressed concern that a lot of misinformation was presented at the Planning Commission meeting. Hearing no further public comments, Mayor Ferrara closed the public hearing. Council comments ensued including support for the proposal; concern over comments made about the development review process; acknowledgment that the City has no control over negotiations between private parties; agreement that this location is farthest from any living units and has the least amount of impact; agreement that an appropriate landscape plan must be in place; observation that the proposed location provides the best coverage and is lowest on the horizon in comparison to other proposed locations; acknowledgment that the City has the facility to accommodate the proposal; and direction to staff to follow up on whether the landscaping related to the Reservoir NO.1 project has been installed. Council Member Arnold moved to adopt a Resolution as follows: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCil OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 05-013, APPLIED FOR BY CINGULAR WIRELESS, lCOATED AT 300 RESERVOIR ROAD". Council Member Dickens seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Arnold, Dickens, Costello, Guthrie, Ferrara None None Council Member Arnold moved to approve and authorize the Mayor to execute a Land Lease Agreement between the City and New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC, dba Cingular Wireless for use of eight hundred (800) square feet of property located at 300 Reservoir Road. Council Member Dickens seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Arnold, Dickens, Costello, Guthrie, Ferrara None None Mayor Ferrara called for a recess at 8:45 p.m. The Council reconvened at 8:55 p.m. 9.c. Consideration of Development Code Amendment 04-005A - An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande Amending Portions of Title 16 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code, Revising land Use Regulations for Design Development Overlay District OMU-D-2.20 within the Office Mixed Use District. Associate Planner McClish presented the staff report and recommended the Council introduce, as revised, an Ordinance amending the Municipal Code to revise land use regulations for Design Minutes: City CounciVRedeve/opment Agency Meeting Tuesday, September 12,2006 Page 7 Development Overlay District OMU-D-2.20. She explained that staff had distributed a recommended alternative with a modification to Exhibit B that includes an objective for the OMU-D- 2.20 Design Development Overlay District (Medical Mixed Use), and a modification of use regulations that leaves the 75% office use as a minimum requirement but allows for deviations of the standard, as determined by the City Council. Mayor Ferrara opened the public hearing and invited comments from those in the audience who wished to be heard on the matter. Rick Castro, representing Arroyo Grande Community Hospital, spoke in support of the proposal and stressed the need for flexibility to plan for future needs of the community. Bardhyll Nushi, Cerro Vista Circle, expressed concern that the Hospital does not have an approved Hospital Facilities Plan in place; spoke of the cultural resources located on the site; noted that a school and residential uses surround the site; increasing the residential component would take away parking areas needed for the hospital; and recommended that specific criteria be developed now for the hospital's needs. David Butler, S. Halcyon Road, stated that the area had always been zoned commercial; however, he expressed concern about moving forward without an approved Hospital Facilities Plan. Arlene Rowland, S. Alpine, stated she didn't understand the map. Following clarification of the parcels in question, she spoke in support of the available area set aside for expansion of the hospital. Chet Williams, Cerro Vista Circle, expressed concern about development impacts to the creek. Gary Young, applicant, noted that the project was originally considered by the Council in January and since that time, they had addressed many of the issues and concerns that were raised. He spoke in support of the proposal. Bob Rowland, S. Alpine, expressed concern about approving this proposal before a Hospital Facilities Plan is in place. Hearing no further public comments, Mayor Ferrara closed the public hearing. Council comments ensued including the need to balance public comments with goals established by the City as it relates to the demand for additional housing; acknowledgment of creek setback requirements and policies to ensure creek protection; acknowledgment that the City's responsibility is to address land use planning; acknowledgment that the Hospital issues are complex and determining needs for the future will take time; acknowledgment of the Hospital's difficulty recruiting doctors due to lack of housing opportunities; support for mixed use (should not be 100% residential); acknowledgment that the area needs a land use designation to allow for future growth and that it is up to the property owners to determine proposed projects; clarification that the existing Mixed Use Overlay is already in place and that this proposal provides the Hospital with flexibility for future expansion; and support for the revised alternative as presented. Minutes: City CounciVRedeve/opment Agency Meeting Tuesday, September 12, 2006 Page 8 Council Member Arnold moved to introduce an Ordinance as follows: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE AMENDING PORTIONS OF TITLE 16 OF THE ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL CODE (DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 04-o05a), REVISING LAND USE REGULATIONS FOR DESIGN DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT OMU-D-2.20 WITHIN THE OFFICE MIXED USE DISTRICr, as modified using alternative language as shown in Exhibit B. Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Dickens, Arnold, Costello, Guthrie, Ferrara None None 10. CONTINUED BUSINESS ITEMS None. 11. NEW BUSINESS ITEMS None. 12. CITY COUNCIL MEMBER ITEMS In response to a recent newspaper article, Council Member Costello requested a report be placed on a future agenda regarding the damage to the Carrithers property and what can be done to avoid similar problems in the future. The Council unanimously concurred with the request. Mayor Ferrara requested, and the Council unanimously concurred, that an item be placed on a future agenda regarding the Dalidio Ranch initiative proposal (Measure J). He stated he would like to discuss the proposal's direct and indirect impacts to the City and provide an opportunity for the Council to receive and review information prepared by SLOCOG and Caltrans regarding the project. . 13. CITY MANAGER ITEMS None. 14. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS None. 15. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS None. 16. COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS Colleen Martin, Olive Street, thanked the Council for taking the time to continue the Cherry Creek proposal in order to receive and review all information related to the project. 17. ADJOURNMENT Mayor/Chair Ferrara adjourned the meeting at 9:40 p.m. in honor of Jackson Wood. Minutes: City CounciURedeve/opment Agency Meeting Tuesday, September 12,2006 Page 9 Tony Ferrara, Mayor/Chair ATTEST: Kelly Wetmore, City Clerk/Agency Secretary (Approved at CC Mtg I B.d. MEMORANDUM FROM: SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL , STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER ~/Y CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSAL TO PURCHASE AND INSTALL UPGRADE TO THE CITY'S CABLE TELEVISION PLAYBACK AND PRESENTATION SYSTEM TO: DATE: OCTOBER 24, 2006 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council appropriate $12,250 from the Public, Education and Government (PEG) Access Fund and direct staff to implement the proposal submitted by AGP Video for design and installation of the upgrade to the City's cable television playback and presentation system. FUNDING: The cost proposal for the improvements to the system is a not to exceed amount of $12,250. It will be paid entirely from the Fund Balance in the City's PEG Access Fund, which is revenue generated from PEG access fees charged to cable subscribers. The projector purchased as part of the system will reduce ongoing charges from AGP Video for use of their equipment of $750 per month. DISCUSSION: In May 2005, staff presented to the City Council recommendations for upgrade of the City's cablecasting system associated with adding Planning Commission meetings to programming on the City's Government Channel. Staff is recommending the City proceed with the first phase of these, improvements at this time, which includes purchase and installation of a projector, ceiling mounted projector screen and upgrades to the playback system. The second phase will include the purchase and installation of ceiling mounted remote controlled cameras. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration: - Appropriate funding and direct staff to implement improvements; - Approve staffs recommendations and appropriate an additional $2,500 to include an automated ceiling mounted screen rather than the proposed manual screen; CITY COUNCIL PROPOSAL TO PURCHASE AND INSTALL UPGRADE TO THE CITY'S CABLE TELEVISION PLAYBACK AND PRESENTATION SYSTEM OCTOBER 24, 2006 PAGE 2 - Appropriate funding, but direct staff to solicit proposals for purchase and installation of equipment; Delay purchase of equipment to implement all upgrades at the same time; Do not approve purchase of upgrade; Provide direction to staff. Attachment: 1. Proposal from AGP Video for Phase I upgrades S:\AdministrationICITY MANAGERISTEVEICouncil ReportslCablecasting Equipment Upgrade IO.24.06.doc AGP Video, Inc MEMO 1600 Preston Lane, Morro Bay, CA 93442 voice: 805/772-2715 fax: 805/772-4950 agpvideo(W,charter.net slo-span.org DATE: TO: September I, 2006 Steve Adams, City Manager City of Arroyo Grande Steve Mathieu Presentation System and Phase I Playback System Upgrade \ , - \: ..,;, , FROM: RE: Attached is the AGP spread sheet delineating equipment and costs for these two facets of the upgraded systems for presentation and playback. Also attached are two diagrams. Image I shows how the projection screen will be attached to the wall, and Image 2 shows the layout with new presentation system elements in the room. The presentation system includes a ceiling mounted projector, a ceiling mounted pull-down screen, document camera, combination DVDNHS tape player, router and associated wiring, converters and switching system. We did not include a presentation laptop computer, as we were told that the City is planning on purchasing a laptop. After a conversation with City Clerk Kelly Welmore, a MP3 recorder and additional recording chip has been included in this package. Phase I Playback System Upgrade meets the immediate need to maintain and improve the quality of playback on the channel. The three harddrives will allow for the playback at highest quality of both City Council and Planning Commission meetings during the same week, as well as provide a harddrive for playback of other programming, including the upcoming campaign forums. The costs for each element in summary are as follows: Presentation System Phase I Playback System Upgrade Total $ 8,955.76 2.716.76 $11,672.52 Recommended contingency amount for unforeseen costs, requirements changes $583.63 Not-to-Exceed Presentation System and Phase I Upgrade Total $12,256.14 With an agreement from you with direction to proceed, we will purchase and install the equipment ASAP. Our goal is to have these two elements completed by end of September. In the going forward, Phase II will be the production system upgrade. Weare in the process of fine- tuning the equipment list, and will be in discussion with you on that element in the near future. Phase III will be a proposed in-depth upgrade to the playback system, potentially including a new channel operations computer and program playback device and software. It is our goal to have the entire upgrade of the entire system completed by the end of 2006. We appreciate your consideration and patience. Please let us know if you have any questions or need more information. ~ N .... 0 N to 0 (j) 0 0 (j) ~ 0 0 CD (j) ~ 0 CD 0 0 0 .... (j) 0 "" 1"'1' ~'!!IIl:I'~ "? '<I: to 0 .... .... 0 CO 0 N N 0') ~ ~ ~ ~ '" 0 .... 0 '" It) .... .... 0 N !O "1""" M .,; M 0 ....: -i -i .,; M M 0 &D 0 ....: ..: 0 cO 0 lii: ,...~. 0') to .... .... ..... to .... ~ai', CD 0') to N 0 .... 0 0 .... CO CO 0 <0 0 ~ .... to Ul; 0 It) '" to ..... to CO '" ~, CD - "'. N .... ~ 0') '" ..... ..... 0') N .... ..... N ~ ~ "'. ... "'. N N ..... ..... ..... ~tS" .~ en <Ii 'frj N ... ,Il> ..... ..... ..... ..... N N 0 .... .... .... W ~";A.. I't''!''.; U I ijpm ~~ .... .:~] .tt~ I 5. '4l'jl ilii!! ;~:c;] ;}n;'! ~ ~ 0 ;ft. ;ft. 0 liljl 0 0 0 0 '" 0 .,; '" 0 .,; N '" ~ '" ....: cO .... .... CO .... (I) I~~I - '0 x g ~ ici x ~ Um it:l ~ :0 III .. ~ 0 .. ~ g- o ':C '_I>>: ... - J:l - - J:l ,e: 0 w 0 :~ 10 .s .~ II :<P, Cl 0 -' - OJ ....,: OJ '0 :;CI): ;~ 0. 0 co J:l Vl -' J:l Vl .~ -' : if! e 0') :l Ql .<= is :l Ql .<= ~ ::::l ~ <( Ul ro Ul Ul ro Ul ';:, AQ ;I! !!-! .: ~ U f-G) 1.2 E 0 '" - CIl - Gl CIl Ie '0. '5 U Ql 0 Z c: i~ ." a' g ~ .s 1'!11, > .... Q Gl .. i'CD: :0 '" e ,!'.l., ~.. if"":, c: g It~ 'c' i~~; Z Ul 0 ~ co CIl ,a rc >- ~ z w to ! ~! ~. ;'(1) a. ro ;~, en w -' .~ :;:I ;:, j:a> OJ Ql ;: f- co is :.:c 'Ul: t::l :0 ~ '5 ro E x <( w ~ e IU 7>\ Ill' ~ U Ql <> W U c: Ie: Ql Gl #CG en' 'iii' III E CIl 0 ,G> c: - Ijg """.j ~ ~ c:: c:: 0 :C4 ~ .~ '~, .0 "" - ~!: :l ;:, to ~ 0 :;:I '.. "0' .."..., >- :; 0 c 0 .. co Ul ,i "I:f '8 III :::; .... :l !:: !:: - 11:0' hl'G' "CD: N Cl 0 Z c: :t:2i;' Cl -'" f" 'l.a: "G> 'G> ll.. Cl '" J: E z G> lji'rrt > " .tIt - 0 .. ~: .~ :. u 0 <f 0 en Cl .~ i~ G> "'''~ ~ - 0') :::; ~j - ,.. -' 0 e> f.- :::; ... Cl m 's Ul (I) a;- ..... > <( a. I Cl .. :c: \;:1::' Ul b <( ii: II: 4,!<!ni :.c: to to ... e> e> J: I' ;;:Oi ie, !~ III .s ..... ~1 ..c: .... 0 0 .$ x x -' g"<1l ,.c: >- c: 0 c: :::J . I'!i! Ol - !Iil': !(II' :c:: ~ ll.. x z .. :::J a Gl :0 z Ql Ql .... .... ;jtifli ]ill;;; ['--,if;; .... ~ Vl ." :::; . ~\llfj en i&' ,iO "CG: '0 N <( ~ .... LL > 0 .. i~ !ii: :> x - - -'" .'" 'CD: s:: 0 CIl :::; :::; '" Ql h, <0 .c "" OJ a. . .... ..... ~ ~ ;1';{, ..... a. IW -,+I an ,,' III 1;Z CIl '" Ql OJ m~ i.co -' ~ '" '" . ''fl :e: f- ro - Ql W (} ;: . .~ E c .$ 0 ..... ..... ",W ... e> z :l ~ t: Cl Cl CIl 0 ~ "E "E :r'>iI" 0 ~';:., :s:: (I) :::J Ql Vl 'w U Ql ~ N .g OJ ;*~ '" i ,U a: x E :> J: J: OJ J: ,(I) ... 0 0 Ql > 0 0') () J: :ji;~ :Ul: 'e: :0 Ul co Ql 0- W c: CIl CIl ;; a. 0 w i~ ;I >- .... :::; <> LL E 0 w w CD ::;- <0 LL <> ~lllij . I; ,,(I)' ,.. <( () to () Vl c:: ii'" ... en :::J e> OJ 0 ro 12 12 !"'1ll " D.;.1 :c: ~ 0 CIl e> ~ ~\m :::; ',c: x z 0 () :l 0 W W :::; co ~;j :;:I ~Q) s:: . Ql 0 '" c: 0 Ql <( Cl :::; ~ilii Cl Vl ffiffiI IS' ilC 0 () :J c:: N c: I1l 0 CIl CIl <> <> 11 <> <> lii ;0 ~Sl ~ a. I .11 -' W ~ . Ql :::; N 0 0 :l 'c N 0 uil! 'c 'c m~lj '0' u. "'" .. a. 0 > c: Ql 0 .t:l ..... e (t. .; !!l: l'll () U w 0 .$ 1ii c:: c:: 0 '" co e.,-' 0 :~f a; I~ CIl Vl c: IJ Vl ":'.,\' ~ - - 0- a. a. ... ~ ~~J s:: " Ql .!11, 0 E :::; E <( OJ ~ OJ ui OJ , ..;:.'0''' - Gl 0 c: E 0 E . "" <I:: :is e> c: x :; c: i'i>:'.:. .. '0 OJ ~ 0 OJ 0 OJ OJ Ql OJ Ql ~ H:! w 5 ii{ Ul :iE CIl () a. () Cl '" ..... > a. :::; -' z a. -' ;,-;;::+ mm ::g;; t!! mm ll.. CIl Gl J: '0 > s:: ." Vl ~ ~ ~ ~ c: ~ ~ ~ Ql c: OJ .!!! Cl Ql t: Ql ~ Cl 0 ~ 'Qj OJ E Ql ~ Ql > ~ Ql ~ ,m 'L () OJ > t: Ql ~ C 0 0 -' <> Cl OJ >- c: U - () c: CIl Ql Vl .<= "E ;: Vl 0 j 0 c: ~ 0 > .!!! Ql .8 Ql () 0 .~ c () c: :0 <> 8 "0 G> ~ => .~ c: .c ';: 'c ~ " > :if ::ml ... 0 0 Ql - ;: 0 OJ OJ Ql "E OJ 'C Ql ... ~ 0 .. <> < ... a. :::; CIl E ~ 0 () () () CIl Vl c:: OJ J: j Cl ~ <> :l Ql ." c: <( <( <( OJ 0') () <> ." '1',; en Cl Cl Cl <> ro OJ c: ~ Ql . Gl () () () 0 <> :; <> e> e> e> I1l a. LL Vl OJ ~ ::l C 9- -' -' -' Cl CIl a. CIl > > > a. :::; () E J: G> Vl Vl - E ~ ~ ~ Ql Ql G> ~ ~ Ul - g g -'" ~ E E u Vl .. <> <> Ul 0 .s .s 0 ~ 'c 'c .<= () () c: ~ ~ ~ ~ <> ~ ~ ~ 0 0 Vl Vl ~ ." 0 0 8 8 0 ~ 0 ro Ql .!!! 0 0 ro .. Vl - c: :;::; <> <> <> <> <> ii: OJ .<= J:l :0 J:l <> .2> .. .. Vl Vl Vl Vl .!9 Vl 0 J:l i= Vl Vl 0 Vl c: ... - &. &. 0 0 &. a OJ OJ 0 &. a ~ - OJ Ql ~ c: c:: c:: CIl () () z c:: G> a. -' Gl 5 en .. N e ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... .... ..... ..... ..... N ~ 0 .. 0') N N .c: a. a. 8.e. MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGE~ SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF SUPPORT FOR PROPOSITION 84 - THE CLEAN WATER, PARKS AND COASTAL PROTECTION BOND OF 2006 DATE: OCTOBER 24, 2006 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council adopt the attached Resolution in support of Proposition 84 - The Clean Water, Parks and Coastal Protection Bond of 2006. FUNDING: There is no cost impact from this action. Funding may be available to the City for projects as a result of the measure. DISCUSSION: Backqround California is facing enormous population growth in the coming years, with 25 million new residents expected by 2040. However, investment in infrastructure is not keeping pace with population growth. Current funding for natural resources and environmental protection programs is low - less than 1 % of the overall state budget. Investments are needed to ensure that all Californians will have access to safe drinking water, better protection from floods and opportunities to enjoy parks, natural landscapes and our rivers, lakes, beaches, bays and coastline. The League of California Cities supports this measure and has requested cities to take action in support. In addition, a broad coalition of interests - water districts, conservation and environmental groups, local government entities, museum and park interests, elected officials, and civic organizations - has been formed to support Proposition 84, the Clean Water, Parks and Coastal Protection Bond. Safe Drinkinq Water. Water Qualitv and Water Supplv Proposition 84 will provide funding for programs that will help ensure safe drinking water for all Californians by cleaning up polluted waters and protecting them from further contamination. The measure will dedicate funds to protect the water quality of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta- the source of drinking water for 23 million CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF PROPOSITION 84 OCTOBER 24, 2006 PAGE 2 Californians. In addition, Proposition 84 will provide funds to assist each region of California in improving local water supply reliability and local water quality. Protection of Rivers. Lakes and Streams Proposition 84 will provide funding to develop river parkways, restore and protect urban streams, and keep contaminated storm water runoff out of our rivers, lakes and streams. Protection of Beaches. Bavs and Coastal Waters Proposition 84 dedicates $540 million to help preserve ocean, major bays, and watersheds. Flood Control Proposition 84 will provide for funding the identification and mapping of high-risk flood areas and the inspection and repair of levees and flood control facilities. By planning, designing and implementing multi-objective flood corridor projects, Proposition 84 will reduce future flood risk and maximize public benefits. State and Local Parks and Public Access to Natural Resources Proposition 84 will include projects that will expand and restore the state park system to reflect the state's growing population and shifting population centers. Proposition 84 will also provide funding for the creation of local and regional parks. In addition, it will fund the development of nature education opportunities at institutions including, natural history museums, aquariums, research facilities and botanical gardens Wildlife and Forest Conservation Proposition 84 will fund the programs needed to protect California's forests, wildlife as well as preserve working forests, farms and ranches. Sustainable Communities: Preparinq for Population Growth and Climate Chanqe California's rise in population and the impacts of climate change pose significant challenges. These challenges must be addressed through careful planning and improvements in our land use and water management systems. Proposition 84 will help California prepare for the challenges that lie ahead, while improving the livability of our cities and communities through programs to re-design California's water and flood control systems. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration: - Approve Resolution in support of Proposition 84; Do not approve Resolution; Direct staff to prepare Resolution opposing Proposition 84; Direct staff not to proceed Provide direction to staff. S:\Administration\CITY MANAGER\STEVE\Council Reports\Proposition 84 Report 10.24.06.doc RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE SUPPORTING PROPOSITION 84 WHEREAS, California is facing challenges on rnany fronts, including enormous population growth in the coming years, with 25 million new residents expected by 2040; and WHEREAS, California's investments in infrastructure, especially clean and safe drinking water, natural resources and coastal protection, are not keeping pace with our population growth; and WHEREAS, Voters have passed a series of resource bond measures since 1996 to support critical program areas including water quality and supply, flood control, state and local parks projects, pollution control projects and air pollution mitigation to fill the enormous backlog of resource infrastructure needs in California; and WHEREAS, Current bond funds will run out as early as 2006 and critical programs will go unfunded and new challenges, combined with a growing population demand, will require more investments now to stay ahead of the curve; and WHEREAS, Current funding for natural resources and environmental protection programs is critically low, making up less than 1 % of the overall state budget; and WHEREAS, Proposition 84, a $5.4 billion bond measure slated for the November 2006 statewide ballot, would provide critically needed funding to ensure the availability of safe drinking water, improve local water supply reliability, strengthen flood protection, and preserve California's natural landscapes, including parks, lakes, rivers, beaches, bays, ocean and coastline; and WHEREAS, Proposition 84 is supported by a broad coalition of interests - water districts, conservation and environmental groups, local government entities, museum and park interests, elected officials and civic organizations; and WHEREAS, further investments must be made now to ensure that all Californians will have access to safe drinking water, will be better protected from floods and will continue to have opportunities to enjoy natural landscapes, including our parks, forests, rivers, lakes, streams, beaches, bays and coastline; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande supports Proposition 84, the Clean Water, Parks and Coastal Protection Bond of 2006. On motion of Council Member seconded by Council Member and on the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this day of , 2006. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 2 TONYFERRARA,MAYOR ATTEST: KELLY WETMORE, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY 8.f. MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER fk: SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF PROPOSITION 1C - THE HOUSING AND EMERGENCY SHELTER TRUST FUND ACT OF 2006 DATE: OCTOBER 24, 2006 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council adopt the attached Resolution in support of Proposition 1 C, the Housing and Emergency Shelter Trust Fund Act of 2006. '- FUNDING: There is no cost impact from this action. Funding may be available to the City for projects as a result of the measure. DISCUSSION: The San Luis Obispo County Trust Fund has requested the City formally support Proposition 1 C, the Housing and Emergency Shelter Trust Fund Act of 2006. The League of California Cities has formally supported this measure. Proposition 1 C would dedicate $2.85 billion in funds to create housing options, including affordable apartments, emergency shelter, supportive housing, and homeownership for working families, people with disabilities, survivors of domestic violence and farm workers. California voters previously passed Proposition 46, the Housing Bond of 2002, to fund housing development throughout the State. More than $4 million in Prop 46 funds were awarded for projects in SLO County, including the Family Care Network project in Arroyo Grande. Proposition 46 funds will be depleted by 2007 and the need remains urgent in San Luis Obispo County for affordable housing. In San Luis Obispo County, a $130,000 income is needed to afford the County's median home sales price and more than 1/3 of the low income households pay more than 50% of their gross income for housing. CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF SUPPORT FOR PROPOSITION 1C OCTOBER 24, 2006 PAGE 2 Funding from the bond will be allocated as follows: . Multifamily Housing Program - $395 million to build apartments for seniors, families, foster youth and people with disabilities; . Emergency Housing Assistance Program - $50 million to build and renovate emergency shelters and transitional rental homes for homeless families with children, battered women, and individuals; . Supportive Housing Program - $195 million to build apartments with support services for people with chronic disabilities, such as mental illness or physical disabilities; . Farm worker Housing Grant Program - $135 million to build for-sale and rental homes for agricultural workers; . Cal-HOME Program - $300 million to fund a range of homeownership programs; . California Homebuyer Down payment Assistance Program - $200 million to provide assistance in the form of second loans for down payment and closing costs; . Building Equity and Growth in Neighborhoods - $125 million for local jurisdictions to adopt measures to support affordable housing; . Affordable Housing Innovation Fund - $100 million to incent development of innovative and cost-saving approaches to housing development; and . Housing Infrastructure Programs - $1.35 billion to provide infill and transit- oriented housing and other infrastructure needs related to home development. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration: - Approve Resolution in support of Proposition 1 C; Do not approve Resolution; Direct staff to prepare Resolution opposing Proposition 1 C; Direct staff not to proceed Provide direction to staff. S:\Administration\CITY MANAGER\STEVE\Council Reports\Proposition 1 C Report 10.24.06.doc RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE SUPPORTING PROPOSITION 1 C - THE HOUSING AND EMERGENCY SHELTER TRUST FUND ACT OF 2006 WHEREAS, to provide greater choice and a sufficient supply of affordable homes for working families and people in Arroyo Grande, including homes for disabled people, seniors and families, homes near day care and services, homes nearer jobs; and WHEREAS, it has been demonstrated that a state investment in housing creates local housing opportunities and more than $4 million in Prop 46 funds were awarded for projects in SLO County, including the Family Care Network project in Arroyo Grande; and WHEREAS, Proposition 46 funds will be depleted by 2007 and the need remains urgent in San Luis Obispo County for affordable housing; WHEREAS, for San Luis Obispo County, a $130K income is needed to afford the County's median home sales price and more than 1/3 of the low income households in SLO County pay more than 50% of their gross income for housing; and WHEREAS, to continue the successes of Proposition 46, the California Legislature has placed Proposition 1 C, the Housing and Emergency Shelter Trust Fund Act of 2006, on the November ballot as part of a long-term plan to rebuild California; and WHEREAS, Proposition 1 C, the Housing and Emergency Shelter Trust Fund Act of 2006, will dedicate and protect funds to create housing options for 20,000 working families to buy a home, 6,500 college graduates, retired seniors, essential public safety workers to afford rent in their communities, 2,000 homeless families and individuals to find safe shelter and services, and 2,800 farm workers to be housed through these programs; and WHEREAS, the bond will also boost California's economy, through new jobs and $9 billion added to local economies; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande supports Proposition 1 C, the Housing and Emergency Shelter Trust Fund Act of 2006. On motion of Council Member seconded by Council Member and on the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this day of , 2006. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 2 TONY FERRARA, MAYOR ATTEST: KELLY WETMORE, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY 8.g. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: CITY COUNCIL STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER ~ KAREN SISKO, HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGER vg... , BY: SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTIONS ESTABLISHING THE CITY'S CONTRIBUTION TOWARD HEALTH CARE COVERAGE DATE: OCTOBER 24, 2006 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council 1) Adopt a resolution establishing the City's contribution towards health care coverage for members of the Arroyo Grande Police Officers' Association; 2) Adopt a resolution establishing the City's contribution toward health care coverage for members of the International Association of Fire Fighters Local 4403; and 3) Adopt a resolution establishing the City's contribution toward health care coverage for members of the Service Employees International Union, Local 620. FUNDING: Additional appropriations are not required to fund these increases as the FY 2006-07 Annual Budget was drafted to include the anticipated rate increases required to meet the City's expected contributions for each of these associations. DISCUSSION: The City provides health insurance benefits for its full-time employees through CaIPERS. The increase in premiums for 2007 range up to an average of 12.61 %. In an effort to share the increasing costs for health care with those that benefit from health insurance coverage, the employees, cost sharing provisions were incorporated into the Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) with the Arroyo Grande Police Officers' Association, the International Association of Fire Fighters Local 4403, and the Service Employees International Union, Local 620. Each group has agreed to pay a certain percentage of the increase in premium costs as negotiated in their respective MOU's. In order to implement these cost-sharing agreements with CalPERS, separate resolutions for each employee group or association must be adopted. These resolutions are attached for City Council consideration. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration: - Approve staff's recommendation by adopting the three resolutions; - Do not approve staff's recommendation; - Modify as appropriate and approve staff's recommendation; or - Provide direction to staff. ',' RESOLUTION NO._ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ESTABLISHING THE CITY'S CONTRIBUTION TOWARD HEALTH CARE COVERAGE FOR MEMBERS OF THE ARROYO GRANDE POLICE OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION (UAGPOA") WHEREAS, Government Code Section 22892(a) provides that a local agency contracting under the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act (the "Act") shall fix the amount of the employer's contribution. The employer's contribution may not be less than the amount required under Section 22892(b)(1) ofthe Act; and WHEREAS, Government Code Section 22892(c) provides that a contracting agency may fix the amount of the employer's contribution for employees and the employer's contribution for annuitants at different amounts provided that the monthly contribution for annuitants shall be annually increased by an amount not less than 5 percent of the monthly employer contribution for employees, until such time as the amounts are equalized; and WHEREAS, the City of Arroyo Grande, (hereinafter referred to as "Public Agency") is a local agency contracting under the Act for participation by members of the Arroyo Grande Police Officers' Association ("Employee"). NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE AS FOLLOWS: That the Public Agency's monthly contribution for each Employee shall be the amount necessary to pay the cost of his/her enrollment, including the enrollment of his/her family members in a health benefits plan up to a maximum of $382.68 with respect to Employee enrolled for him or herself alone, $765.38 for an Employee enrolled for him or herself and one family member, and $994.99 for an Employee enrolled for him or herself and two or more family members, plus administrative fees and Contingency Reserve Fund assessments. On motion of Council Member , seconded by Council Member , and on the following rollcall vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this day of ,2006. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 2 TONY FERRARA, MAYOR ATTEST: KELLY WETMORE, CITY CLERK -, APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER APPROVED TO AS FORM: TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY RESOLUTION NO._ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ESTABLISHING THE CITY'S CONTRIBUTION TOWARD HEALTH CARE COVERAGE FOR MEMBERS OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIRE FIGHTERS LOCAL 4403 WHEREAS, Government Code Section 22892(a) provides that a local agency contracting under the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act (the "Act") shall fix the amount of the employer's contribution. The employer's contribution may not be less than the amount required under Section 22892(b)(1) ofthe Act; and WHEREAS, Government Code Section 22892(c) provides that a contracting agency may fix the amount of the employer's contribution for employees and the employer's contribution for annuitants at different amounts provided that the monthly contribution for annuitants shall be annually increased by an amount not less than 5 percent of the monthly employer contribution for employees, until such time as the amounts are equalized; and WHEREAS, the City of Arroyo Grande, (hereinafter referred to as "Public Agency") is a local agency contracting under the Act for participation by members of the International Association of Fire Fighters Local 4403 ("Employee"). NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE AS FOLLOWS: That the Public Agency's monthly contribution for each Employee shall be the amount necessary to pay the cost of his/her enrollment, including the enrollment of his/her family members in a health benefits plan up to a maximum of $372.06 with respect to Employee enrolled for him or herself alone, $744.15 for an Employee enrolled for him or herself and one family member, and $967.40 for an Employee enrolled for him or herself and two or more family members, plus administrative fees and Contingency Reserve Fund assessments. On motion of Council Member , seconded by Council Member , and on the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this day of ,2006. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 2 TONYFERRARA,MAYOR ATTEST: KELLY WETMORE, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER APPROVED TO AS FORM: TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY RESOLUTION NO._ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ESTABLISHING THE CITY'S CONTRIBUTION TOWARD HEALTH CARE COVERAGE FOR MEMBERS OF THE ARROYO GRANDE CHAPTER OF THE SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION, LOCAL 620 WHEREAS, Government Code Section 22892(a) provides that a local agency contracting under the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act (the "Act") shall fix the amount of the employer's contribution. The employer's contribution may not be less than the amount required under Section 22892(b)(1) of the Act; and WHEREAS, Govemment Code Section 22892(c) provides that a contracting agency may fix the amount of the employer's contribution for employees and the employer's contribution for annuitants at different amounts provided that the monthly contribution for annuitants shall be annually increased by an amount not less than 5 percent of the monthly employer contribution for employees, until such time as the amounts are equalized; and WHEREAS, the City of Arroyo Grande, (hereinafter referred to as "Public Agency") is a local agency contracting under the Act for participation by members of the Arroyo Grande Chapter of the Service Employees International Union, Local 620 ("Employee"). NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE AS FOLLOWS: That the Public Agency's monthly contribution for each Employee shall be the amount necessary to pay the cost of his/her enrollment, including the enrollment of his/her family members in a health benefits plan up to a maximum of $395.55 with respect to Employee enrolled for him or herself alone, $791.09 for an Employee enrolled for him or herself and one family member, and $1,028.41 for an Employee enrolled for him or herself and two or more family members, plus administrative fees and Contingency Reserve Fund assessments. On motion of Council Member , seconded by Council Member , and on the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this day of ,2006. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 2 TONY FERRARA, MAYOR ATTEST: KELLY WETMORE, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER APPROVED TO AS FORM: TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY a.h. MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD OF DIRECTORS FROM: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ;1t-/ SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS FOR STARTUP COSTS FOR EAST GRAND AVENUE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION DATE: OCTOBER 24,2006 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council/Redevelopment Agency Board of Directors appropriate and authorize the. City Manager/Executive Director to expend $2,000 for startup costs for the formation 'of an East Grand Avenue Business Improvement Association. FUNDING: Funds are recommended to be appropriated from the Redevelopment Agency budget. Therefore, there will be no impact to the City's General Fund. DISCUSSION: The Mayor and staff have participated in a number of meetings with business representatives on E. Grand Avenue, the Chamber of Commerce, and the Village Improvement Association (VIA). The purpose of the meetings have been to form a business association similar to the VIA, which would focus on and serve the E. Grand Avenue corridor. The goals would be to coordinate efforts and promotional activities to attract customers, provide feedback and coordination on efforts with the City, and fund and coordinate improvements to the corridor. Initial discussions have included efforts to create a brochure to solicit membership, plans to increase holiday lighting in front of businesses, and to promote and enhance the Cruise Night event. Individual businesses are providing additional startup revenue and new members will pay a membership fee. However, additional funding from the City will assist in facilitating the organization to move ahead. The objective is for the organization to become financially self-sufficient. Given that the organization will significantly benefit the City's economic development goals, staff believes this funding will be a good investment. CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS FOR STARTUP COSTS FOR EAST GRAND AVENUE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION OCTOBER 24, 2006 PAGE 2 ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the City Council's consideration: Appropriate and authorize the City to expend $2,000 for startup costs for the formation of an East Grand Avenue Business Improvement Association; Approve a different amount; Do not approve funding; Provide direction to staff. a.i. MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: DON SPAGNOLO, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER c1J6 SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE A SELF- PRIMING PUMP AND MOTOR FOR SOTO DETENTION BASIN NO.1 DATE: OCTOBER 24, 2006 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council authorize the purchase of a 50 h.p. self-priming pump. motor and suction hose for Soto Detention Basin No. 1 from Godwin Pumps in the amount of $23,537.09. FUNDING: Funding for the equipment is included in the Drainage Pumps and Piping at Soto Sports Complex capital improvement project. The total project budget is $150,000. These funds were received from S & S Homes as mitigation for the Park Side development. The proposed pump, motor and suction pipe is the first phase of the overall project. DISCUSSION: The City is in the process of improving the operational characteristics of the storm drain basin system at the Soto Sports Complex. The first phase of the overall project is to improve operation of the detention basins. Two bids were received for the equipment. The lowest bid was submitted by Godwin Pumps, which included one (1) new skid mounted 50 h.p. self-priming pump and motor with 40 feet of heavy duty suction hose. The pump will be capable of pumping 1,500 gpm, which will lower the water level of Basin NO.1 during an average storm event. Providing a pump at Basin NO.1 will allow storm water to be discharged to the creek via the existing bleeder line or pumped to basin NO.2 for use as irrigation water. This will provide flexibility in addressing the available storm water storage capacities of the Soto basins. The electrical service connection to operate the pump motor will be provided by a licensed electrician. The Public Works Department will install the pump, motor and piping. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration: Approve staff's recommendation to purchase a 50 h.p. pump/equipment and hose from Godwin Pumps at the bid price "of $23,537.09; Do not approve staff's recommendations; Modify staff's recommendation as appropriate and approve; or Provide direction to staff. Attachment: - Bid Sheet CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE BID SHEET SUBMITTED BY: TOTAL: Godwin Pumps Mira Lama, CA $23,537.09 Rain For Rent Bakersfield, CA $25,485.97 8.J. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: CITY COUNCIL DANIEL C. HERNANDEZ, DIRECTOR OF PARKS, RECREATION AND ~ FACILITIES SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF AWARD OF BID FOR CONTRACTED CUSTODIAL SERVICES - SERVICE MASTER DATE: OCTOBER 24, 2006 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council award the bid for contract custodial services to Service Master in the amount of $3,834.00 per month x 12 = $46,008 (current budget is $45,900), and authorize the Mayor to execute the Contractor Services Agreement. FUNDING: Funds have been allocated in the bi-annual budget for Government Buildings Contracted Services (010-4213-5303). In the FY2005-06, the City allocated $3,800.00 per month or $45,600.00 for contracted janitorial services. The FY 2006-07 budgeted funds for contracted custodial services is $45,900.00. There is funding in the existing budget to cover the $108 additional expense for this budget year. DISCUSSION: A total of eight bids were received. All bids were evaluated to include hours of service weekly and all consumable goods used (all paper products and soap). The bids submitted were evaluated on a per-hour cost. The low bid was $3,834.00 monthly ($46,008.00 annually) by Service Master. Based on the number of hours of service, staff recommends awarding the contract for two years with a one-year renewal clause. The next lowest bids were from Commercial Maintenance Service ($4,050 per month/ $48,600 per year) and Pacific Coast Floor & Building Maintenance ($4,125 per month/$49,500 per year). The current contractor, Clean Sweep Janitorial, submitted a bid of $4,509.00 per month, significantly higher than the current lowest bid. It should be noted that Clean Sweep has performed admirably in providing service to the City for the past three years. The low bid has been reviewed for meeting all stated requirements and has been deemed complete. CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF AWARD OF BID FOR CONTRACTED CUSTODIAL SERVICES - SERVICE MASTER OCTOBER 24, 2006 PAGE 2 ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration: Approve staff's recommendation; Modify staff's recommendation; Do not approve staff's recommendation; Provide direction to staff. Attachments: 1. Bid Notice Opening Log Sheet 2. Contractor Services Agreement R:\Staff ReportslAwardbidcustodial1 D.D6.doc ATTACHMENT 1 BID OPENING LOG SHEET CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RFP DEADLINE: , October 12, 2006, 4:00 p.m. Janitorial Services TOTAL SUBMITTED BY: Executive Janitorial San Luis Obispo . $4,440/mo. Clean Sweep Templeton $4,509/mo. Service Master Santa Maria $3,834/mo. Brendler Janitorial Service $5,950/mo. Templeton A Clean House $6,933/mo. San Luis Obispo Pacific Coast Floor & Bldg Maint. $4,125/mo. San Luis Obispo . Commercial Maintenance Service $4,050/mo. Nipomo JAN_PRO Cleaning Systems $4,430/mo. Ke~()J.~ City Clerk c: "Dii-ector_ofParks, Recr:~ation and FC!~i1iti~s7 City Manager AGREEMENT FOR CONTRACTOR SERVICES ATTACHMENT 2 THIS AGREEMENT, is made and effective as of 2006, between ServiceMaster Commercial Cleaning Services ("Contractor"), and the CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE, a Municipal Corporation ("City"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. TERM This Agreement shall commence on remain and continue in effect until pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. , 2006 and shall , 2008, unless sooner terminated 2. SERVICES Contractor shall perform the tasks described and comply with all terms and provisions set forth in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. 3. PERFORMANCE Contractor shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his/her ability, experience and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Contractor shall employ, at a minimum generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Contractor hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. 4. AGREEMENT ADMINISTRATION City's Parks Supervisor shall represent City in all matters pertaining to the administration of this Agreement. Jeff Hopson shall represent Contractor in all matters pertaining to the administration of this Agreement. 5. PAYMENT The City agrees to pay the Contractor in accordance with the payment rates and terms set forth in Exhibit "8", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. 6. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSE (a) The City may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or terminate this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the Contractor at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Contractor shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the City suspends or terminates a portion of this Agreement such suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement. Page 1 (b) In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the City shall pay to Contractor the actual value of the work performed up to the time of termination, provided that the work performed is of value to the City. Upon termination of the Agreement pursuant to this Section, the Contractor will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 5. 7. TERMINATION ON OCCURRENCE OF STATED EVENTS This Agreement shall terminate automatically on the occurrence of any of the following events: (a) Bankruptcy or insolvency of any party; (b) Sale of Contractor's business; or (c) Assignment of this Agreement by Contractor without the consent of City. (d) End of the Agreement term specified in Section 1. 8. DEFAULT OF CONTRACTOR (a) The Contractor's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Contractor is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Contractor for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Contractor. If such failure by the Contractor to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Contractor's control, and without fault or negligence of the Contractor, it shall not be considered a default. (b) If the City Manager or his/her delegate determines that the Contractor is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, he/she shall cause to be served upon the Contractor a written notice of the default. The Contractor shall have ten (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Contractor fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement. 9. LAWS TO BE OBSERVED. Contractor shall: (a) Procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges and fees, and give all notices which may be necessary and incidental to the due and lawful prosecution of the services to be performed by Contractor under this Agreement; (b) Keep itself fully informed of all existing and proposed federal, state and local laws, ordinances, regulations, orders, and decrees which may affect those engaged or employed under this Agreement, any materials used in Contractor's Page 2 performance under this Agreement, or the conduct of the services under this Agreement; (c) At all times observe and comply with, and cause all of its employees to observe and comply with all of said laws, ordinances, regulations, orders, and decrees mentioned above; (d) Immediately report to the City's Contract Manager in writing any discrepancy or inconsistency it discovers in said laws, ordinances, regulations, orders, and decrees mentioned above in relation to any plans, drawings, specifications, or provisions of this Agreement. (e) The City, and its officers, agents and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Contractor to comply with this Section. 10. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS (a) Contractor shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to sales, costs, expenses, receipts, and other such information required by City that relate to the performance of services under this Agreement. Contractor shall maintain adequate records of services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identified and readily accessible. Contractor shall provide free access to the representatives of City or its designees at reasonable times to such books and records; shall give City the right to examine and audit said books and records; shall permit City to make transcripts therefrom as necessary; and shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings, and activities related to this Agreement. Such records, together with supporting documents, shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years after receipt of final payment. (b) Upon completion of, or in the event of termination or suspension of this Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings, maps, models, computer files, surveys, notes, and other documents prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of the City and may be used, reused, or otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission of the Contractor. With respect to computer files, Contractor shall make available to the City, at the Contractor's office and upon reasonable written request by the City, the necessary computer software and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transferring, and printing computer files. 11. INDEMNIFICATION (a) Indemnification for Professional Liabilitv. When the law establishes a professional standard of care for Contractor's Services, to the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor shall indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless City and any and all of its officials, employees and agents ("Indemnified Parties") from and against any and Page 3 all losses, liabilities, damages, costs and expenses, including attorney's fees and costs to the extent same are caused in whole or in part by any negligent or wrongful act, error or omission of Contractor, its officers, agents, employees or subContractors (or any entity or individual that Contractor shall bear the legal liability thereof) in the performance of professional services under this agreement. (b) Indemnification for Other Than Professional Liabilitv. Other than in the performance of professional services and to the full extent permitted by law, Contractor shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, and any and all of its employees, officials and agents from and against any liability (including liability for claims, suits, actions, arbitration proceedings, administrative proceedings, regulatory proceedings, losses, expenses or costs of any kind, whether actual, alleged or threatened, including attorneys fees and costs, court costs, interest, defense costs, and expert witness fees), where the same arise out of, are a consequence of, or are in any way attributable to, in whole or in part, the performance of this Agreement by Contractor or by any individual or entity for which Contractor is legally liable, including but not limited to officers, agents, employees or subContractors of Contractor. (c) General Indemnification Provisions. Contractor agrees to obtain executed indemnity agreements with provisions identical to those set forth here in this section from each and every subContractor or any other person or entity involved by, for, with or on behalf of Contractor in the performance of this agreement. In the event Contractor fails to obtain such indemnity obligations from others as required here, Contractor agrees to be fully responsible according to the terms of this section. Failure of City to monitor compliance with these requirements imposes no additional obligations on City and will in no way act as a waiver of any rights hereunder. This obligation to indemnify and defend City as set forth here is binding on the successors, assigns or heirs of Contractor and shall survive the termination of this agreement or this section. 12. INSURANCE Contractor shall maintain prior to the beginning of and for the duration of this Agreement insurance coverage as specified in Exhibit "C" attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. 13. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR (a) Contractor is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent Contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Contractor shall at all times be under Contractor's exclusive direction and control. Neither City nor any of its officers, employees, or agents shall have control over the conduct of Contractor or any of Contractor's officers, employees, or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. Contractor shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees, or agents are in any manner officers, employees, or agents of the City. Contractor shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation, or liability whatever against City, or bind City in any manner. Page 4 (b) No employee benefits shall be available to Contractor in connection with performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Contractor as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Contractor for performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Contractor for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 14. UNDUE INFLUENCE Contractor declares and warrants that no undue influence or pressure was or is used against or in concert with any officer or employee of the City of Arroyo Grande in connection with the award, terms or implementation of this Agreement, including any method of coercion, confidential financial arrangement, or financial inducement. No officer or employee of the City of Arroyo Grande will receive compensation, directly or indirectly, from Contractor, or from any officer, employee or agent of Contractor, in connection with the award of this Agreement or any work to be conducted as a result of this Agreement. Violation of this Section shall be a material breach of this Agreement entitling the City to any and all remedies at law or in equity. 15. NO BENEFIT TO ARISE TO LOCAL EMPLOYEES No member, officer, or employee of City, or their designees or agents, and no public official who exercises authority over or responsibilities with respect to the project during his/her tenure or for one year thereafter, shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in any agreement or sub-agreement, or the proceeds thereof, for work to be performed in connection with the project performed under this Agreement. 16. RELEASE OF INFORMATION/CONFLICTS OF INTEREST (a) All information gained by Contractor in performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential and shall not be released by Contractor without City's prior written authorization. Contractor, its officers, employees, agents, or subContractors, shall not without written authorization from the City Manager or unless requested by the City Attorney, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories, or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement or relating to any project or property located within the City. Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered "voluntary" provided Contractor gives City notice of such court order or subpoena. (b) Contractor shall promptly notify City should Contractor, its officers, employees, agents, or subContractors be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions, or other discovery request, court order, or subpoena from any person or party regarding this Agreement and the work performed thereunder or with respect to Page 5 any project or property located within the City. City retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent Contractor and/or be present at any deposition, hearing, or similar proceeding. Contractor agrees to cooperate fully with City and to provide the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by Contractor. However, City's right to review any such response does not imply or mean the right by City to control, direct, or rewrite said response. 17. NOTICES Any notice which either party may desire to give to the other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may be given either by (i) personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, which provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by notice: To City: City of Arroyo Grande Kevin Rocha, Parks Supervisor 214 E. Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 To Contractor: ServiceMaster Commercial Cleaning Svcs. Jeff Hopson 708 W.Betteravia, Unit C Santa Maria CA 93455 18. ASSIGNMENT The Contractor shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, without the prior written consent of the City. . 19. GOVERNING LAW The City and Contractor understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties, and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the superior or federal district court with jurisdiction over the City of Arroyo Grande. 20. ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations, and statements, or written, are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into Page 6 this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material. 21. TIME City and Contractor agree that time is of the essence in this Agreement. 22. CONTENTS OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL AND PROPOSAL Contractor is bound by the contents of the City's Request for Proposal, Exhibit "D", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and the contents of the proposal submitted by the Contractor, Exhibit "E", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. In the event of conflict, the requirements of City's Request for Proposals and this Agreement shall take precedence over those contained in the Consultant's proposals. 23. CONSTRUCTION The parties agree that each has had an opportunity to have their counsel review this Agreement and that any rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not apply in the interpretation of this Agreement or any amendments or exhibits thereto. The captions of the sections are for convenience and reference only, and are not intended to be construed to define or limit the provisions to which they relate. 24. AMENDMENTS Amendments to this Agreement shall be in writinq and shall be made only with the mutual written consent of all of the parties to this Agreement. 25.. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Contractor warrants and represents that he/she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Contractor and has the authority to bind Contractor to the performance of its obligations hereunder. Page 7 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be, executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE CONTRACTOR By: Tony M. Ferrara, Mayor By: Its: Attest: (Title) Kelly Wetmore, City Clerk Approved As To Form: Timothy J. Carmel, City Attorney Page 8 EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF WORK Page 9 FACILITY: Arroyo Grande Parks, Recreation and Facilities Department Elm Street Community Center and Preschool 1221 Ash Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 FIVE DAYS PER WEEK: Restrooms Sweep and Mop Clean and disinfect toilets, sinks, counter tops, urinals Refill all dispensers Clean and disinfect receptacles Empty trash and reline trashcans Deodorize Trash Empty and reline Deodorize Water Fountains Clean and polish TWO DAYS PER-WEEk: Vacuum carpeting Mop flooring WEEKLY: Clean and detail sinks and counter tops MONTHLY: Spot clean walls and partitions Spot clean entry doors and door glass Low dusting - sills, ledges, molding, ducts, radiators, desks, fumiture, picture frames QUARTERLY: ". High dusting - lights, vents, fixtures TWICE PER YEAR: Deep renovate grout Page 9.1 R:\Kitty's StufflStaffRpt\CCCustodial.proposaI9.06.doc FACILITY: Arroyo Grande Police Department 200 N. Halcyon Road Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 FIVE DAYS PER WEEK: Kitchen Sweep and mop Clean and disinfect all sinks, counter tops and table Empty trash and reline trashcans Deodorize Restrooms Sweep and Mop Clean and disinfect toilets, sinks, counter tops, urinals and showers Refill all dispensers Clean glass Clean and disinfect receptacles Empty trash and reline trashcans Deodorize Trash Empty and reline Deodorize Water Fountains Clean and polish TWO DAYS PER WEEK: Vacuum all flooring Spot clean carpet Clean and disinfect all sinks and counter tops WEEKLY: Entrance Sweep and mop Spot clean entry windows and door glass Kitchen Clean stove top Walls and Partitions Spot clean Page 9.2 R:\Kitty's Stuff\StaffRpt\CCCustodial.proposaI9.06.doc MONTHLY: High dusting Low dusting QUARTERLY: Scrub tile grout ;:'! Page 9.3 R:\Kitty's Stuff\StaffRpt\CCCustodial.proposaI9.06.doc FACILITY: Arroyo Grande Fire Department 140 Traffic Way Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 WEEKLY: Entrance Spot clean glass Spot clean entry windows Offices and Conference Room Vacuum Empty trash Feather dust desktops Polish conference table Classroom Vacuum Dust Empty trash and reline trashcans Lounge Vacuum Empty trash and reline trashcans Kitchen Sweep and mop Clean and disinfect countertops and tabletops Polish stainless steel sinks Clean stovetop Clean face of all appliances Empty trash and reline trashcans Locker Room Vacuum Empty trash Water Fountains Clean and polish R:\Kitty's Stuff\StaffRptICCCustodial.proposaI9.06.doc Page 9.4 Page 9.5 TWICE PER WEEK: Sweep and mop Clean and disinfect count~rtops, toilets, sinks and showers Clean glass Refill all dispensers Empty trash and reline trashcans Deodorize R:lKnty's Stuff\StaffRptICCCustodial.proposaI9.06.doc Page 9.6 FACILITY: Arroyo Grande Council Chambers 215 E. Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 FIVE DAYS PER WEEK: Restrooms Sweep and mop Clean and disinfect all toilets, sinks, urinals, countertops and receptacles Refill all dispensers Empty trash and reline trashcans Deodorize Trash Empty and reline trashcans Deodorize WEEKLY: ..;..t Entry Spot clean:entry windows and door glass Flooring Dust mop Wet mop Conference Tables Polish weekly Kitchen Clean and detail Carpeted Flooring Vacuum ., ,.',' Sinks and Counters Clean and.disinfect "",.- MONTHLY: High dust Page 9.7 R:\K~ty's StufflStaffRptICCCustodial.proposaI9.06.doc FACILITY: Arroyo Grande Corporate Yard 1375 Ash Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 MONDAY, WEDNESDAY, FRIDAY: Entrance Spot clean entrance windows Vacuum throw rugs Sweep and mop Offices Vacuum Clean chairs Dust window sills, desks, office equipment Empty trash and reline trashcans Conference Room Dust window sills Clean chairs Spot clean windows Sweep and mop Clean and polish conference table Empty trash and reline trashcan Uniform Closet Area I Washroom Sweep and mop flooring Clean and disinfect countertop and sink area Empty trash and reline trash cans Water Fountains Clean and polish Restrooms Sweep and mop men's I vacuum women's Clean and disinfect countertops, sinks and toilets Refill all paper products Empty trash and reline trashcans R:\K.ty's StufflStaffRpt\CCCustodial.proposaI9.06.doc Page 9.8 FACILITY: Arroyo Grande Woman's Club 211 Vernon Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 FIVE DAYS PER WEEK: Restrooms Sweep and mop flooring Clean and disinfect toilets, sinks, urinals, receptacles Wipe down walls Clean glass Refill all dispensers Empty trash and reline trashcans Deodorize Kitchen Clean and disinfect counters and stove top Wipe down refrigerator Clean oven Trash Empty trash Deodorize Flooring Dust mop MONTHLY: , ~, ! '~:; 'l'" _, , .,.,.",- .: ;', ,~. Spot clean walls and partitions Spot clean entry windows and door glass TWICE PER MONTH: Wet mop floors (Dates to be determined by Facility Coordinator) TWICE PER YEAR: Deep renovate grout Page 9.8 R:\K~ty's StufflStaffRptICCCustodial.proposaI9.06.doc FACILITY: Arroyo Grande City Hall, Engineering Department and Building & Life Safety Department 214,208 & 200 E. Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 FIVE DAYS PER WEEK: . , I Restrooms Sweep and mop Clean and disinfect all sinks, countertops, toilets and urinals Clean glass mirrors Refill all dispensers Empty trash and reline trashcans Deodorize Trash Take out daily Reline trashcans and deodorize . WEEKLY: Dust all offices, windowsills, picture frames, baseboards Spot clean entrance windows and door glass Clean and disinfect all sinks and countertops Clean and descale drinking fountains Vacuum and mop all flooring MONTHLY: Spot clean walls and partitions High dusting - walls, vents, fixtures "'<,I, ' R~lKitty's SlufflSlaffRpl\CCCustodiaLPrOPosaI9.06.doePage 9.9 EXHIBIT B PAYMENT SCHEDULE Page 10 ServiceMASTER Clean @ Commercial Clearung Services ServiceMaster Commercial Cleaning Services 708 W Betteravia, Unit C Santa Maria, CA 93455 Phone: 805/349-0503 805/688-5191 805/545-8900 Fax: 805/352-1025 October 6, 2006 City of Arroyo Grande Attn: Daniel Hernandez 214 E. Branch St. Arroyo Grande, Ca 93444 Dear Daniel, Thank you for this opportunity to provide a quote for cleaning services. Based on our visit 1 have comprised the following price list according to the task schedules provided by the city. Ci . Hall, ring, Building 214, 208 & 200 E. Branch St. Co orate Yard, 1375 Ash St. Womens Club, 211 Vernon St. Council Chambers, 215 E. Branch Fire D . (mobile unit) 140 Traffic Wa ' Police Dept. Parks and Recreation, Preschool 1221 Ash Street Total $1339. $328 $606 $261 $145 $539 $616 $3834 er month er month er month er month month er month r month r month ~ lbis includes all taxes, labor, supervision, cleaning supplies, and necessax)' insurance (W ork Comp / General Liability / Public Liability / Fidelity Bond). JeffH on ServiceMaster C mmercial Building Maintenance Page 10.1 A SerViCeMASTER. BRAND EXHIBIT C INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS Prior to the beginning of and throughout the duration of the Work, Contractor will maintain insurance in conformance with the requirements set forth below. Contractor will use existing coverage to comply with these requirements. If that existing coverage does not meet the requirements set forth here, Contractor agrees to amend, supplement or endorse the existing coverage to do so. Contractor acknowledges that the insurance coverage and policy limits set forth in this section constitute the minimum amount of coverage required. Any insurance proceeds available to City in excess of the limits and coverage required in this agreement and which is applicable to a given loss, will be available to City. Contractor shall provide the following types and amounts of insurance: Commercial General Liability Insurance using Insurance Services Office "Commercial General Liability" policy from CG 00 01 or the exact equivalent. Defense costs must be paid in addition to limits. There shall be no cross liability exclusion for claims or suits by one insured against another. Limits are subject to review but in no event less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. Business Auto Coverage on ISO Business Auto Coverage from CA 00 01 including symbol 1 (Any Auto) or the exact equivalent. Limits are subject to review, but in no event to be less than $1,000,000 per accident. If Contractor owns no vehicles, this requirement may be satisfied by a non-owned auto endorsement to the general liability policy described above. If Contractor or Contractor's employees will use personal autos in any way on this project, Contractor shall provide evidence of personal auto liability coverage for each such person. Workers Compensation on a state-approved policy form providing statutory benefits as required by law with employer's liability limits no less than $1,000,000 per accident or disease. Insurance procured pursuant to these requirements shall be written by insurer that are admitted carriers in the state California and with an A.M. Bests rating of A- or better and a minimum financial size VII. General conditions pertaining to provision of insurance coverage by Contractor. Contractor and City agree to the following with respect to insurance provided by Contractor: Page 11 1. Contractor agrees to have its insurer endorse the third party general liability coverage required herein to include as additional insureds City, its officials employees and agents, using standard ISO endorsement No. CG 2010 with an edition prior to 1992. Contractor also agrees to require all Contractors, and subContractors to do likewise. 2. No liability insurance coverage provided to comply with this Agreement shall prohibit Contractor, or Contractor's employees, or agents, from waiving the right of subrogation prior to a loss. Contractor agrees to waive subrogation rights against City regardless of the applicability of any insurance proceeds, and to require all Contractors and subContractors to do likewise. 3. All insurance coverage and limits provided by Contractor and available or applicable to this agreement are intended to apply to the full extent of the policies. Nothing contained in this Agreement or any other agreement relating to the City or its operations limits the application of such insurance coverage. 4. None of the coverages required herein will be in compliance with these requirements if they include any limiting endorsement of any kind that has not been first submitted to City and approved of in writing. 5. No liability policy shall contain any provision or definition that would serve to eliminate so-called "third party action over" claims, including any exclusion for bodily injury to an employee of the insured or of any Contractor or subcontractor. 6. All coverage types and limits required are subject to approval, modification and additional requirements by the City, as the need arises. Contractor shall not make any reductions in scope of coverage (e.g. elimination of contractual liability or reduction of discovery period) that may affect City's protection without City's prior written consent. 7. Proof of compliance with these insurance requirements, consisting of certificates of insurance evidencing all of the coverages required and an additional insured endorsement to Contractor's general liability policy, shall be delivered to City at or prior to the execution of this Agreement. In the event such proof of any insurance is not delivered as required, or in the event such insurance is canceled at any time and no replacement coverage is provided, City has the right, but not the duty, to obtain any insurance it deems necessary to protect its interests under this or any other agreement and to pay the premium. Any premium so paid by City shall be charged to and promptly paid by Contractor or deducted from sums due Contractor, at City option. 8. Certificate(s) are to reflect that the insurer will provide 30 days notice to City of any cancellation of coverage. Contractor agrees to require its insurer to modify such certificates to delete any exculpatory wording stating that failure of the insurer to mail written notice of cancellation imposes no obligation, or that any party will "endeavor" (as opposed to being required) to comply with the requirements of the certificate. Page 12 9. It is acknowledged by the parties of this agreement that all insurance coverage required to be provided by Contractor or any subContractor, is intended to apply first and on a primary, noncontributing basis in relation to any other insurance or self insurance available to City. 10. Contractor agrees to ensure that subContractors, and any other party involved with the project who is brought onto or involved in the project by Contractor, provide the same minimum insurance coverage required of Contractor. Contractor agrees to monitor and review all such coverage and assumes all responsibility for ensuring that such coverage is provided in conformity with the requirements of this section. Contractor agrees that upon request, all agreements with subContractors and others engaged in the project will be submitted to City for review. 11. Contractor agrees not to self-insure or to use any self-insured retentions or deductibles on any portion of the insurance required herein and further agrees that it will not allow any Contractor, subContractor, Architect, Engineer or other entity or person in any way involved in the performance of work on the project contemplated by this agreement to self-insure its obligations to City. If Contractor's existing coverage includes a deductible or self-insured retention, the deductible or self-insured retention must be declared to the City. At the time the City shall review options with the Contractor, which may include reduction or elimination of the deductible or self-insured retention, substitution of other coverage, or other solutions. 12. The City reserves the right at any time during the term of the contract to change the amounts and types of insurance required by giving the Contractor ninety (90) days advance written notice of such change. If such change results in substantial additional cost to the Contractor, the City will negotiate additional compensation proportional to the increase benefit to City. 13. For purposes of applying insurance coverage only, this Agreement will be deemed to have been executed immediately upon any party hereto taking any steps that can be deemed to be in furtherance of or towards performance of this Agreement. 14. Contractor acknowledges and agrees that any actual or alleged failure on the part of City to inform Contractor of non-compliance with any insurance requirements in no way imposes any additional obligations on City nor does it waive any rights hereunder in this or any other regard. 15. Contractor will renew the required coverage annually as long as City, or its employees or agents face an exposure from operations of any type pursuant to this agreement. This obligation applies whether or not the agreement is canceled or terminated for any reason. Termination of this obligation is not effective until City executes a written statement to that effect. Page 13 16. Contractor shall provide proof that policies of insurance required herein expiring during the term of this Agreement have been renewed or replaced with other policies providing at least the same coverage. Proof that such coverage has been ordered shall be submitted prior to expiration. A coverage binder or letter from Contractor's insurance agent to this effect is acceptable. A certificate of insurance and/or additional insured endorsement as required in these specifications applicable to the renewing or new coverage must be provided to City within five days of the expiration of the coverages. 17. The provisions of any workers' compensation or similar act will not limit the obligations of Contractor under this agreement. Contractor expressly agrees not to use any statutory immunity defenses under such laws with respect to City, its employees, officials and agents. 18. Requirements of specific coverage features or limits contained in this section are not intended as limitations on coverage, limits or other requirements nor as a waiver of any coverage normally provided by any given policy. Specific reference to a given coverage feature is for purposes of clarification only as it pertains to a given issue, and is not intended by any party or insured to be limiting or all-inclusive. 19. These insurance requirements are intended to be separate and distinct from any other provision in this agreement and are intended by the parties here to be interpreted as such. 20. The requirements in this Section supersede all other sections and provisions of this Agreement to the extent that any other section or provision conflicts with or impairs the provisions of this Section. 21. Contractor agrees to be responsible for ensuring that no contract used by any party involved in any way with the project reserves the right to charge City or Contractor for the cost of additional insurance coverage required by this agreement. Any such provisions are to be deleted with reference to City. 'it is not the intent of City to reimburse any third party for the cost of complying with these requirements. There shall be no recourse against City for payment cif premiums or other amounts with respect thereto. 22. Contractor agrees to provide immediate notice to City of any claim or loss against Contractor arising out of the work performed under this agreement. City assumes no obligation or liability by such notice, but has the right (but not the duty) to monitor the handling of any such claim or claims if they are likely to involve City. Page 14 EXHIBIT D CITY'S REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL Page 15 EXHIBIT E CONTRACTOR'S PROPOSAL Page 16 eibjoJ CWuup-l}uuuk PARKS, RECREATION AND FACILITIES P.O. Box 550 1221 Ash Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93421 Phone: (805) 473-5474 Fax: (805) 473-5479 E-Mail: agclly@arroyogrande.org NOTICE OF INVITATION TO BIDDERS SEPTEMBER 27,2006 The City of Arroyo Grande is requesting bids for contract custodial services for City- operated facilities. The contractor must furnish all supplies and labor necessary to perform all related duties associated with this proposal. Proposals shall be sealed and on company letterhead with the envelope marked "Bid Proposal." Bid proposals will be accepted until 4:00 p.m. on Thursday, October 12, 2006. Please submit your sealed bid to: Kelly Wetmore, Director of Administrative Services 214 E. Branch Street / P.O. Box 550 Arroyo Grande, CA 93421 On Friday, October 6, 2006, Parks Supervisor Kevin Rocha will conduct a pre-bid tour for bidding contractors of the proposed facilities. The tour will begin at the Parks, Recreation and Facilities Department, 1221 Ash Street. Please arrive at 10:00 .a.m. Questions concerning bid proposals are to be directed to Daniel Hernandez, Director of Parks, Recreation and Facilities, at 473-5474, or Kevin Rocha, Parks Supervisor, at 473-5470. REQUIREMENTS: 1. Show evidence of liability and Workers' Compensation Insurance; (Refer to enclosed sample copy of the Agreement for Contractor Services for amounts and further requirements.) 2. Obtain a City business license; 3. Provide a breakdown of costs based on duties assigned per the attached facility requirements; 4. Contractor is responsible for providing all cleaning supplies, paper products, trash bags, etc; 5. Contractual employees are subject to a police background check. BID PROPOSAL MUST INCLUDE: 1. Written schedule of days and times specific facilities will be cleaned and maintained; 2. Name, address and phone number; 3. Three local references. of current or previous clients; 4. Authorized signature. R:\Kitty's Stuff\Correspondence\2006CustodiaIServices.bidnotice .doc Page 15.1 , SerViCeMASTER Clean @ Commercial Cleaning Services ServiceMaster Commercial Cleaning Services 708 W Beneravia. Unit C Santa Matia, CA 93455 Phone: 805/349-0503 805/688-5191 805/545-8900 Fax: 805/352-1025 October 6, 2006 City of Arroyo Grande Attn: Daniel Hernandez 214 E. Branch St. Arroyo Grande, Ca 93444 Dear Daniel, Thank you for this opportunity to provide a quote for cleaning services. Based on our visit I have comprised the following price list according to the task schedules provided by the city. C' . Hall, inee B .. 214,208 & 200 E. Branch St. Co orate Yard" 1375 Ash St. Womens Club, 211 Vernon St. Council Chambers, 215 E. Branch Fire t. (mobile unit) 140 Traffic Wa . Police D t. Parks and Recreation Preschool 1221 Ash Street Total $1339 $328 $606 $261 $145 $539 $616 $3834 .~ This includes all taxes, labor, supervision, cleaning supplies, and necessary insurance (Work Comp I General Liability I Public LiabiIity I Fidelity Bond). ~---' . Jeff:;Z: r. ServiceMaster C nnnercial Building Maintenance Page 18.1 A SerViCeMASTER. BRAND Cleaning Schedule Building department Mon thru Fri (6pm-12am Corporate Yard Monday, Wednesday, Friday (6pm-12am) Womans Club Mon thru Fri (6pm-12am Council Chambers Mon thru Fri (6pm-12am) Fire Department Friday (6pm-12am) Police Department Mon thru Fri 6pm-12am Parks and Recreation Mon thru Fri 6pm-12am Public Works Mon thru Fri 6pm-12am City Hall Mon thru Fri 6pm-12am) Page 18.2 COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA BOB NISBET Director Paddy Langlands Assistant Director Ronn Carlentine, SR/WA Real Estate Svcs Manager Jack T. Williams Facilities Manager Grady Williams, PE Capital Projects Manager Mitch Guenthar! Fleet Manager GENERAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT SUPPORT SERVICES DIVISION 1105 Santa Barbara Street Santa Barbara, California 93101 IE: ServiceMaster CBM 708 West Betteravia, Unit C Santa Maria, CA 93455 To Whom It May Concern: It is with pleasure that I am writing a letter of reference on behalf of Service Master CBM. Service Master CBM has had the janitorial contract for county owned buildings located in North County of Santa Barbara for over 13 years. This would include approx. 34 facilities located throughout Santa Maria, Solvang, Buellton and Lompoc. In July 2006, I renewed this contract for an additional 3 years based on the history with the company and with full confidence that I would continue to receive the same level of satisfaction I have come to appreciate. I have always found the service to be above contract standards. I feel they go above and beyond with our Task Schedule, follow up with any issues that may arise and Mr. Hopson assures that I have contact with him on a regular basis regarding our facilities. In addition to the excellent service provided by Service Master CBM, another advantage I find is the service of the staff. They are always available, courteous and more than willing to help out and I appreciate that there is always a staff member available during my business hours. If you would like further information, please do not hesitate to contact me at 805.896.6515. Thank you, e1ll\ Traci Lothery "=n'~ Departmental Assistant, SeniOr- County of Santa Barbara General Services, Facilities Page 18.3 I city o~ san lulS OBISpo 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 June 6, 2003 To Whom It May Concern: Since July 1,2001 ServiceMaster Commercial Building Maintenance has been furnishing contract janitorial maintenance services for the City of San Luis Obispo's recreation facilities, including the Ludwick Recreation Center, the Senior Center, the Meadow Park Multi-Purpose Building, and the Jack House Service Building and Restrooms. This service is provided through a six-year contract that was procured through a request for proposals. After interviewing all proposing firms and checking their references, a review committee scored the firms on various service factors based on a scale from 0.00 to 4.00, with 0.00 being unsatisfactory and 4.00 being excellent. ServiceMaster's average score was 3.88 out of 4.00, and it was awarded the contract. Since then, it has lived up to its high rating with timely and exemplary service. It has been a pleasure to work with this firm, and I am confident that if you select this firm to work for you, you will appreciate your association with it. ~ The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include t~eaJ&~b~~i~ all of its services, programs and activities. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7410. ' , References City of San Luis Obispo Janitorial services 7 days per week in recreation facilities. Contract start date: July 1,2001 Contact: Andrew Collins 781-7219 Square Footage: 24,100 City of San Luis Obispo Janitorial services 7 days per week in all public city and park restrooms. Contract start date: November 7, 2005 Contact: Larry Tolson 781-7022 City of Santa Maria Janitorial services 6 days per week in city facilities. Contract start date: June I, 2002 Contact: Richard Dupree 929-0446 County of Santa Barbara Janitorial services 5 & 6 days per week in all County owned facilities. Contract start date: July I, 1988 Contact: Bob Clarke 934-6136 Page 18.5 8.k. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: CITY COUNCIL DANIEL C. HERNANDEZ, DIRECTOR OF PARKS, RECREATION AND ~ FACILITIES SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF AUTHORIZATION TO SUBMIT A PROPOSAL TO THE LUCIA MAR UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT TO BE A PARTNER IN THE BRIGHT FUTURES PROGRAM DATE: OCTOBER 24, 2006 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council authorize the Director of Parks, Recreation and Facilities to submit a proposal to the Lucia Mar Unified School District to become a partner in the Bright Futures Program. FUNDING: Funding for the Children In Motion Program is included in the FY 2006/07 budget. Costs for operating as part of the Bright Futures Program will be reimbursed by the School District. Currently, the program operates at approximately a 75% cost recovery, which is higher than typical programs operated statewide by recreation departments. The current expenditure budget for the year is $402,730. Summer program expenditures, as well as for winter and spring breaks and teacher conference dates, are not affected. Since Bright Futures reimburses direct as well as indirect costs, overall program subsidy should actually be reduced from $102,000 to approximately $80,000- $85,000. Actual figures will be determined when the detailed proposal is completed. Additionally, the City would no longer be required to pay for facility use; this would save the City an additional $7,500 per year in facility use fees. DISCUSSION: The Lucia Mar Unified School District has requested the Parks, Recreation and Facilities Department to submit a proposal to become a partner in the School District's Bright Futures Program. The School District has applied for and been awarded a three- year, renewable grant from the State of California's After School Education and Safety Program (ASES). The San Luis Obispo County YMCA and the United South County Boys and Girls Club are currently Bright Futures partners and provide programs in Grover Beach and Oceano Elementary Schools. The City Parks, Recreation and Facilities Department currently offers state licensed before-and-after-school childcare at Branch, Margaret Harloe and Ocean View Elementary Schools. During regular school days, care is provided from 7:00 a.m., until school begins, and again when school gets out, until 6:00 p.m. Participants pay the City R:\Staff ReportslCCBrighlFutures1 02406.doc CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF AUTHORIZATION TO SUBMIT A PROPOSAL TO THE LUCIA MAR UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT TO BE A PARTNER IN THE BRIGHT FUTURES PROGRAM OCTOBER 24, 2006 PAGE 2 an .hourly rate for the childcare program. On October 9, 2006, the Lucia Mar Unified School District contacted City Parks, Recreation and Facilities Department staff and indicated that in order to continue providing care at the schools listed above, the department would be required to submit a proposal to become a partner in the School District's Bright Futures Program. The Bright Futures Program is funded from Proposition 49 funds allocated to school districts statewide (Attachment 1). The requirement is to partner with a local service provider. Since the City currently provides childcare at Ocean View, Branch and Harloe Elementary Schools, this department was the obvious choice for a partnership. The new program will incorporate our current drop-in recreational activities with organized activities, such as, computer lab workshops, and specialty classes like cheerleading, chess club, arts and crafts, as well as other similar offerings. Current staff would be selected to lead many of these classes. The Bright Futures Program would operate after school until 6:00 p.m. The City would continue to offer before-school care, winter/spring/summer break camps, and school holidays under our current operational format. The benefit of maintaining this relationship with the School District is maintaining our ability to continue to provide childcare programs in addition to Bright Futures classes on school sites. Meetings with the School District are scheduled to obtain more detailed information regarding the Bright Futures Program. Proposals need to be submitted to the School District as soon as possible and are to be received by the State on or before November 3, 2006. Pertinent information related to this program is attached. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration: Approve staff's recommendation; Do not approve participating in the Bright Futures Program and eliminate the City's childcare program; Request additional information: Provide direction to staff. Attachment: 1. ASES Program Materials R:\Staff ReportslCCBrightFutures102406.doc California's ASES Program Fully Funded in 2006-07 - After School Education & Safety... Page I of 4 Taken from: http;J /www.cde.ca . gOY /ls/ba/as/ases06Tundingfaq .asp last modified: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 California's ASES Program Fully Funded in 2006-07 Provides information on the 2006-07 Califomia State Budget and the provisions of Proposition 49. I California will fully fund the After School Education and Safety Program (ASES) at I $550,000.000 in accordance with the provisions of Proposition 49. Please note that the ! application for the ASES program will not be released untillegislalion is passed by the I Legislature and signed by the Governor. Currently, Senate Bill (SB) 638 is making its way i through the legislative process. If enacted into law, SB 638 will implement the provisions of I Proposition 49, and the California Department of Education (CD E) will release a Request for I Applications (RFA) based on the provisions of this act. i The CDE will release an RFA soon after the enactment of SB 638 or, if the bill is not passed, ! release an RFA based on current iaw. We encourage you to join the CDE funding e-mail list I at htlD://www.cde.ca.aov/falfo/af/ioinlist.asl1 to receive notification when this and other CDE ! funding opportunities become available. ! I Prospective applicants may want to prepare for an ASES grant based on the language of SB t 638 and Education Code (Eel sections 8482 through 8484.6. In addition, future applicants are encouraged to begin planning for program implementation, collecting and analyzing student and demographic data, securing funding from local partners, and building partnerships prior to the release of the RFA. Please consider the following questions and i information when planning your iocai ASES program; , , I Who is eligible to receive funding? I ASES programs may serve pupils in kindergarten and grades one through nine at I participating public elementary, middle, junior high, and charter schools. The application I must be approved by the school district and the principal of each participating school. I Applicants may include any of the following: 1. A local educational agency (LEA), including school districts, charter schools, and county offices of education 2. A city, county, or nonprofit organization in partnership with, and with the approval of, an LEA or LEAs The application must designate the public agency or LEA partner to act as the fiscal agent. A "public agency" means only a county board of supervisors or, where the city is incorporated or has a charter, or a city council. I Are all public elementary, middle, and junior high schools eligible to apply for ASES , funding? Ii Yes, however, the proposed law states that the CDE shall consider the following in selecting schools to participate in the ASES Program; ! I I ! , i What steps can I take to begin planning for an ASES program? I II , . The percentage of pupils receiving free and reduced lunch . Other indicators of need, including but not limited to, neighborhood socio-economic status, percentage of limited-English-language families, availability of programs in the community, and juvenile crime rates Steps What Actions to Take http://www.cde.ca. gOY /Islbal as/ases06 fundingfaq .asp ?print -yes 10/1812006 California's ASES Program Fully Funded in 2006-07 - After School Education & Safety... Page 2 of 4 Understand Requirements of Know and understand ASES requirements and the ASES Program components by studying EC sections 8482 to 8484.6. httR:/Iwww.leainfo.ca.aov/calaw.html (Outside Source) and the text of SB 638, httR://WWW .Ieginfo.ca.aov/bilinfo.html (Outside Source). Identify Lead Organization Identify who-county office of education, school district, or county/city-will be the fiscal agent for the funding and oversee the program. Identify Schools and Partners Determine which schools. cities and community- based organization partners to include, and involve principals and partners in the planning process. Create a Timeline Set dates and identify responsible partners for each step of your planning and application process. The RFA will be released shortly after SB 638 becomes law. At this time, it is expected to be released by the end of August with the application due approximately six weeks later. To allow for all necessary planning, and to secure paperwork, commitments and signatures, a timeline is highly recommended. Identify MatChing Funds Find sources of matching funds, either in-kind or cash, to match 33 percent of your anticipated grant total. Develop Program Design Work with schools and partners to design a program: . Assess community needs and interests . Determine vision and desired results . Design strategies to achieve desired results Develop Staffing Structure Determine staffing needs and qualifications for the different levels of program responsibility including both the district and site levels. Sign Memorandums of Secure MOUs from partners so signatures can be Understanding (MOUs) obtained by the RFA due date. Draft Budget Develop a budget of expenses and revenues, based on the number of students to be served, a $7.50 daily rate, and any matching funds secured. Complete Application Process Assign a person to compile all components. Including Securing Approval by Schedule approval of your application for a hearing Local Governing Board with your local governing board (or appropriate approval process for your agency). How much funding can my agency receive? Funding is determined by the number of school sites in your ASES program, the number of i students who will attend the ASES program at each site, and the number of days the program will operate at $7.50 per pupil per day. ASES programs established under SB 638 may receive a three-year renewable grant which , shall not exceed $112,500 for each regular school year per elementary school or $150,000 for each regular school year per middle or junior high school. Does the ASES program require a budget match? Yes, your ASES program must provide an amount of cash or in-kind local funds equai to not I less than one-third of the total grant. Matching funds can be secured from the school district, govemmental agencies, community organizations, or the private sector. Facilities or space usage may fulfill not more than 25 percent of the required local contribution. State ! http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/ba/as/ases06fundingfaq.asp?print=yes 10/18/2006 California's ASES Program Fully Funded in 2006-07 - After School Education & Safety... Page 3 of 4 categorical funds for remedial education activities shall not be used to make the required contribution of local funds for those ASES programs. Since there is not a state categorical program called "remedial education" you will need to work with the accounting office of your partner LEA to determine which categorical funds are designated for student remedial services. Who will staff the program? The administrator of the ASES program must establish minimum qualifications for each staff position and ensure that all staff members who directly supervise students meet at least the minimum qualifications for an instructional aide in the school district. The minimum qualifications for an instructional aide vary, so it is important to check with the LEA's personnel department. The administrator must ensure that the program maintains a student- to-staff ratio of no more than 20 to 1. A lower student-to-staff ratio is allowabie and may be achieved with a cadre of trained volunteers and other strategies. Also, the principal of each participating school must approve the selection of ASES program site supervisors. All program staff and volunteers are subject to heaith screening and fingerprint clearance requirements in current law and district policy for school personnel and volunteers in the school district. Is a collaborative process required for the ASES program? Yes, current law requires that ASES programs operate as collaboratives. Communities implementing ASES programs should build upon existing local collaboratives and use proven strategies to provide a unified, integrated system of service for children and youth. Every ASES program shall be planned through a collaborative process that includes parents, youth, and representatives of participating public schools, governmental agencies, such as city and county parks and recreation departments, local law enforcement, community organizations, and the private sector. The collaborative should consider: ways to allocate resources or to work closely with those who can provide resources; how to manage daily work of the site, advocate for and implement necessary changes; determine means to . continuously improve the decision-making process, share accountability among partners; i and how the collaborative can serve as an advocate for parents and children. How can my agency assess the needs of children and youth in, and the strengths of our ASES program? lit is importantto use current assessments such as the California Healthy Kids Survey, strategies such as those included in the School Site and Safe School plans, and other assessment instruments as appropriate. Analysis of strengths should focus on children and youth, the school(s) and district, city or county organizations, service agencies (public and non-profit), businesses, faith-based organizations, and other community groups. Consider what is, and is not, working well for children and their families within the existing system. Also, the perspectives of children and youth need to be assessed to assure the program is effectively meeting their needs. Exampies of needs that can be fulfilled through the ASES program are: helping students perform at grade levei, teaching students the dangers of drug addiction and gang involvement, and assisting students to help the community through service-learning activities. Examples of strengths are: active coordination between regular day and after school staff, a well designed locai school plan that includes the ASES program, and supportive community-based and/or faith-based organizations in your local area. What Implementation strategies will build on what students learn during the regular school day? Applicants should consider the following questions when designing how the ASES program will support what is taught during the regular day: What are the existing and proposed new efforts in the educational and literacy component for elementary and/or middle schools? How Is the program connected with the district's standards, assessment, and accountability system? How will the program be integrated with the school's curriculum? How will the ASES program address student diversity (ethnicity, language, etc.) and learning needs? What evidence is available regarding the effectiveness of proposed strategies? How are teachers, site administrators, support staff and community members Involved? What evidence of long-term commitment from your partners is provided (e.g., Memorandums Of Understanding and budget match)? htlp ://www.cde.ca. gOY /Islbalas/ ases06fundingfaq. asp ?print=yes 10/1812006 California's ASES Program Fully Funded in 2006-07 - After School Education & Safety... Page 4 of 4 What enrichment activities will lead to desired program results? Applicants should consider the following questions when designing how the ASES program will enrich student learning: What are the existing and proposed new efforts in the enrichment (recreation. prevention, etc.) component for elementary and/or middle schools? How will you provide a variety of enrichment activities that will allow selection based on students' interests and talents? What youth development activities will be offered? How will the ASES program address student diversity (ethnicity, language. etc.)? What is your plan for integration with community, city, and/or county, and school and/or district enrichment programs and initiatives, such as recreation, mentoring, and community s8IVice-learning? What evidence is available on the effectiveness of proposed strategies? How are the administrators and staff of these programs and initiatives involved? How can my agency evaluate our local program? Applicants should consider the following questions in designing an ASES program evaluation system: What is your current capacity for conducting program evaluation? How will your program develop a local evaluation system including student and parent satisfaction for your ASES program? How will you measure progress for the result areas selected, collect and analyze data, and report results for program participants? What is your plan for continuous improvement? How is your evaluation linked to your collaborative partners? How will your ASES evaluation integrate with existing program evaluations? What resources will be committed to evaluation, including dissemination of results? Which of your collaborative partners will be the lead on program evaluation? What experience do they have in conducting evaluations similar to the one for this grant? Who can I contact for more information? The after school system of field support is divided into 11 service regions consisting of several counties with similar demographics. Each region has an after school regional lead who provides assistance to current and prospective grantees in their region. For more information about the ASES program, please contact the CDE's, After School Partnerships Office consultant for your region; or, you can contact the after school regional lead for your region. A list of these contacts is available at: . htto:/Iwww.cde.ca.aov/ls/balco/reantwrkcontacts.asQ. Questions: After School Partnerships Office I afterschool@c:de.ca.gov I 916-319-0923 http;/ /www.cde.ca. gOY /ls/ba/as/ases06fundingfaq. asp ?print=yes 10/18/2006 9.8. CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE CIT COUNCIL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING On TUESDAY, OCTOBER 24, 2006, the Arroyo Grande City Council will conduct a public hearing at 7:00 P.M. in the COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 215 E. BRANCH STREET to consider the following item: CASE #'5: Vesting Tentative Tract Map Case No. 04-004 and Planned Unit Development Case No. 04-001 (Continued from August 8, 2006). ,PROPOSAL:, The City Council wilLconsider a proposal for,acommercial retail, office and residential project to be developed in the Village of Arroyo Grande (Creekside Center). LOCATION: 415 East Branch Street APPLICANT: DB & M Property, LLC STAFF CONTACT: Kelly Heffernon, Associate Planner The City Council certified the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the Creekside Center mixed-use project (Tentative Tract Map 01-002 and Conditional Use Permit 01-001) in September 2003. In compliance with Section 15162 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City has prepared an Addendum to the FEIR for the revised . project. The purpose of the Addendum is to address the possible environmental effects associated with' the revised development proposal.. If the City Council does not feel that an Addendum is appropriate, project approval will not be considered. The Council may also discuss other hearings or business items before or after the item listed above. If you challenge the proposed action in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. Failure of any person to receive the notice shall not constitute grounds for any court to invalidate the action of the legislative body for which the notice was given. Information relating to these items is available by contacting the Arroyo Grande Community Development Department at 473-5420. The Council meeting will be televised live on Charter Cable Channel 20. 0-e-- Publish n, The Tribune, Friday, October 13, 2006 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: BY: ~~. CITY COUNCIL ROB STRONG, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR~ KELLY HEFFERNON, ASSOCIATE PLANNER CONSIDERATION OF VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP CASE NO. 04-004 & PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CASE NO. 04-001; APPLICANT - DB & M PROPERTIES, LLC; LOCATION - 415 EAST BRANCH STREET (CONTINUED FROM THE AUGUST 8, 2006 COUNCIL MEETING) OCTOBER 24, 2006 SUBJECT: DATE: RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council consider an addendum to a certified EIR and a proposal for a commercial retail, office and residential project located in the Village of Arroyo Grande (Creekside Mixed-Use Center), take tentative action on the project and direct staff to return with a supporting resolution. FUNDING: There would be additional City costs associated with maintenance if the City accepts the offer of dedication of the creek channel and creek setback area. DISCUSSION: Backqround The City Council adopted Resolution No. 3710 on September 23,2003 certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the Creekside Center project. The previous project proposed to retain and remodel the existing office building, relocate two former Loomis residences, remove the E.C. Loomis and Son Feed Store and develop a retail commercial, office and residential complex on the former Loomis property located at the east edge of the Village. The EIR determined that the main residence would be eligible for listing in the Califomia Register as a historical resource, and that the grain warehouse serves as an important feature of the setting of the main house. In response to this determination, the applicant submitted revised plans that retain all of the existing structures and provides a larger residential component. The Planning Commission considered the project on April 19, 2005 and made the following recommendation to Council (see Attachment 1 for Meeting Minutes): CITY COUNCIL VTTM 04-004; PUD 04-001 (CREEKSIDE MIXED-USE CENTER) OCTOBER 24, 2006 PAGE 2 Recommend denial of the proposal based on the inability to make findings No.1, 2 and 3 of the Resolution approving the project regarding issues of consistency with the goals, objectives, policies, plans, programs, intent, and requirements of the General Plan; public health, safety, and welfare; and consistency with the purpose and intent of the Development Code. The Commission further added that the project could meet the findings for approval if the following issues were dealt with: 1. The driveways on Crown Terrace should be level or down sloped to the street. 2. The barn should be preserved in its entirety with net loss of three parking spaces and include a parking reduction for the barn or reduction in the proposed retail space to accommodate the loss of three parking spaces. 3. Provide public access to creek and park open space area. 4. There should be no gate, but have a "look back" provision to reassess after one year. Enough space should be left if it is determined that a gate is necessary at a later date. 5. The building design, height and materials should go back to ARC and Planning Commission before issuance of a building permit for final development. 6. There should be further determination and detailed description of any retaining walls along Crown Terrace. 7. The issue of biological creek filters should be included in the staff report to Council. 8. A model to scale of the project in its entirety should be presented to Council. 9. The project should be reduced by one unit in Plan 'B" to improve on-site loading and parking. 1 O. The access between the Barn and Loomis house should provide a pedestrian path out to the sidewalk. In response to Planning Commission comments and concerns, the applicant proposed the following project revisions. 1. Residential driveways leading from the four (4) residential units along Crown Terrace will slope downward to provide for traffic sight distance visibility. 2. The addition to the rear portion of the existing warehouse will be retained and the resultant loss of parking spaces will be absorbed with a subsequent loss of retail space at the warehouse or the conversion of existing residences to commercial uses. 3. The existing loading dock along the easterly wall of the warehouse will be retained, and the newly constructed handicap ramp will be relocated with development of the proposed commercial structure. 4. A pedestrian access will be provided from East Branch Street between the warehouse and Loomis house leading to the residential area of the project. 5. The originally proposed controlled access gate between the residential and commercial areas has been eliminated from the project plans. CITY COUNCIL VTTM 04-004; PUD 04-001 (CREEKSIDE MIXED-USE CENTER) OCTOBER 24, 2006 PAGE 3 6. The City's ARC and Planning Commission will approve final building designs, materials of construction and color schemes. 7. The guardrail along Crown Terrace is to be constructed in accordance with the standards adopted by the City of Arroyo Grande. 8. The applicant intends to incorporate the Best Available Technology (BAT), as outlined by the Federal EPA standards, to deal with pollution caused by urban ru noff. 9. A scale model for the site has been completed at a scale of 1"=20' and will be available at the City Council meeting. 10. Flood sections with this development were presented with the subdivision application submittal. These sections and calculations indicate conformance with the City's Flood Plain Management Ordinance No. 501. 11. Creek clean up and restoration will be improved and managed with the development of the residential component of the project in accordance with the submitted landscape plans and the recommendations contained within the FEIR for the project. 12. The elimination or modification of street light structures and their intensity in the residential areas of the project is acceptable if the City allows for deviation from these requirements. The City Council considered this project on June 14, 2005 and continued the item to a date uncertain pending resolution of several issues (see Attachment 2 for Meeting Minutes). Issues discussed included: . Reciprocal access agreement with adjacent property to the west. . Safe access to Paulding Middle School. . Sight distance concem on Crown Terrace where it intersects with Crown Hill. . Left turn pocket design. . Crown Terrace/Le Point Street intersection improvements. . Tree removal along Crown Terrace. . Large scale of proposed commercial building in relation to the Loomis barn. . Clarification of how the public/private interface within the 25' creek setback area will be managed. . Emphasis of pedestrian access throughout the project. . Widening of Crown Terrace. In response to Council comments, the applicant secured a reciprocal easement for ingress and egress with the neighboring property to the west (see Attachment 3 for signed agreement), and revised the tentative tract map to show the 25' wide creek setback area as an individual parcel to be irrevocably offered to the City. Revisions to the Grading Plan, Easement Plan and Flood Sections were also made. The applicant additionally submitted the following exhibits to further clarify features of the project (see Attachment 4 ): 1. Creek Easement. Open Space and Setback Exhibit, identifying the various setbacks and easements along Tally Ho Creek. The 25' wide creek setback area is shown on the revised tentative tract map as Lot 14. Consistent with CITY COUNCIL VTTM 04-004; PUD 04-001 (CREEKSIDE MIXED-USE CENTER) OCTOBER 24, 2006 PAGE 4 Development Code Section 16.64.060(R), the creekbed and 25' from the top of the bank will be irrevocably dedicated to the City. The area identified on the exhibit as the shaded homeowners open space area is an open space amenity accessible to members of the Creekside Homeowners Association (HOA) and will be maintained by the HOA. The applicant recommends that a trail easement be recorded but remain unimproved, without public access, until such time as additional easement segments are acquired and a trail constructed by the City linking a creek trail system between existing public right of ways (on Le Point Street and East Branch Street). 2. Creek Landscaoina and Imorovement Plan Exhibit, which shows proposed landscaping, play structure and other miscellaneous improvements within the floodplain setback area. Slight modifications to the landscape plan will be necessary to move the proposed Homeowner's amenities from the area now identified as Lot 14. 3. Creek Gradina Plan Exhibit, illustrating the preliminary grading proposed for the creek area and adjacent houses. 4. Comoosite Creek Gradina and Landscaoina Plan Exhibit, which is a composite of the above two exhibits. 5a. Pedestrian Pathways Exhibit, illustrating pedestrian and open space connections through the project to East Branch Street and the Village Area. 5b. Drivewav and Parkina Areas Exhibit, including the second access onto East Branch Street. 6. Sidewalk View of New Buildina - Desian Comoatibilitv Exhibit shows the view of the new commercial building and warehouse building from a pedestrian's sidewalk viewpoint from the north side of East Branch Street. 7. Warehouse/New Buildina - Desian Comoatibilitv Exhibit shows existing and proposed views of the property frontage illustrating compatible size, scale and design elements between the existing warehouse and new commercial building without making any design modifications to the design of the submitted project. 8. East Branch Street/Crown Hill Street/Condo Street Elevation Exhibit illustrates the size and scale of the main architectural elements in the vicinity. The exhibit shows that the condo units, with the exposed under story, dominate the visual backdrop to the site and in the neighborhood. The proposed commercial building provides a middle position in the spatial hierarchy of the streetscape and appears complimentary in size, scale and massing to the other urban forms on the site. CITY COUNCIL VTTM 04-004; PUD 04-001 (CREEKSIDE MIXED-USE CENTER) OCTOBER 24, 2006 ' ,PAGE 5 9. Crown Terrace Rioht-bf-Wav Width - Imoact Comoarison Exhibit illustrates the impact of required retaining wall heights if Crown Terrace were to increase from two, 12' wide travel lanes with no parking to two, 15' travel lanes. Other relatEid impacts would be shorter length of driveways, effects on structural retaining walls within the residential units and floor plan redesigns. 10. Left Tum Pocket Exhibit shows the design and functional characteristics of a left tum pocket into the project from Crown Hill Street. A 6' wide sidewalk with ADA compliance ramps will also be improved. Final design details of these improvements will accompany the improvement plans for the project. '-' The applicant submitted additional information regarding drainage including calculations identifying the difference in pre and post development volumes for various storm events using the San Luis Obispo County standards. The drainage evaluation indicates that the peak flows are being reduced through reduction in impervious surface area. Also included is correspondence between the City Public Works Department and TEC Civil Engineering Consultants discussing drainage detention basin need, design" and location (see Attachment 5). Regarding the suggested redesign of Plan "A", the applicant studiEid the point of access for the upper duplex unit at the comer of Le Point and Crown Terrace and determined that due to the steepness of the Le Point slope, the garage access would be awkward and potentially conflict and interfere with travel lane vehicles at the intersection. Therefore, no design modifications of the garage location were made. The applicant also evaluated the removal of the three-foot high clearstory roof element on the commercial building and concluded that this detail helps to provide visual relief to the roof plane, and helps diminish the vertical profile ofthe building. Council considered the above revisions to the project on August 8, 2006 (see Attachment .2 for Meeting Minutes) and directed staff and the applicant to address the issue conceming impervious surfaces. Council further directed staff to facilitate the involvement of the -Tree Guild conceming the issue of tree removal and protection. In response to Council concems, the applicant has provided additional information and analysis as follows: 1. Revised Commercial Buildino Desion. The roof and floor plans for the proposed commercial building have been rEidesigned (see Attachment 7). Based on comments received from the Council and public regarding the bulk and mass of the building, the gable roofs 'were changEid to hip roofs, the siding changed from vertical to horizontal to emphasize a horizontal dimension, and the Crown Street building frontage on the second and third floors was stepped back and replaced with outdoor patio areas which enables a view of the Victorian house above Crown Terrace. 2. Tree Removal. W~h input from the Tree Guild, the applicant hired arborist Carolyn Leach to assess tree removal and protection on the project site. Based on the arborist report (included as Attachment 8), a total of eighty-five (85) trees CITY COUNCIL VITM 04-004; PUD 04-001 (CREEKSIDE MIXED-USE CENTER) OCTOBER 24, 2006' . , PAGE 6 are located on the subject property, all of which are proposed to be removed (see table below for tree inventory). The report recommends that the two (2) Coast live oak trees and the Canary Island date palm are good candidates for successful transplanting and that the remaining trees are too large, too diseased, or too problematic. to transplant. The project is conditioned to transplant these trees, at a suitable location on or off-site. Tree Invento 70 5 3 2 2 2 1 ~onrw."j;;:j~;;'~, """,,,,;;;....uanll ..N.m"'''.,-!#L.......'''.............. 3. Crown Hill Turn Pocket. Soeed Humos and Sianaae. The Public Works Department recommends that the Crown Hill entry be improved with a left'tum pocket and marking the entrance area with a "keep clear" message. Speed humps along Le Point Street and speed limit signage can be installed if directed by Council. 4. Street and Proiect Liahtina. Representatives from PG&Ehave indicated 'that the City can recommend the type, location and style of lighting, both along the Right of Ways and internal to the project. PG&E will accept the light standards into their maintenance system following their improvement by the developer. Included as Attachment 9 are examples of the style of street light stanqards recently adopted by the City for the Village area. Proposed are low profile, pedestrian oriented light standards within the residential areas of the CreeKside project. 5. Flood Plain Manaaement District and FEMA Floodolain. City Ordinance No. 501 and the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) that was prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) were reviewed to confirm compliance with .the requirements. Residential development located in an "A" zone must have the lowest floor elevated at least one foot (1') above the base flood elevation, exclusive of areas used for parking or storage areas. Attachment 10 is a FIRM map exhibit illustrating that the majority of the project site is within the flood zone. Garages shall conform to City requirements and storage cabinets shall be elevated in the event of a flood situation. 6.' Existina Imoervious Surface/Drainaae Retention. GeoSolutions, Inc. prepared a geotechnical investigation on the propertY that included six (6) site borings and a soils analysis (Attachment 11). The report indicates that the site is covered with a five to twelve inch (5" - 12") base layer and that the existing surface CITY COUNCIL VTTM 04-004; PUD 04-001 (CREEKSIDE MIXED-USE CENTER) OCTOBER 24, 2006 PAGE 7 conditions at the site provide near impervious surface drainage. The fact that the proposed project represents. a significant decrease of impervious surface area was assessed to determine the need for an on-site drainage retention basin. However, based on the "Detention Basin Analysis" prepared by the Wallace Group dated June 2006 (Attachment 12), it is not advisable to include local detention basins on sites within Flood Management Zone B (the project site . lies within this zone). Stormwater detention is therefore not recommended for the proposed project due to the lack of effectiveness in benefiting the later- occurring peak flow in the creek and the potential for increasing peak flow rates downstream as a result of the lag time associated with the peak creek flows. 7. Upper Floor Parkina Garaaes. The applicant contacted building officials and inspectors at the Cities of Pismo Beach and San Luis Obispo, as well as the County of San Luis Obispo regarding the safety and construction drawbacks to having parking garages above living spaces. The response from these agencies was that if the structure is designed and constructed in accordance with the Uniform Building Code and structural engineering specifications, there have been no reported problems. ( Proiect Description The proposed project is a reconfiguration of twenty-three (23) underlying lots into thirteen (13) lots, and a mixed-use development cOmposed of 12 duplexes, a 12,000 square foot commerciaVoffice building, and potential conversion of existing structures (two residences) to commercial uses (see table below for square footage and coverage information). The warehouse is currently occupied by a fabric store (Chameleon). Primary access to the ./ commercial development is from East Branch Street and Crown Hill and the residences have access from either Crown Terrace or Le Point Street. Currently, the plans do not include a controlled entry gate between the residential and commercial uses, as depicted on earlier plans. The Conceptual Landscape Plan shows rail bed gravel along the old Pacific Coast Railroad right of way in an effort to simulate and preserve this historic featu reo p . t Stat" t" rOJec IS ICS: Site Area 121,205 s.1, (2.78 acres) Existing Impervious Surface Area 117,778 s.1. (buildings, driveways, walkways, parking - impervious surface area from FElR Sec. 4.7-6, less area now not a Dart! ProDosed Proiect FootDrints/Coveraae: (e) Warehouse 5,880 s.1. (e) House (Maud) 962 s.1. (e) House (Hilde) . 834s.1. New Commercial 4,421 s.1. New Residential (Plan A, 4 buildinas) 9,284 s.1. New Residential (Plan S, 8 buildinas) 9,296 s.1. Parkina, Drives, Walks/Patios 43,257 sJ. Tota/lmpervious Surface Area. . 73,934 s.t. (DroDosed Droiect reDresents a 36% decrease in imoorvious surface area! CITY COUNCIL VTTM 04-004; PUD 04-001 (CREEKSIDE MIXED.USE CENTER) OCTOBER 24, 2006 PAGE 8 Residential Plan "A" contains eight (8) units in four (4) buildings with access from either interior drives at grade level, or above from Crown Terrace. The duplexes are three (3) levels with individual units ranging from 1,940 to 2,595 square feet. Residential Plan "B" contains eight (8) primary units and eight (8) second uriits in eight (8) buildings, all two (2) . stories with access from interior drives. These units are small~r, from 420 to 1,303 square feet in size (with optional plan for a larger, 1,523 square foot unit). The commercial structure has three (3) levels with an elevator and two-story parking garage accessed from Crown Terrace and at grade level. The project is conditioned to not exceed the thirty-six foot (36') height limit for the Village Mixed Use (VMU) district. The architectural style of the complex is a mix of Craftsman and California Bungalow. Per the originally adopted 2003 Housing Element (the tentative map is vested under that Housing Element), the project is subject to a 10% inclusionary requirement, or two (2) units. Environmental Review City Council certified the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the projeCt in September 2003.. An Addendum has been prepared for the project to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of the revised project (see Attachment 13). Per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEOA), the Lead Agency (the City) shall prepare an addendum to an EIR only if minor technical changes or additions are necessary to make the EIR document adequate, and the changes made by the addendum do not raise important new issues about the significant effects on the environment. The Addendum . must be considered prior to making a decision on the project. I The Addendum provides information to the City Council on the changes to the site plan, changes to environmental impacts resulting from these revisions, and conclusions about the potential changes in impacts~ Focused issues addressed in the Addendum include the following: . Parking . Traffic/Access . Historical Resources . Recreation . Biological Resources Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code requires all state and local agencies to establish monitoring or reporting programs whenever approval of a project relies upon a mitigated negative declaration or an environmental impact report (EIR). The monitoring or reporting program (MMP) must ensure implementation of the measures being imposed to mitigate or avoid the significant adverse environmental impacts identified in the mitigated negative declaration or EIR. The MMP is required for all mitigation measures adopted by the City as conditions of the project approval. When the City certified the FEIR, the City agreed to adopt all mitigation measures identified in the FEIR for the project, and the mitigation measures shall be required to avoid potentially significant adverse environmental impacts. The MMP, included as Attachment 14, contains the relevant mitigation required for the original project and new mitigation for the revised project. CITY COUNCIL VTTM 04-004; PUD 04-001 (CREEKSIDE MIXED-USE CENTER) OCTOBER 24, 2006 PAGE 9 Parkinq Total proposed parking for the project has been reduced by four (4) spaces with retention of the warehouse side loading dock and rear addition (see table below for parking calculations). Parking is considered adequate by utilizing the parking reduction provision in Development Code Section 16.56.050; which allows up to a 20% parking reduction for mixed-use projects. The loss of four (4) parking spaces represents a 3.4% parking reduction. Parkin Re uirements Residential Units Re uired Parkin Second Residences 1 per unit = 8 spaces uncovered 8 units 2 Bedroom (8 units) 3 Bedroom (8 units) Subtotal: Commercial Existin Warehouse Existin Residences New Office/Retail Subtotal: Pro osed Parkin 1 per unit - 8 spaces uncovered 2 per unit + 2 guest spaces = 18 s aces 2 per unit + 5 guest spaces = 21 s aces 47 spaces (32 covered and 15 uncovered Traffic/Access The original project induded the property developed with an office building and storage units adjacent to Tally Ho Creek. This one (1) acre property, which has the only direct driveway access from East Branch Street, was sold. The applicant recently secured an access agreement from the adjacent property owner to the west, significantly improving access and site circulation.. As mentioned above, residential traffic will access the site from either Crown Terrace or Le Point Street. In response to concems .of tuming movement conflicts with the Paulding Middle School AM and PM peak hour traffic, a separate Site Access Analysis was conducted by Associated Transportation Engineers (ATE), dated February 11, 2005. The analysis concluded that the proposed access at Crown Hill would not adversely impact the projected level of service (LOS) A-B. As added mitigation, however, ATE recommended that a "KEEP CLEAR" zone be painted in front of the Crown Hill driveway to accommodate left hand turn movements into the project. Since a "keep clear" area would not always be obeyed and requires enforcement, staff detenmined that a left tum pocket into the project site would be a superior solution (MM 4.11.1). The road is wide enough at this location to install a left turn pocket and allow sufficient rooin for cars to pass through. To accomplish this, the curbs on Crown Hill must be painted red up to Crown Terrace (red curb already exists for half the distance).. CITY COUNCIL VTTM 04~04; PUD 04~01 (CREEKSIDE MIXED-USE CENTER) . OCTOBER 24, 2006 . PAGE 10 ATE also conducted a Stop Sign Warrant Analysis dated February 23, 2005 for the intersection of Le Point Street and Crown Terrace. The study concludes that the traffic volumes; delays and speeds at this intersection do not warrant an all-way stop or a partial (two-way) stop. Staff believes that other criteria (such as sight distance and safety) besides that contained in the Caltrans Traffic Manual, apply to this intersection that favor the installation of a multi-way stop configuration with crosswalks as follows: . Since the project will provide a new pedestrian sidewalk on the west side of Crown Terrace, pedestrians. must be able to safely access the existing crosswalk on the north side of Le Point Street east of the intersection. In accordance with the requirements of Municipal Code Section 6-02.12, crosswalks shall be installed on the west and northern legs of the intersection to discourage pedestrians from crossing Crown Terrace on the south side of the intersection. City will not allow crosswalks to be installed at uncontrolled intersections. . There are also considerations for traffic circulation due to the offset geometry . of Crown Terrace entering Le Point Street. The centerlines of the northern and southern legs of Crown Terrace are offset by approximately 50 feet. The Caltrans Highway Design Manual Section 403.3 also discourages roadways entering intersections at an angle skewed more than 300. The current configuration of the northbound lane of Crown Terrace enters the intersection at an approximate 500 angle. The northbound lane must be reconfigured to enter the intersectiol) at a 900 angle. This will enable northbound traffic to better negotiate the left turn onto westbound Le Point Street. . The steep grade of eastboundLe Point Street and the inadequate corner sight distance of northbound Crown Terrace onto Le Point Street qualify as "Undesirable Geometric Features" for intersections in accordance with Caltrans Highway Design Manual Section 402.2. Historical Resources The EIR determined that the main house has historical significance (i.e. is eligible for listing in the California Register of Historic Places) and that the warehouse contributes to the "setting" of the main house, but by itself is not considered historically significant. The revised project retains all existing structures, which changes the environmental determination from a Class I impact (significant and unavoidable) to a Class IV impact (beneficial) and Class II (Significant butmitigable). A new mitigation measure (MM 4.4.1) has. been added requiring the co-applicant and the new owner of the property to register the main residence in the California Register of Historic Places through the State Office of Historic Preservation (OHP). Any change to the "R3" occupancy classification or any physical alteration also requires consistency with the Secretary's Rehabilitation Standards and Guidelines (36 CFR part 68) or technical advisories (MM 4.4.2). f:'" _ CITY COUNCIL VTTM 04-004; PUD 04-001 (CREEKSIDE MIXED-USE CENTER) OCTOBER 24, 2006 PAGE 11 Recreation The original project included several open space/recreational amenities, including an . amphitheatre and pedestrian trail network along the creek and throughout the project. Because the project site is an acre smaller in size resulting from the sale of the office property, recreational opportunities are reduced. However, the residential component of the project does incorporate an open space area that includes a play structure, picnic table and bench adjacent to the creek. As mitigation, the applicant is required to record an open space easement (MM 4.3.30 and MM 4.3.31). Overall, the project includes approximately 56,284 square feet (1.29 acres) of open space. Bioloaical Resources As with the recreational opportunities described above, the opportunity for enhancement of Tally Ho (Corbett Canyon) Creek is also reduced due to the exclusion of the existing office property. As mitigation, the applicant is required to record an open space agreement and a twenty-five foot (25') creek public access and maintenance easement measured from top of bank. The creek easement must also include provisions for a pedestrian trail (MM 4.4.30). The project is further required to construct a non-erosive footpath to the creek (MM 4.4.31). PUBLIC COMMENTS: A public hearing notice was sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the proposed project and a public notice was placed in the Tribune. Included as Attachment 15 are letters received previously for the August 8, 2006 meeting. Also attached is a letter from Adair and Trudy Brown, owners of the warehouse property, dated October 18, 2006 (see Attachment 17). ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are presented for Council consideration: 1. Take tentative action to approve the project and direct staff to return at a subsequent meeting with a supporting resolution (Draft Resolution included as Attachment 16); 2. Take tentative action to deny the project and direct staff to return at a subsequent meeting with a supporting resolution; or 3. Provide other direction to staff. Attachments: 1. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 19, 2005 2. City Council Meeting Minutes of June 14, 2005 3. Reciprocal access agreement 4. Exhibits Submitted by Applicant 5. Drainage Calculations 6. City Council Meeting Minutes of August 8, 2006 7. Commercial Building Elevation Exhibits 8. Arborist Report prepared by Carolyn Leach dated September 1, 2006 9. Examples of street light standards 10. FIRM Map CITY COUNCIL VTTM 04-004; PUD 04-001 (CREEKSIDE MIXED-USE CENTER) OCTOBER 24, 2006 PAGE 12 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Geotechnical Investigation by GeoSolutions, Inc. dated September 19, 20p6 Detention Basin Analysis prepared by the Wallace Group dated June 2006 EIR Addendum for the Creekside Mixed-Use Center' ) Mitigation Monitoring Plan' '. Letters received for the August8, 2006 City Council Meeting f Draft Resolution of Approval I Letter from Adair and Trudy Brown dated October 18, 2006 ? . ) I I / , , i / / / / MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 19, 2005 ATTACHMENT 1 Commissioner Parker made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Tait to schedule consent items 3, 4 & 5 to a public hearing, date uncertain. The motion was approved on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Parker,Tait, Fellows, Keen and Chair Brown None None III. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: A. VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP CASE NO. 04-004; APPLICANT - DB & M PROPERTIES, LLC; LOCATION - 415 EAST BRANCH STREET (continued from April 4, 2005 meeting). AssoCiate Planner, Ms. Heffernon, gave a brief update of the proposal for the mixed use development; stated that the Commission had previously considered this at a special hearing on April 4, 2005; stated that site access, stop sign warrant analyses (conducted by Associated Traffic Engineers) and retention of the loading dock on the east side of the warehouse were discussed at the meeting. Ms. Heffernon further discussed water supply, stating that measures had already been included in the EIR addendum; the level of significance may have to be changed from significant and unavoidable to potentially significant but mitigable; adoption of overriding considerations is therefore not necessary. In conclusion, Ms. Heffernon stated that staff recommends the Commission. adopt a Resolution recommending approval of the project to the City Council subject to Conditions of Approval. Commission Comments: Keen: . He was ready to move forward with approval of this project. . He would like to add a mitigation that all the drives on Crown Terrace be sloped down toward the street for safety. . Agreed with the four-way stop. . The 25-foot setback should be clarified with subdivision; there seems to be conflict with the requirements for other projects. . The gate between the commercial and residential should be an access for emergency vehicles only and not a through gate. Parker: . Is in favor of reducing parking in the commercial area in order to retain the portion of the historical barn and the square footage of the 2nd building. . The creek walk/access to the park should be retained; the City should maintain the park; it should be opened up and made larger (by losing one of the units). . Commercial and residential parking should be open; visitor parking could be signed; remove the gate to make parking more accessible to the duplexes. . Cannot understand what the building materials would look like from the drawings; would like them to match the barn and look more historic; not in favor of corrugated metal painted green (needs to look more rustic); ARC may have ideas; not in favor of stucco, it's too modern. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 19, 2005 PAGE 4 . The design of the 3-story duplexes is very innovative; likes the density; has concern that the 3-story may look large; would like each duplex to look individual to lesson the impact. . There is already a problem in this area with the traffic; mitigations may improve it. . Putting in a sidewalk and railing for the pedestrian walkway may make it better; concern with safety of backing out onto Crown Terrace and putting in sidewalk along a narrow of 24 feet; not sure how this will work and concern that it will be a problem. . . The duplexes are very large; suggest the square footage be reduced to allow more green space and this in turn could eliminate some other problems and make them more affordable. Fellows: . Asked if the sketch submitted by Mr. Balgeman had been considered by staff. . The site is a good place for homes and makes a walkable community; the proposed . commercial development would help with sales tax revenue also. . The Crown Terrace sidewalk is badly needed; the proposed four-way stop is needed and the proposed curb should be squared up for safety. . There are negative impacts for the neighbors on Crown Hill due to the size of project, the number of units proposed and the serious circulation problems as proposed - one entrance and exit only at a snarled up corner. . The gate was proposed to stop people form driving through the commercial area out onto LePoint Street; he could not support the circulation as it was now. . Pedestrians should have a place to walk separate from the driveway; suggested a pathway between the barn and Maud's house and a raised textured walkway from the residential units and out along the pathway to the sidewalk. . If this project were approved as proposed the result in traffic snarl would be ridiculous and unacceptable. .. If egress (exit through the Hayes property) is not obtained and if an easement for foot traffic is not worked out, the project should be started from square one with a much reduced plan for the front and rear phases; if the egress is obtained the project should be modified with no more than 20 residential units; 8,000 sq ft of commercial; a lower street front profile. This may mean no third story units and no second level parking units on Crown Terrace; the project needs a card key gate between the commercial and residential; ingress near the present barn with angled parking with access out the back; a safe walkway from the residential areas; the rear portion of the barn and the loading dock retained; garden area between Hilde's house and old stone wall left as is and because of the amount of asphalt, etc. there should be one or more retention basins/biological filters to treat water before it runs off into the creek. . If he is overruled and there are homes on Crown Terrace there should be no backing out; hammerhead driveways are the only way to go. . If the neighbors above do not want street lights, they should be an option. . If there is a 2-story parking garage the roof should not be open. . A scale model of the project is required. . A left turn pocket does not in any way mitigate the loss of egress through the Hayes property. . The circulation is unacceptable. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 19, 2005 PAGE 5 . Tait: . This project can achieve goals of the City, provide housing options and create walkable neighborhoods and expand transportation choices. It reduces land consumption; likes proximity to Village and enhances community; supports Village . shops; connects people with places. . He has serious concern with potential flooding even though this has been addressed in the EIR; he had spoken to Gorden Bennett who gave him history of flooding in the Village who said that the Tally Ho Creek should be cleared out. . He read excerpts from the DEIR by Duffy & Assoc. which stressed the potential for flooding in the area of the project site; read excerpts from mitigation measures for the Town Center EIR (a proposal on the same site in 1980); he would like to get an update on these concerns. . As requested in the April 4, Planning Commission minutes, who is going to take care of the creek clean up. The EIR does not specify this. . The removal of any part of the structure of the historic barn should not take place. . Could not support the removal of the back loading dock to provide additional parking. . There have been more than twenty public comment letters received regarding concerns with traffic, driveway backing out onto Crown Terrace and pedestrian safety - he shares these concerns. . The proposed yellow curb for commercial deliveries would take away from street parking for the other businesses. . The project may be too dense if delivery trucks cannot get into the project to deliver; he hopes there is room for emergency vehicles. . Concern about the loss of open space and recreational amenities that were included in the original project and the opportunity for enhancement of the Tally Ho Creek is reduced due to the sale of the existing office property. . He recommended: Reduce the residential buildings in Plan 'A' by one (decreasing the number of driveways on Crown Hill); reduce number of buildings in Plan 'B' by one, this would help accommodate the large delivery trucks and would provide for expansion of the creek area located at top of creek. . . A scale model is definitely needed before going to City Council. Brown: . He would like to see the Commissioner's diverse points of view reflected in detail in the minutes for City Council. . Read the four findings required for approval of the project; he could not make finding No.3, regarding historic resources due to the proposed alteration of the back portion of the barn to provide parking spaces. . He agreed with Commissioner Keen's comments regarding the driveway slopes. . There should be no gate; this should be a relief route for pedestrians; there should be a "look-back" provision of 6 months to one year; if not successful, a gate could then be put in. . Agrees with the suggestion from Commissioner Parker to reduce the retail space for parking. . Agrees with possibility of reducing future uses of the barn to preserve parking spaces lost by preserving the barn. . Access to the creek is an important issue. . . A model of the project should be required to provide a level of comfort for the public, Commission and Council. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 19, 2005 PAGE 6 . Density: 3-stories is acceptable, but smaller units would make them more affordable. . The retaining walls should be dealt with by staff before going to Council. . Circulation: The developer has made a problem by not having an access agreement before selling the property next door; he was leaning toward approval of the project because it would have less traffic than if it was a completely retail project; there is already a traffic problem in this area. . He agreed with Commissioner Fellows regarding the stone garden wall, the side walks on north side of LePoint and the street lights; he was not sure if the left turn pocket lane would solve the problem and the "keep clear" signage should be included. . He understands the neighbor's concerns with this project, but there will be a project at this site regardless, and while circulation is an issue he was likely to vote in favor of the project if the right motion could be crafted. . . He would like to see a recommendation to Council regarding creek clean up, flooding and good language to take care of the 1 DO-year flood level. Commissioner Tait asked Mr. Devens if an analysis had been done on the culvert, as recommended in the 2002 DEIR. Mr. Devens stated there is a study being done, currently being reviewed, for a property owner on the corner of Le Point and carried all the way down to East Branch Street. Mr. Strong explained that flooding is evident on the property; it is addressed in the EIR and it is mandatory that the new development be protected from flooding or it would not be permitted; it is a Federal requirement and is in the Code. Commissioner Keen stated that it was not the responsibility of the Commission to design the project; the Commission should either deny or approve the project. Commissioner Fellows stated he would be more comfortable with a denial of this project as trying to craft a motion to include every concern could leave something important out. After further Commission discussion, (on how they should move forward) Chair Brown stated that as the project is currently proposed a majority of the Commission have enough concerns that one or more of the findings cannot be met; he would like to see the project move forward in some positive manner; he asked the applicant if he would like to comment. Joe Boud, the applicant's representative: . This proposal has been before all committees for over a year with pre-application review to gain insight and make adjustments. . He is fine with the suggestion of sloping the drives down; losing the gate; minor adjustments to the building materials, even though the ARC has already recommended approval of this project as submitted. . Traffic: The conclusions from the traffic study indicated the LOS was not going to be affected; there were no major traffic problems except during school rush hour. . Having a walkway between the Barn and Maud's house is a good idea. . Crown Terrace: 247foot street width is equal to two travel lanes. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 19, 2005 PAGE 7 . Unit max count and square footage: We meet the City's zoning code and the project was designed with this in mind. . Regarding the loss of the 6 parking spaces and the barn, the applicant would agree to retain the barn in it's entirety if the Commission would be willing to approve a parking reduction if that portion of the barn were to convert to a full retail use; losing square footage on the new commercial building to reduce parking requirements would be a problem. . The size of units is directed by the footprint and the garage on the top level, etc; it . would not work to squeeze down the units; he explained all the constraints that had . to be considered. . If City can avoid street lights, that would be fine with them. . The creek and flooding: The permitting authorities will take care of this; it is all part of the EIR. . Open space and recreational usage: Approximately 25% of the site is dedicated to . open space; they would not be in favor of reducing the units to provide more. . Widening Crown Terrace would require a massive retaining wall and they did not consider this necessary. . They could do a scale model. . He would like the Commission to make a recommendation that includes their concerns. Fellows: . Why do the "out of town" experts state that there will not be a traffic problem at this site even though the traffic experts failed to see the traffic problem at Rancho Grande. Mr. Boud - he could only speak for the traffic report at this development and they have indicated that the LOS would not be negatively affected with this project. Tail: . Who is going to do the creek clean up? Mr. Boud - the applicant with the required agency approvals; the creek walkway system if it extends up to Tally Ho could be created for the benefit of the public; could be conditioned to identify this as a desired goal; they believe they have enough open space (25% of the site). . The scale model is definitely needed. Mr. Boud - suggested that the City incorporate this as a requirement into the application process. Parker: . Asked Mr. Boud to clarify if they intended to open up the park for the public. Mr. Boud - if the City would maintain the area and the amenity area included as a credit to the development. . Asked if there was a pedestrian access between the Barn and Maud's Home would they agree to continue the path to the park if the City would maintain it? Mr. Boud- agree this would be a good idea for the City. . Re the design submitted by Mr. Balgeman: How do you plan on putting up guard rails along the driveways and still maintain visual access for backing out. Mr. Boud- it could be done without a solid wall and would meet the building standards. After further discussion the Commission agreed that they were ready to make a motion with some recommendations to,Council. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 19,2005 PAGE 8 Commissioner Fellows made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Tait to recommend denial of the proposal based on the inability to make finding #2 that the . project will affect public health and safety. Chair Brown asked that the motion be amended to include finding No. 1 (as it is not consistent with the goals and objectives of the City), and finding NO.3 (for historic resources as the applicant is proposing to remove the back portion of the barn). . The motion was amended: Commissioner Fellows made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Tait to recommend denial of the proposal based on the inability to make findings No.1, 2 and 3. Commissioner Parker asked if the motion to deny was based on the findings not being met in the. current proposal and that it does not include what the developer is willing to change? She would like a motion to state what the developer is willing to change. Chair Brown stated that the motion to deny was based on the findings in the current proposal. The motion was approved on the following roll call vote: . AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Fellows, Tait, Parker and Chair Brown Commissioner Keen None Discussion: Chair Brown stated he wanted to make sure that the Council would be aware of all of the issues that the Commission had concerns with. Commissioner Keen asked if more specific detail should be included regarding the findings for denial. Chair Brown added that regarding finding No. 1 he did have some concerns for pedestrian access to the creek, pedestrian recreation area and if the terms of the General Plan are being met by the open space. Commission Fellows stated that he had not made specific mention in finding No. 1 that the lack of bio-filtration of run off water as one of the concerns for public health and taking off the back of the barn (finding 1 & 3). Chair Brown made a motion that the project could meet the findings if the following issues were dealt with: 1. The driveways on Crown Terrace should be level or down sloped to the street. 2. The barn should be preserved in its entirety with net loss of three parking spaces and include a parking reduction for the barn or reduction in the proposed retail space to accommodate the loss of three parking spaces. 3. Provide public access to creek and park open space area. . 4. There should be no gate, but have a "look back" provision to reassess after one year. Enough space should be left if it is determined that a gate is necessary at a later date. 5. The building design, height and materials should go back to ARC and Planning Commission before issuance of a building permit.final development. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 19, 2005 PAGE 9 6. There should be further determination and detailed description of any retaining walls along Crown Terrace. 7. The issue of biological creek filters should be included in the staff report to Council 8. A model to scale of the project in its entirety should be presented to Council. 9. The project should be reduced by one unit in Plan 'B" to improve on-site loading. and parking. 10. The creek access between the Barn and Maud house should be opened up to provide a pedestrian path out to the sidewalk. Commissioner Tait asked if the Branch Street flood study of the culvert would influence the project? Mr. Devens replied that it is currently under review, but is not for this project. Commissioner Tait asked again about the clean up of the creek and stated his concern. Chair Brown said he would amend the motion to state: "the staff report shall include that some investigation be done as to the process timelines and responsibilities of clean up of the creek", Commission Parker seconded the motion. Commissioner Keen stated he agreed that it was very important to clean up the creek, but that he did not think it was the developer's problem and felt instead that it is the City's responsibility. He requested an additional amendment to the motion to include the 4-way stop and the 3-way stop be lit and one street light in the middle of Crown Terrace (but not at the same spacing as downtown). Commissioner Parker stated that street lighting for residential areas could be applied to this, not Village commercial lighting. Chair Brown said he would amend the motion to investigate if Crown Terrace could have residential lighting as opposed to commercial Village lighting, Commissioner Fellows questioned the reason for eliminating the gate; Chair Brown stated to make full use of the mixed use design parking, but the "look-back" provision should be included. Commissioner Fellows stated circulation is a huge problem, fewer units will not help, there is lack of a biological filter for drainage to the creek and where Crown Hill stops at Branch Street there should be a crosswalk, with' or without the project. The motion was approved on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Chair Brown, Commissioners Parker and Tait Commissioners Keen and Fellows None The Commission took a 10cminute break. ATTACHMENT 2 CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES JUNE 14, 2005 PAGE 6 Council Member Arnold moved to adopt a Resolution as follows: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ESTABLISHING WATER AND SEWER RATES AND CHARGES", and approving the tiered rate structure with yearly usage monitoring. Following discussion, the motion was amended to include that the tiered water rate schedule would be implemented as soon as feasible and a water conservation status report would be provided a year from the date of implementation. Council Member Guthrie seconded the amended motion. Following further discussion concerning monitoring and reporting, the motion carried on the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Arnold, Guthrie, Dickens, Costello, Ferrara None None Council Member Arnold moved to adopt a Resolution as follows: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE SETTING FORTH THE AMOUNT OF LOPEZ CONTRACT CHARGES". Council Member Dickens seconded, and the motion carried on the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Arnold, Dickens, Guthrie, Costello, Ferrara None None At 8:25 p.m. at the request of Council Member Dickens, the Council unanimously agreed to take a recess to allow time to review correspondence received at the beginning of the meeting relating to Item g.c. Mayor Ferrara reconvened the meeting at 8:38 p.m. g.c. Consideration of Vesting Tentative Tract Map Case No. 04-004 and Planned Unit Development Case No. 04-001; Applicant - DB & M Properties, LLC; Location - 415 East Branch Street. Associate Planner Heffernon presented the staff report and recommended the Council consider an Addendum to a certified Environmental Impact Report and a proposal for a commercial retail, office and residential project. The Planning Commission recommended the City Council deny the project as presented at the April 19, 2005 Planning Commission meeting. Associate Planner Heffernon noted that the applicant had since made changes to the project in accordance with Planning Commission and public comment. Staff responded to questions from Council. Mayor Ferrara opened the public hearing. Joe Boud, Joseph Boud & Associates, spoke. on behalf of the applicant and gave a brief background presentation on the status and design of the project which has been in progress for the past five years. He stated that the proposed mixed-use project had been presented to the Council as a pre-application last year in order to better understand the City's goals and expectations for the site. He stated the project had been reviewed by the Staff Advisory Committee, Architectural Review Committee (ARC) and Planning Commission and support . letters had been prOVided by the Chamber of Commerce and Village Improvement Association. He explained that the project had been redesigned as a result of feedback received. He referred crr< COUNCluREOE'/ELOPIAENT ~GENCT M'NuTES JUNE 14. 2005 pp..GE7 , d . ,""" '" "'" ,,,,,,,'''10"'' ,~ ,,,II .,,,,,,,11 \0 c,,,,,,"'O' .19 "" 119' .od ,,,,,,",: . ""d \0 "'" d'''" ,'''''' d<W"'"'' ro C<<>'H" 'ml""'om"'" ."'" L' po<" 5tr~"" ..;.".d' refe""" '" coodd.' 119 ."",,,,,,,,,, '" T'-" _m""d "",~, "'''' hOd -', rom";""" ~. "" .,pI""""""" '" .'10'.... "" ",," ",..-" "'t ','~" .:=:::.~., _po""'"' """" "", "'" d"- ",..- "" ,." ",..." ,,,"" "" " ' ' ,d' ..,,,,, """ hOd .,'" .,""" \0 ..10m ~, "'" "'" .od lA'''''' ''',~ hOd ,,~, "":;:::;:"'0 .od "",,,,,,d "'" ' rood"ro "" ~" '" , ~,i'cl ",cl< '" ." p,,'''''' eo<<'m'~.' d _, ""d"" "",i'" -" '" ,~,,,,,,,,, '" "'" _, "".. "", .' '"'~ .~~'~'~ .:::, . ..,.: d'.' f,"" ,,10'" hOd ,,- ,""d'" "d p"",,,, eomm"""'''" ' "" , d """" ,.,red H' -",""" ",. "" - ,.,d ''''" , ,,,,. mod" " '" proI~ '; p,,"i': ~mmi;'''," ."" '" m"""d ",,,,,,,, d~'" ,od ",,,,,,"'," _"""'" "'" · ':-red m "" E'" ~ ... '" _pli_.dh "'" II"'" "'" _,,,,~_dO<'''' p<09..m '" ,," d' mod'"~' _'"'''''' .,Ioh 10'" ",." ' _1010"''''''''' H...... "",,~;,,~~ ;,..'" "", ,,- ~"" 110m '''" p"",,,, "'."'" '" """,,'00 On. H. """ ' .' ~ 10' "" ,,~ '''" """'''\00 pi "'" - " "'" comm''"oo ",,,,ghl '" "'" ,-I""";' 10': ..~ ':,a\. ,II d~..<<pm'" - ,,,,d""" "'" ,,,,d""" ",iI H' ..... "'. """, ro,' "'" L_" "","i'" .od "'" """',,,. ,'I" _","",," ""II"'" .'" _,"'" '" rom"';;:' Vii" .' H",,"d'; ""'" ",i' ." , ~'i"" ...-"" ""Is ",,, d'''''''' '" ":,,"m"d d '" ,,,;'..00' - """oci' "",-'''' "",,- ~, """oci' """ ",p!""" lA', eo" ,~O:::; """hi " '''" ",10m."". "",,,,,,,, '" ","",", .- ",,,,,,,d"" "'" ,"J"" ~. "'" ' "ro''"'''''' "",,,,,,d ~IbOl"" .." ",,_ ,,-.. ,,,0"" "'d:''''::::''\OO 10 "'" ,10""" ,mi"" "d "".. "" ,,,, , ~,L. ,." .0...., ,po . "'H "go"'''' ,,,,,,,,,,, "'" ,"",,,,m'''' """,",, ,,~, "IV _,d ,,,,,", ~. ..- '" J"'''''' d" _ "",","" "",,,,, " 0"" ",,,," "d L' beginning 01 the pro~ess. rle exP""f\i" ":' d Irom "" d""""m"'" """," " ~. ,.-'" Point street due to Increased tra IC genera e . des lrorn crown Terrace. ,_, " ... " 109"'" '" .." d 'M "",ig' pi lb' ,mi'. ",d ",,", d dId "'" 10'''' ..".. ~' L' po" s".~, <<p'- , , .......od..... H' ,,'" ". " ,,,,,", "'" '" """ 24 ",,, ",.'" lb' d"O"m", 00 , · om"" ,od "", ~i' _Id be "",,,,red '" , .iIi''"'' P"""'" "'... ."" 00' ,," '~ "'" d-" """ '" ""d ,10m E. 0"""" 5'" ' 'cl """"d' , om-,I< ...... ~. ,ld"'.'" 00 ~ L' pol" """ "'-::' ,~' ~':;:, "'" ~",... i'''od, S"" ,-'" """,10 0""' ""'.'" ,od L' P." ,.", ,,,, ":" ...""",, ,od " ." "'" fa" \0 d"m' "'" - ~. Ib' ,_ cl "''' Ol"" "" ";~ '": ,,:.... ,,"''' ,,,,,', "".d ",., "'" ,,,ff" _d '" '" lrorn a rnixed-use project Into a we _es a . nei hborhOOd 00\0 "'" rom""""" ,.... .od "'" "Ol'" ",,,, ";" ,~""" C~.. C""" ,,,,,,Id ~,"""IV ~' C<<>'H" H'", """, '" "",'" """ "', ~ill'''' . 'I"' ..,,"00 10 ,,," CW/, H-"" "" ",,",P""" " _' "'.. .od, , doo' ,10'" t '0"'''' 5"'" . ~. ,""", " 0<<>" ",II .od "".....d """,10' ,,,,,", "'t ";",,,," .:~ """,,,",,' pi "'" ",bi"" P""""" "'" H"" C- T-'"' ". """" ~, · 00 , do"" 10 d''''"''''' - ",. '" ,,,,dI'.' cl "'" ,,,,,,,,,, ,od Ib' 5"'''' ,_'" ,,,,,,Id " ., C",.' T_'"' L' pol" ,od M-' S,,~., H' , ..." .dh"'~' ",,",d'''''' ,IE, oc;:oo:;s~,;, ph<<"" (00 ", " ~,"'m""'....'s,,'''''' ,po'" cl "",." ""ff" ,,",,'''' ' ., ' , d ,', "", ",", ..ro,. H' ..,.. " did "'" 0""""''''' ,_'''' "",,, " "'''' _,OO~~ ;"d '" ",d,d .., '",' "",, ,,,,,,, wo'" ",,,~, ... ",,, "Ib'" ""p"',dd''''':'''~:: ,,'" ,,,,.. d ." im""'" ~. ' "",-' be ..""",,, '" ..~,'" "'" d"",,,m"', ,,,, .'" """" \0 ~. ...' ,od ,,,,,d ... , ._ .,,.,,,,,"" '" """,,,,,d .'" ~, ....~',:,,: ". ,..,,..., H' ",go",,,d " "" ,ml.d . wwiths';:"~:' ~,~;::;~:,~, ':::.:, ~," 00 C<<>" ",,,," a ' ' ----------------------------------- CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES JUNE 14, 2005 PAGE 8 Ann Balaeman, Le Point Street, referred to the letter she wrote to the Planning Commission which included 37 signatures of her neighbors opposing the scope of the project as it relates to traffic and safety impacts, and asked the Council to visit the site and walk the streets surrounding the project site. Barbara Freel, Le Point Street, referred to the proposed island along Crown Terrace and expressed concerns that it will be all concrete without any landscaping. She stated she was unhappy with the trees along Crown Terrace being removed and also expressed concern with lighting generated from the project and its impact to the residences. Camav Arad, owner of Chameleon Fabrics on E. Branch Street, rebutted some of Mr. Boud's comments regarding redesign of the project; that the barn was retained (the barn was sold); and stated that not all of the Planning Commission's suggestions were addressed, including design materials for the commercial building and creekside access. She referred to the roofline of the proposed commercial building and objected to the metal roof. She noted that the design of the commercial portion should be cute, charming, and character driven to attract shoppers. Steve Ross, Garden Street, commented that the project had gone through the ARC and was reviewed by people who were familiar with the Cityscape; believed that the project is outside the strictest area of architecture that would include the Village Core and is in the Village Mixed Use area as far as zoning. He said if the City intends to provide affordable workforce housing, projects like this within the core of the City is where it should be provided. He said he did not believe this project takes away from the rural feel of the City. He stated that the project should follow the City's guidelines. Jacklin Pontarelli, Le Point Street, said there is a unique opportunity in the Village to provide a project that will benefit the citizens, merchants, and visitors. She spoke of the need to include businesses that will attract visitors and that those businesses have adequate parking. Howard Mankins, Hillcrest Drive resident and owner of several businesses in the Village, stated he has lived here all his life and has watched the changes in the City. He said there is more to being for or against a project; what is good for the City is what counts. He commented on the water supply issue. He stated it was important for the Council to consider a project that brings in sales tax, offers some workforce housing, and stated that projects cannot economically assume all of the mistakes made around it. He noted that the Village Improvement Association supported this project and that this project would be good for the Village. He supported the proposed project. Grea Moore, Village business owner and member of the Village Improvement Association, spoke in support of the project. He pointed out the project is compatible with the area and is a nice addition to the Village, provides a live/work environment, and noted that residents could walk to the Village for services. Richard DeBlauw, property owner/applicant, stated that retired people who are interested in the project have contacted him. He spoke in support of the project. Susan Flores, E. Branch Street, stated that she sees potential for this project; noted that the developer is a long time resident of the City; commented that Crown Hill needs to be opened up; and more sidewalks are needed for the kids. She supported the project as proposed. John Gutierrez, E. Branch Street, commented that traffic is already coming from other areas of the City to the Village and he disagreed that the neighborhood would be impacted by additional traffic. He supported the proposed project. Mike McConville, E. Branch Street, commented that backing out onto E. Branch Street is tough. He stated this was a good project and that he felt there was too much negativity surrounding the project. He suggested that sidewalks be installed on Crown Hill. He supported the project and encouraged the Council to provide the applicant with clear direction. CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES JUNE 14, 2005 PAGE 9 Michael Bondello, McKinley, acknowledged that the City Council is very concerned with the details of the project as well as the neighborhood's concerns. He spoke about the existing traffic problems near Crown Hill and stated that this project will exacerbate the problem. Ann Balqeman, Le Point Street, noted that the addresses of those who spoke in favor of the project are not directly impacted and do not live in the immediate vicinity of the project. . Joe Boud, applicant's representative, responded to public comments and spoke of the traffic studies that have been conducted and the level of service impacts. He also clarified that his reference to a redesign of the project was from the original 35,000 square foot shopping center to this proposed mixed-use project of 24 residential units and a 12,000 square foot commercial building. He encouraged approval of the project. Hearing no further public comments, Mayor Ferrara closed the public hearing. Council Member Arnold stated one of his concerns was the access through the west side of the property. He stated he could not support the project until that access is granted. He addressed : the circulation issue; referred to the trees on Crown Terrace and suggested a way to save them; expressed concern with regard to the scale of the commercial building; requested story poles on the site; and concluded by stating that most of the issues could be resolved and this could be a good project. He reiterated that access to the west side of the parcel is critical. Council Member Guthrie asked questions of the traffic engineer regarding Crown Hill and E. Branch. Mr. Dan Dawson replied that detailed studies, traffic, and pedestrian counts were conducted during a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Council Member Guthrie stated that he believes commercial use generates more traffic than residential; that the proposed improvements will return Crown Terrace to a residential street; the addition of a sidewalk on the west side also improves the street to a residential nature; and the driveways would contribute more to a residential nature of Crown Terrace. He stated the net affect is an improvement to Crown Terrace/Le Point. He expressed a concern about the creek setback/property line issue as it relates to the residential component. In terms of the commercial component, he acknowledged that there is a traffic problem at the intersection at certain times of the day; however, the overall effect at this intersection is not serious according to the City's policies. He shared concerns with the proposed scale/height of the commercial building. He said the addition of a second entrance on E. Branch is important and would improve the traffic congestion at Crown Hill and E. Branch. He concluded by stating that he would need clarification on the creek setback to ensure that houses are not being built within the creek setback, and agreed that the project needs the access easement for a second entrance on E. Branch Street. He stated that with those two additions he could support the project as designed. . Council Member Dickens stated he relies in part on observations and input from residents in the immediate area for traffic concerns. He reflected on the pre-application process which was review of a conceptual plan and an opportunity to provide input. He spoke about the focus and vision for the Village Core. He stated that he had preferred the original commercial project and did not support the large residential component as presented. He spoke about the site and said a project needs to capitalize on its assets, including creekside access, close proximity to the Village, and the historic features and buildings on the site. He objected to the size and scale of the three-story commercial building which dwarfs the existing barn; did not see adequate pedestrian access or pathways to the Village; and feit there were land use conflicts between the commercial and residential uses. He stated there was also a conflict between the residential and open space. He comm'ented that historically, this parcel has had no access to Crown Terrace CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES JUNE 14,2005 PAGE 10 " and that it needs to be widened and improved to City standards. He was not in favor of relinquishment of any easements along Le Point, and stated that future circulation and access issues need to be addressed. He noted that circulation within the development was imperative and that circulation must include access to the west. He suggested the applicant look at the assets this parcel provides, capitalize on those assets, and mitigate traffic circulation problems more effectively. Mayor Pro Tem Costello inquired how many trees were proposed to be re'moved. He expressed concern with the left turn pocket as proposed; the driveway as proposed on E. Branch Street conflicts with Crown Hill intersection; stated that access from the west side of the property needs to be in place first; supported the four way stop at Crown Terrace and Le Point; did not have a problem with the driveways backing out into the street; noted that lighting impacts are mitigated and should not create a nuisance for the residential neighborhood; suggested a one year review period on an interior gate; agreed that pedestrian circulation needed to be improved; supported the proposed density and noted that in order to preserve agricultural in the City, we need to look at other areas for development; requested clarification regarding the open space and potential impacts to the homes; clarification regarding the creek setback; and stated at this point he could not support the project. Mayor Ferrara" asked staff to address the potential for phasing the project. Director Strong stated there was initially a recommendation to phase the project to defer the 12,000 square foot commercial building until the western access was obtained. He said the applicant has been in " negotiations with the owner of the property located to the west. Mayor Ferrara noted that a considerable amount of progress had been made on this project. He acknowledged existing problems surrounding the site. He stated that size, scale and intensity of use are the most critical issues in the Village. He stated he was pleased that negotiations were underway to obtain access to the western portion of the site. He agreed the creek setback and open space issues need to be clarified. He expressed appreciation for the three dimensional model; did not support the proposed roofline of the commercial building; stated that the commercial building needs to blend in better with the barn; supported the concept of "less verticality, more horizontality" and stated it needed to be softened and/or flattened. He liked the idea of phasing of the project overall for circulation purposes and stressed the need for a manageable circulation segment. He had issues with the results of the traffic study based on his . actual experience. He stated with additional modifications, the project would work. He commented that live/work units are not working in this area and supported the concept of small residential units, with proper landscaping. : Council Member Arnold moved to continue to a date uncertain consideration of Vesting Tentative Tract Map Case No. 04-004 and Planned Unit Development Case No. 04-001; Applicant- DB & M Properties, LLC; Location - 415 East Branch Street. Council Member Guthrie seconded, and the motion carried on the following roll-call vote: ",AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Arnold, Guthrie, Costello, Ferrara Dickens None Mayor Ferrara requested, and the Council concurred, to move Agenda Item 10.a. up on the Agenda for consideration prior to Item 9.d. ~Y-16-20~6 11:59 FROM: ATTACHMENT 3 \ RECORDING REQUESTED BY: ) ) D6&M PROPERTIES, LLC ) ) AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: ) ) J JOHNSON ) P.O. BOX 3 ) GROVER BEACH, CA 934B3 ) ) ) toO~/GINAL v'e C.Ov"d.d.. RECIPROCAL GRANT OF EAS~S POR INGRESS AND EGRESS Preamble This Agreement made this .J..'i -H'Iooday of April 2006, by and between Milton F. Hayes and Mary J. Hayes, husband and wife, hereinafter referred to as "HAYES", and DB&M Properties, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company, hereinafter referred to as "DB&M" , and C. Adair Brown and Trudy Ann Brown, husband and wife, hereinafter referred to as "BROWN". Recitals WHEREAS, "HAYES" is the owner of certain real property, commonly known as 405 East Branch Street, Arroyo Grande, State of California, described as follows: [SEE EXHIBIT "A" FOR LEGAL DESCRIPTION] WHEREAS, "DB&M" is the owner of certain real property in the city of Arroyo Grande, State of California, described as follows: [SEE EXHIBIT "B" FOR LEGAL DESCRIPTION] 1 MAY-15-2005 12:00 FROM: TO: 5432187 P.3 WHEREAS, "BROWN" commonly known as 415 California, described is the owner of certain real property East Branch Street, Arroyo Grande, State as follows: of [SEE EXHIBIT "C" FOR LEGAL DESCRIPTION] WHEREAS, the parties desire to acquire certain rights in the Servient Tenements owned by the other: Now, therefore, it is agreed as follows: Grant of Easements 1. For valuable consideration in the form of reciprocal easements granted herein and other valuable consideration, "HAYES" hereby grants to "DB&.M" and "BROWN", and "DB&.M" hereby grants to "BROWN" and "HAYES", and "BROWN" hereby grants to "HAYES" and "DB&:M" reciprocal easements as hereinafter described. Character of Basements 2. The easements granted herein are appurtenant to the Dominant Tenements described herein. Description of Easements 3. The easements granted herein are for shared use of common driveways for ingress and egress to the dominant tenements only. Location 4. The easements granted herein are located on the diagram marked as Exhibit "D" attached to thie Agreement. The legal description of those easemsnts is attached as Exhibit "E". Exclus!veness of Easements 5. The easements granted herein are for the exclusive, mutual use of "HAYES", "BROWN" and "DB&:M" , and no other parties shall be allowed access or use thereof. 2 MAY-16-2006 12:01 FROM: TO: 5432187 P.4 secondary Easements 6. The easements granted herein include incidental,rights of maintenance, repair, and replacement. Maintenance 7. "DB&MlJ and U BROWN II and all their succeBsora (as described in paragraph 11 below) shall maintain the easements in a good and clean condition which shall include a good quality seal coat every three (3) years or sooner if necessary, repair and replacement of asphalt when necessary and other maintenance to keep the easements in good condition. "DB&M" and BROWN" shall pay for all of the maintenance as and for part of the consideration for this Agreement. "HAYES" and their successor (as described in paragraph 11 below) shall pay no cost of maintenance, repair or replacement. Should the easements be in need of maintenance, any party to this Agreement may notify the parties responsible for maintenance, in writing, of the maintenance required. The responsible parties shall have 90 days to complete the necessary maintenance. If the necessary maintenancs is not completed in 90 days, weather Or act of God an exception, then any party may pay to have the maintenance done and collect the actual costs plus 20% as agreed upon liquidated damages, plus attorney's fees if necessary to collect by court action. Insurance 8. "DB&M" and "BROWN" shall name "HAYES" as an additional insured and keep a liability insurance policy in,effect on the easements of at least $1,000,000.00. Entire Agreement 9. This instrument contains the entire Agreement between the parties relating to the rights herein granted and the obligations herein assumed. Any oral representations or modifications concerning this instrument shall be of no force and effect excepting a subsequent modification in writing, signed by all of the parties to this Agreement. Attorney's Fees 10. In the event of any controversy, claim, or dispute relating to this instrument or the breach thereof, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the losing party reasonable expenses, attorney's fees, and costs. 3 MAY-15-2005 12:02 FROM: TO.: 5432187 P.5 Binding Effect 11. This instrument shall be binding on and shall inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns of "HAYES", "DB&M" and BROWN". IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement the day and year first above written. II KAYES II "DB&M1. DBKK Properties, L~C a California L~ted Liability Compe.ny y!1rhM' ~ Id /Y~4;>'~ Richard P. DeBlauw, President . IJ By L.A.dA~ ff. ~f'J'~...~P J~ R. Matthews, Member "BROWN" C. Adair Brown Trudy A.'1n Brown 4 "IH'f-lo-i::::::l::::ll::lb li:::::::\::::l..::i FRCJM: TO: 5432187 P.6 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO) On N~ 2. I :2006, before me, !l.a.'<6'I HaM ~~ f a Notary P lic for the State of California, personally appeared Milton F. Haves and Marv J. Haves, personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the persons whose names are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that they executed the same in their authorized capacities, and that by their signatures on the instrument the persons, or the entities upon behalf of which the persons acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. ~lM \lb~bb1 . otary puol' 81'.AAEH IMRIE BECtITOlD &l COMM. # 1359278 . C( Notary ~aAklmlil County III San LiJIs 0bI&p0 My Comm. &1>..Iu1e 2. 2lIOll. STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO) On ~'id , :2006, before me, 5'1 ,,;/ J;A.~ a Notary . ubl c for the State of Californi I personally appeared Richard P. DeBlauw and James R. Matthews, personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the persons whose names are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that they executed the same in their authorized capacities, and that by their signatures on the instrument the persons, or the entities upon behalf of which the persons acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. ~ J~. C" I, Not~;; Public ~ BOBBIE l. COLESON (it Commission # \38392\ , i.. NotelY Public - Collfernla ~ . San Luis Obispo C ountv '. My Oomm. E><PIresClec6. 2006 5 MHY-15-200b 12:04 FROM: TO: 5432187 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO) On , 2006, before me, , a Notary ~ublic for the State of California, personally appeared C. Adair Brown and Trudv Ann Brown, personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the persons whose names are subscribed to the within instrument and aoknowledged to me that they executed the same in their authorized capacities, and that by their signatures on the instrument the perSOIlS, or the entities upon behalf of which the persons acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary Public Oililtf/lt:L'IQN lb.'1iS/Wamrr 6 P.? MAY-16-2006 12:05 FROM: TO: 5432187 P.B LEGAL DESCRIPTION EXHIBIT "A" PARCEll: Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 and 29 In Block 3B of Beckett's Crown Hili Addition to the Town of Arroyo Grande, in the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis Oblspo, State of California, according to map recorded In Book A, Page 57 of Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County. PARCEL 2: That portion of Tally Ho Street as shown on the map of Beckett's Crown Hili Addition to the Town of Arroyo Grande, In the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, according to map recorded In Book A, page 57 of Maps, which was abandoned by Resolution No. 167 of the City Council of the city of Arroyo Grande, a Certified Copy of which was recorded November 20, 1953 in Book 734, page 255 of Official Records, that would pass by a conveyance as to Parcell above. PARCEL 3: Lots 26, 27 and 28 In Block 38 of Beck.ett's Crown Hill Addition to the Town of Arroyo Grande, In the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, according to map recorded in Book A, Page 57 of Maps, In the office of the County Recorder of said County. PARCEL 4: That portion of the street within Block 38 of Beckett's Crown Hili Addtion to the Town of Arroyo Grande, in the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, according to map recorded in Book A, Page 57 of Maps, designated on said map as 'Street' whlct1 was abandoned by Resolution No. 72 of the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande, a Certified Copy of whICh was recorded May 10, 1939 In Book 257, page 440 of Official Records, bounded as follows: Southeasterly by the Northwesterly Dne of Lot 26 in said Block 38; Northeasterly by the Northwesterly prolongation of the Northeasterly line of Lot 26 in said Block 38; Northwesterly by the Southeasterly line of Lot 25 In said Block 38; Southwesterly by tile Northwesterly prolongation of the Southwesterly Une of Lot 26 in said Block 38. PARCEL 5: That portion of TaRy Ho Street lIS shown on tile map of Beckett's Crown Hill Addition to the Town of Arroyo Grande, ArrO)lO Grande, County of San Luis Obispo, State or California, according to ITlllp recorded in Book A, Page 57 of Maps, which was abandoned by Resolution No. 167 of the Oty Council of the City of Arroyo Grande, a Certlf1ed Copy of which was recorded November 20, 1953 in Book 734, page 255 of OffICial Records, bounded as follows: Southwesterly by the Southwesterly line of the Northeasterly 30 feet of said Tally Ho Street; Southeasterly by the Southwesterly prolongation of the Southeasterly line of Lot 28 In Block 38 of said Beckett's Crown Hili Addition to the Town of ArrO)lo Grande; Northeasterly by tile Southwesterly lines of Lots 28, 27 and 20, In said Block 38 and the Northwesterly prolongation of the Southwesterly line of said said Lot 26; Northwesterly by the Southwesterly prolongation of the Southeasterly line of Lot 25 in said Block 38. APN: 007-203-15 and 16 EXBJ:BI'l' -An P1HY-l.o-2\ji21.o 12:121.0 FROI'I: TO: 5432187 P.9 LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE, COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, STATE OF CAUFORNIA AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL 1: (A portion of APN: 007-203'017) That portion of Block 38 of Beckett's Crown Hili Addition to the Town of Arroyo Grande, In the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, according to map recorded June 19, 1905 in Book A, Page 57 of Maps, In the office of the County Recorder of said County, and of the stneet adjoining said Block 38 on the Northeast described as a whole as follows: Beginning at the Southwest corner of Lot Iln said Block 38; thence North 61 0 Ea~ along the Southerly line of seld elOl:l<, 226 feet; thence North 290 West., 187,5 feet; thence Northwesterly across said street to the Southeast comer of Lot 14 of said Block 3B; thence South 610 West along the Southerly line of Lots 14 and 25 of said BlOCk 38,237.5 feet to the Southwest comer of said Lot 25; thence South 290 East across said street and along the East line of said Block 38, 237.s feet to the point of beginning. EXCEPTING therefrom that portion of Block 38 and of the street adjoining said Block 38 on the Northeast, desCribed as a whole as follows: Beginning at the most Easterly corner of Lot 9 of said Block 38; thence North 290 West, 187.5 feet; thence Northwesterly across said ~rcet to the Southeast corner of Lot 1'Iot 5elld Block 38i thence South 610 West, along the Souther1y line of Lot 14 of said Block 38, 65.30 feet; thence South 290 East, 237.5 feet to a point on the Southerly line of said Bleck 38, said point being located South 610 West, 'l feet from the most Southerly corner of Lot 8 of said Block 38; . thence North 610 East, 54 feet to the point of beginning. ALSO EXCEPTING therefrom Lots 1, 2, 3, 'l, 26, 27, 28 and 29 In said Block 38; ALSO EXCEPTING therefrom that portion of the street within Block 38, designated on said map as "Street' which was abandoned by Resoiutlon No. 72 of the City Council of the City of Arrayo Grande, a certified copy of which was recorded May 10, 1939 In Book 257, Page 440 of Official Records, bounded as follows: Bounded Southeasterly by the Northwesterly line of Lot 26: Bounded Nolthea~terly by the Northwesterly prolongation of the Northeasterly line of Lot 26; Bounded Northwesterly by the Southeasterly line of Lot 25; Bounded Southwesterly by the ~orthwesterly prolongation of the Southwesterly line of Lot 26. Also Excepting therefrom that portion conveyed to Adair Brown and Trudy Brown by Grant Deed recorded June 26. 2004 in Instrument No. 2004-055175 of Dffclal Records. PARCEL 2: (A portion of APN: 007-203-017) That portion of Block 38 of Beckett's Crown Hill Addition to the Town of Arroyo Grande, In the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, according to map recorded June 19, 1905 In Book A, Page 57 ofMap~, In the office of the County Recorder of ~aid County, and of the street adjoining said Block 38 on the Northeast described "s a whoie as follows: Beginning at the most Easter1y corner of Lot 9 of said Biock 38; thence North 290 West, 187.5 feet; thence Northwesterly across said street to the Southeast comer of Lot 14 of said Block 38; thence South 610 West. along the Southerly line of Lot 14 of said Block, 65.30 feet; thence South 290 East, 237.5 feet to the Southerly line of said Block 38, ~ald point being located South 610 EXHIBIT DB" page 1 of 2 MAY-16-a306 12:08 FROI1: TO: 5432187 P.10 West, 4 feet from the most Southerly comer of Lot 8 of said Block; thence North 610 East, 54 feet to the point of beginning. PARca 3: (APN: 007-203-013) Lots 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 in Block 38 of Beckett's Crown Hill Addition to the Town of Arroyo Grande, in the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis ObiSpo, State of California, aCcording to map recorded June 19, 1905 In Book A, Page 57 of Maps, in the offk:e of the County Recorder of said County. PARCEL 4: (A portion of 007-204-003) Commencblg at the most Northerly corner of Lot 13 in BIock.38 of Beckett's Crown Hill Addition to the Town of Arroyo Grande, In the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, according to map recorded June 19, 1905 in Book A, Page 57 of Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County; thence North 61. East to the westerly line of the right of way 01 the Pacit..: Coast Railway Company; thence Southerly along the said Westerly line of said right of way to its intersection with the Easterly ana of lot 9 of said Block 38; . thence Northerly along the Easterly line of Lots 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 01 said Block, to the point of beginning. PARCEL 5: (007-204-003) That portion of the Pacific Coast Railway right of way as described In the deed to the San Luis OblsjXl and Santll Marla Valley Railroad Company, a corporation, recorded August 13, 1881 In Book N, Page 228 of Deeds, of Beckett's Crown Hill Addition to the Town of Arroyo Grande, In the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, according to map recorded June 19, 1905 in book A, page 57 of Maps, In the offk:e of the County Recorder of said County, which lies between the Southeasterly line of Le Point Street and the Northeasterly prolongation of the Southeasterly line of Block 38 of said Beckett's Crown Hill Addition. EXCEPTING therefrom all of the minerals, oil, gas and other hydrocarbon substances within Or underlying said land as reServed in the deed from Bell Petroleum Company, recorded July 26, 1950 in Book 572, Page 400 of Official Records. . PARCel 6: (APN 007-204-001) All of Block 36 of Beckett's Crown Hili Addition to the Town of Arroyo Grande, In the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San luisOblspo, State of California, according to map recorded June 19,1905 in BookA, Page 5701 Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County. EXHIBIT DBD page 2 of 2 MAY-16-cmJ6 12: 09 FROI1: TO: 5432187 P.ll (APN: 007-203-018) Lots 5 through 11, Inclusive of Block 38 of Beckett's Crown Hill Addition, to the Town of Arroyo Grande, in the in the City of ArroyO Grande, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, according to map recorded June 19, 1905 in Book A, page 57 of Maps, in the office of the County Recorder ot said County. EXB:IB:I'l' DC. 11AY-16-22l1i:lb l2: 10 FRO~I: 9 I -1 ~BLOCLJ6 _8 7 6 5 - - - I 13 ..... t:J~ ~'t Ing; ~ ? @" ....:0 :t" ~($ jijtJ:. ~fB ~~ t.:j Q) 'l" R=3.00' . b-53'30'54" L=2,80' I R=23,OO' b-53'22'14" L=21.42' N28'3'27"W 4.59' 26 27 R=3,OO' /'=90'18'06" L-4.73' .,., ": ~ 12 ;0 . .. 10 r ~ 11 11.54' _J N28'26'4Q"W 528'26'40"( ~ --i-- a, I 10 l" .. ;;; ~I I Z I "L 0 c, ~ '" '" o:i .., ~ . '" '" .., 5" it -.3.00' ~ &:-90"22'38 ~ g L-4.73' :r ..= - '" llll I 1528"3'27"( I TO'5432187 P.12 EXHIBIT EAsa.tENT FOR INGRESS & EGRESS OVER A POR nON or BLOCK 38 AND A POR nON Or P.C,R.R. RIGHT or WAY or BECKETT'S AOOlTION TO THE TOWN or ARROYO CRANOE CITY or ARROYO CRANOE STATE or CALlrORNIA - 142.02' 115.11' p, C, R. R. iN2S'13'27 W 130.56 R=3,OO' ~9a"QO'QO. ... L-4.7 ' S28'13'27"E 9~.39' 63.00' N6"48'3J"E 15,62' ..... 28 29 I I EXlUB:IT "0" I~ I~ / II TRUE POIN r OF -- 1"8 BEGINNING b . 00 .; P N- OD Z I i I -.-~ '" I- W W a:: I- (f) :c u z <{ a:: ~; 1<( IW ... -I U> '" I" bP "'~ OD Z rIAY-16-2006 12: 11 FROM: TO: 5432187 EXHIBIT An Easement for Ingress, Egress and Incidental Purposes lying over. under and upon a portion of Block 38 of Beckett's Crown Hill Addition to the Town of Arroyo Grende In the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis Obispo, State of CaUfor nia, according to Map recomed June 18, 1 905 In Book A, Page 57 of Maps, in the omce Of the County Recorder of said County, said Easament being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Northeriy right of way line of Branch Street which bears South 61' 00' 00" Wast. 101,55 feet from tha Southeast corner of Block 36 of Beckett's Crown Hill Addition; thence North 28' 26' 40" West, 142.02 feet; thence South 61' 15' 14' West, 141.73 feet to the beginning of a tengent curve concave to the North and having a radius of 3.00 feet; thence Along said c"rve Westerly and to. tIle.Rigl1t through a Central Angle of 53' 30' 54" for an Arc Length of 2.80 feet to the beginning of a tangent Reverse curve concave to the South and having a Radius of 23.00 feet; thence Along said curve Westerly and to the Left through a Centrai A ngle of 53' 22' 14' for an Arc Length Of 21.42 feet; thance South 61' 23' 55' West, 38.52 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave to the North and having a Radius of 3.00 fe et; thence Along said curve WestarlY and to the Right through a Central Angle of 80' 22' 38" for an Arc Length of 4.73 feet; thence North 28' 13' 27" West 4.59 feet; thence South 61' 46' 33' West, 24.00 feet; thence South 28' 13' 27" East, 63.00 feet; thence North 61' 46' 33' East, 5.62 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave to the South and having a Radius of 3,00 feat; then ce Along said curve Easterly and to the Right through a Central Angle of 90' 00' 00" for an Arc Length of 4.71 feet; thence South 28' 13' 27' Eest. 95.39 feet to the Northerly right of way of Branoh Street; thence along said right of way line. North 61' 00' 00' East. 20.00 feet; thence North 28' 13' 27' West, 130.56 feeltothe beginning of a tangent curve concave to the East and having a Radius of 3.00 fee t; thence EXHIBIT "E" page 1 of 2 P.13 MAY-16-2006 12:12 FROM: TO: 5432187 Along said curve Northerly and to the Right through a Central Angle of 89. 37' 22" for an Arc Length of 4,69 feet; thence North 61. 23' 55" East, 34,08 feet to tha beginning of a tangent curve concave to the South and having a Radius of 3.00 fa et; thence Along said curve Easte~y and to the Right through a Central angle of 89. 51' 20" for an Arc Length of 4.70 feet: thence South 28" 44' 46' East. 11.54 feet; thence North 61" 15' 14" East. 132.49 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave to the South and having a Radius of 3.00 feet; then ce Aiong said curve Easte~y and to the Right through a Central Angie of 901806" for an Arc Length of 4.73 feet; thence South 28" 26' 40" East, 115.11 feet to the Northerly right of way of Branch Street; thence Along said right of way line, North 61" 00' 00" East, 24.00 feet to the Point of beginning. EXCEPTING THEREFROM any portion lying wtthin tha property of the Grantee. EXHIBIT -B- page 2 of 2 P.14 ATTACHMENT 4 CREEKSIDE 1 . Creek easement, Open Space & Setback Exhibit HOA common open space easement area (shaded) new sycamore . centerline of creek / . top of creekbank 25' setback/dedication area.-y (includes stream bed and . setback area; per 16.64.060) . FEMA floodplain setback line . c1l " ! CREEKSIDE Creek Landscaping & Improvement Plan Exhibit 6'wlde concrete or sealed decomposed granite path 2-rail split rail fence (typical) area within creek setback . to centerline of creeltshall be ddressed hi subsequent Riparlah Plah I / I new sycamore I, I I / play structl!re (ages 2-12) with resine'll, accessib e _L.. surfacing: gf' . If ~ '.. .f ,,!!} ! new redwoods I I I I I I I " Myoporum screen 4' shrub screen 2 I!> j " DENSE l CREEKSIDE. Creek Grading Plan Exhibit. ... .,,~ 'f ~ il ! (!)p, 3 CREEKSIDE Composite Creek Grading & Landscaping Plan Exhibit 4 .:. 2-ra' ~ /, 1 - split raIl rence f1.. (lyp'caQ "".... _ \ ^ . ~ ;-/,,'\., ..1-.J\/Ji, 15c...C~ '7\<'1~-i3ii~ -.OpINE~ ~I 'YVI, ' ," I ~-------=~ f " 1 i ,: ft' .~S "f.\''' }<~S ",~ ~I - '<-'<-'0 ,,_, / -, 'I A..... (" /" ~ DENSE \~' '>- 6'w'de"'-'>l "-. '?- VE~bf!&mpo'ed t / gran'" palh ~ ( _1I61U3'4rp.- \,15' / 114,20 TOP- \ '\ aL~, creekselbael< : ~ f;1 I'"~ ~ 't~ ne of creek shaU e jr"\./ j ~. I t..~dres in subsequent ~ '2, I t,panah """ "'~ \ ' ) I / : ~---l ~ 11/ {~ r .k-- / ;- ~> 30. 0 I~. ,/p ~ ?i elOsloa ""ma~ DENSE ~ "~ 0-", " I"'H') I' "((,ll"A' -""./~~'~~l~ :'lft~~>;.~l ~~~ (1/ ~ /" Jfjr;~~J '\ 1tj:;,"Jl \~ ~'~ I',<- .0 ' ~ " ~(I ..~ cy o;od ::, ,I //// /~ -. "..... ~( /' ~ ' , .;... ~<': ' l .. '::; : , , ' /'.... 111 --',/ / aystrud, ar/R2 2) ~-/.': ..' ~- 0::!, ::: ",,-, ~I I' z ,.s"rfaemg, ~ rf8D/;~/JtE;i lii'><" (/., ~ ' '11 11~5; / 1l6: o .f~ .,J /4'] - I ,,:::.' 0", li' liS I ' .:z:.' ,J ~ i, :. 1<, ">'9~. . I?c I \ ~+. ./ /1f~" "8. >:~, '. ~~h f' .lD.~~ _ 1_5~ /' ;Ld' ~ 1-' ,( 1~ ~~ 1 u':- r ::~i ~~%- / ( -ne~&,d~ '7ft M~' ~t>, '- "-" / '~~~' ./ tTT, !, M'oPo~~7~ ,'.Nf-- - '"t '~?'5_4TG_ "< / /i IE ~ -;:: ,'~;~ ~~~-~ -. ~ J n. ~ :~ ,.i-m ~~l f- . !lo l<l_ "'~,:..; I '" 'I' :.~' ':;. ~ '< U:V~ L, ....-' ~'9 /' : : '" ~'-s 0",<> 0 ....- , ";> I . ", ~ ''-I. ,,>" - --- F -7''; .0 ,. :':j lI.l.,', I'):- .0 ,Ol--\\'='"': 0-4.<;> I _ ~. /'~.:. f.' , ' " . 0 /1,-s /)>'0 l'iIiP:IIJ I I ,-- "j,"~~." . / . .. D-.-.. .... '" ',' rJ~1 ' , '0 1 I //:1 ~'.j~~:,:--": ,.:'. I:,~~,YI , ;(~~~~~'<~~. . :'(~ !11~5I,ou I( ) ) / ~~;..\ r--..,<. ,"If '1.1 "" "- I ~~/rr-~~ J \ ~ ~l ',I t I _ ..~/ ~, ' /~ '-11~;>'1 V /-1:1- t~! ,~ _ - -r - ~ /' I /'.,., i ~ --' , '!!f i PPH PI ill ~l 1m H~ iil' I Iii Iii' iii' i r J!i"~ ~ ,,! g.. . t 'j! ~ 'f ~ ~ ~I If ~ II i If' ~ ,f ~ ~ !l ., I e ~ If - ~ > I r i ~ d ui:' u! !!! ~ ~ ~ ! I I I; u ri! au i ~ ' ! 1 I ; ~ .. i i s f if ;I .. .-------.- --- .---------------. ----- --- --- -- ~ ~. 8000 .. , ' ar.:.:!"~'.'';~ E -~ ~'m O~ ".0 ,,<! ~ii ~.. '" Z .. )~ " . . a . {~ f ~ r. } '~ .- , t :>l1" J f ='<- , , , . . :t Il' II It . , ....t Ii H " ,f Ii ..... ~~Ei~ ~ig.. i i i , E J ; I I ..... ~:t .m &0 c:J] 1m ~m "^ aUl a_ &0 em ::n. "0 ~;: 3.. or- am x i i II ~ . 1! . ~ '" ~ .. ;! iI ~ n " fill fl 'II' H II!!I! 1m !m ',H! '.' I" 'I ~i' f 1'., "" '!' iii I' 51 t, ',"j 'llllll~ 'i ~ if.; 1 i' "I - 'II I' i J' 1 r I.- f ., ~~. . m "1J r- )> z.' :-::----- --- --. .. --~-.. D8&MPropert)'.LL..C. ....lll!l~_ ~~CIo_ THE CRE'EKSIDE 'COMPLEX =~I -~-- ............c._ --- -- .. U:__..I 11__ ru............ n...vAtnnment . 415 E. Branch Street. Anayo Grande, CA , I .1 .! , " ; .1 5a 'tJ (l) Q. (l) '0 - ... iii' ::s 'tJ m - ::r :E m '< o m >< ::r -. C" ;:;: o :c m m " en - c m :Pf I ~:i!n ~:I !III! UII HlliJ~ i iii Iii! fil~ I HI III j III pI j .J ,I ~ ! ~ ~ Iii Ii d :!! t Hi i!! :. ! Ii n~ ! 'i i i . a ; .. ..' ~ I . . I ~ Ii ; ~ ~ >-1 c' . ! = ~x 6 ! i I ~ i 0 ..m e ~! ~ z ~ i ~ m &0 , '" " i ::l c;n !!j' . i ! 1m . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~m ." ~, 'fI), :t .- n &C ~ n em Ii: I If " n lI"l I'll lIif 'f:! ~ ::0 '" ........ ~ r.. ! H . ~ ~o , ii' I II .11 llll'!j -jll Ill! iil~ <I;: 3'U " 'II i f. '1 'I il 'If 'Ii il .,.. 3m I ,I ' ' 1/1. x I . -----, r I en ::j m '"D r :r> z .--------- -~. 09 . -- ' -- -~ -~ -- -- -- ~. ~ -~ ------------ o r, -, .";' '. ..'.\ if' . ~- ~ ~.~ 5i.~ mz ~o ~' '" z _.....l~_".. .~ , " . . , . " -" - tiS & M Prof*t1. LLC. ftlGConIlno_ _---.co.- ~- THE CREEKSIDE -COMPLEX A Mixed Use Planned Development. 415 E. Branch Street -..Arroyo Grande, CA ....._, ........... -.....-- ----- ....._c._ --...- -- 5b o .., :c:- ~ III '< III ::s a. '"D III .., Q. ::s lC )> .., ~ III l/l m >< ::r -. CT ~ C' :x n n ~ u - C n 6 CREEKSIDE Sidewalk View of New Building Design Compatibility Exhibit 7 .CREEKSIDE " Warehouse I New Building Design Compatibility Exhibit -',.,."c'.,;". ,. , 'F,''.'" ~"\;.~:.;_:~,,,::';?-~'v:~'" .t~:;~~~~i~~~ii;~~:~:"\~irij ...('- - , ;{'.t"'~ f"J. '-, '1."f,;,. ? P /"S>,~ .-' PROPOSED 8 CREEKSIDE Branch I Crown Hill Street I Condos Street Elevation Exhibit 'caLl b-U I , , It, .lJ: I / ~ w ~ -/ , - I ,: J. Sewer II Gas ...ement .,... l r I 1 I J< Parking StruCUIN ~ -0 " o I loading dock , I <\./ , b '~.m'."Offi" ~1- _ :::...J EXISTING WAREHOUSE/BARN I , I , , , -, STREET I ~~ B .R A N C H ~.';c. 'l .}" ~,:) :rr~ I Entrance New Building Crown Terrace Condos CREEKSIDE Crown Terrace ROW - 30' vs 35' Wide Impact Comparison Exhibit , ~ "Ito 4 30' ROW + 5' Sidewalk 29' high Retaining Wall .. ..- ..- '\ Crown Terrace ..- L 24' ROW + 5' Sidewalk 23' high Retaining Wall Residential Building 'A' FFL 221.0' 9 ,Condos 10 CREEKSIDE Left Turn Pocket @ Crown Hill Street Exhibit CREEKSIDE SECOND ENTRY I EXIT CREEKSIDE CENTER fNTRV T Move stopbar to back of crosswalk g g ~ .. rr=v. CROWN HILL STREET r:J[fJ},. ~- - - - TI01 - New 6> crosswalk w/ADA ramps to sidewalks 05/19/2006 09:18 8055412132 D~ 4115 South Broad Street, San LuIt;Obiapo, CA 1iI34b~" 806.4S1.1064~ Fax805.4al.~146 TEe ENGINEERING ATTACHMENT 5 DrSitlSp Evaluation CUENT: Oe81auw Builders DATE: JOB NO: Oeblauw006 .. LOCATION: Branch Street and Crown Ta"".o, Arrr1fO Grande Pu_: .. Co/colata!he dlflerence In prs and post deVeltiped volumes using the County of San Luis Obispo Standards (10 hour duration for 10 hours) bsSed upon County Standsrd e Factors lor \I1ls l}Ipe of dsveJopment. Site Drainaga Parametars: Te: 10hr C Impervious: 0.90 C.Pervfous 0.35 (2,10) (5,10) . I (In/hr): 0.18 0.26 Composlt C - Pre Developed Condl1iOri. Aree Aree ff AC IrnpervlousSUrtaee 117,778 2.70 Pervious Area 3,427 0.08 Total Are. .121,205 2.78 Compoait C . POlt Developed Condillllna Impel1llous Surtace 73,934 1.70 Pervious Ares 47,271 1.09 Total Area 121.205 2.78 Volume. (Vo:CxJxAx60x6OX10) Pre Develooed (FT~ 15947 28035 28578 33866 41640 43411 Post Oililtalooed tFJ'!\ l23BO 17853 20600 26093 32273 33648 Olflarenca m -3587 -5182 -5979 -7573 -9387 -9785 .slwm 2-year 5-year 101'eer 25-year SO-year 100-year . Page 1 28-Apf.()8 CO. Std. for Sizing Inllltrallon Basins Co. Sid 0-2 Co. StdO-2 (10,10) (25.10) (50,10) (100,10) Co. Std. O-ll 0.30 0.38 0.47 0.49 C 0.90 0.35 0.88 0.90 0.35 0.69 From: "Ben Fine" <bfine@tecslo.com> Subject: FW: Detention Basin Design - Tract 2346 - Crown Hill and W. Branch Date: May 1, 2006 8:08:01 AM PDT To: "'Duane P. DeBlauw'" <deblauwcon@sbcglobal.net>, <jcboud@sbcglobal.net> Duane and Joe- . Here is copy of the email Victor Devens sent me regarding the basin for The Creek Side Complex. If you need anything else let me know. Ben Benjam A. Fine, M.S., M.B.A., E.I.T. Design Engineer TEC Civil Engineering Consultants 4115 Broad Street, Suite B1 San Luis Obispo, California 93401 . Phone (805) 541-2114 x207 Fax (805) 541-2132 "Engineering California's Interests" -----Original Message----- From: Victor Devens [mailto:VDevens@arroyogrande.org] . Sent: Friday, April 28, 2006 5:13 PM To: bfine@tecslo.com Subject: Detention Basin Design - Tract 2346 - Crown Hill and W. Branch Ben: This is a follow up to our phone conversation earlier today regarding detention basin design criteria for the above referenced project. The City. is currently reviewing the detention design criteria for developments adjacent to the creek to mitigate impacts and has not adopted a specific criteria as of yet. Per our conversation, you stated that the basin would be located in the . landscaped area adjacent to the creek, which is within the 100-year flood plain. The basin would become inundated with creek water at times.. . . when the basin would need to be in operation, rendering the basin ineffective. If a detention basin is required, an alternate site would need to be selected. You also stated that the amount of impervious surface on the site is being reduced with this project. This would, in turn, reduce the peak flows. Detention basins are typically required whl;ln the project is increasing the peak flows. If the peak flows are in fact being reduced , through reduction in impervious surface, then a detention basin would not seem necessary for this specific project. However, the reduced impervious surface would need to be verified prior to consideration of waiving detention requirements. . Please feel free to contact me if you have further questions. Victor Victor Devens Associate Engineer - Development City of Arroyo Grande Phone: (805) 473-5445 Fax: (805) 473-5443 E-mail: vdevens@arroyogrande.org ATTACHMENT 6 Minutes: City Council Meeting Tuesday, August 8, 2006 Page 2 Council Member Costello moved, and Council Member Dickens seconded the motion to approve Consent Agenda Items 8.a. through 8.h., with the recommended courses of action. The motion passed on the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Costello, Dickens, Arnold, Guthrie, Ferrara None None 8.a. Cash Disbursement Ratification. Action: Ratified the listing of cash disbursements for the period July 16, 2006 through July 31, 2006. 8.b. Consideration of Approval of Minutes. Action: Approved the minutes of the Special (Closed Session) City Council Meetings of July 11 and 25, 2006, the Regular City Council Meeting of July 11, 2006 and the Regular City Council/Redevelopment Agency Meeting of July 25, 2006, as submitted. 8.c. Consideration of Authorization to Reject Claim Filed Against the City - Claimant: Plycon Van Lines. Action: Rejected claim. 8.d. Consideration of Authorization to Purchase Parks Division Vehicle - Parks Maintenance. Action: Authorized staff to purchase a new 2006 % ton Ford pick up truck from Mullahey Ford in the amount of $19,576.45. 8.e. Consideration of Authorization to Purchase Parks Division Vehicle - Soto Sports Complex. Action: Authorized staff to purchase a new 2006 Ford Ranger pick up truck from Mullahey Ford in the amount of $13,124.46. 8.f. Consideration of Compensation Adjustments for Part-Time Employees. Action: Adopted Resolution No. 3942 approving a 3% Cost of Living (COLA) adjustment for all part-time employees for FY 2006-07 effective July 28, 2006. 8.g. Consideration of Change in Council Appointments to the San Luis Obispo County Water Resources Advisory Committee (WRAC) and the San Luis Obispo Economic Vitality Corporation (EVC). Action: Approved appointment of Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie to the San Luis Obispo County Water Resources Advisory Committee (WRAC); and the appointment of Council Member Arnold to the San Luis Obispo Economic Vitality Corporation (EVC). 8.h. Consideration of a Resolution Accepting Public Improvements and Easements for Tract 2506 Located at 325 Alder Street, Constructed by Mal-Hun, LLC. Action: Adopted Resolution No. 3943 accepting the public improvements and easements for Tract 2506 10Gated at 325 Alder Street, constructed by Mal-Hun, LLC. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS 9.a. Consideration of Vesting Tentative Tract Map Case No. 04-004 & Planned Unit Development Case No. 04-001; Applicant - DB & M Properties, LLC; Location - 415 East Branch Street (Continued from June 14, 2005 Council Meeting). I Minutes: City Council Meeting TueSday, August 8, 2006 Page 3 ASSOCiate Planner Heffernon presented the t ff -"01 to , ~"",' E1R '" , "" ...;~, ,,"", '"' """"""'_ .. Co''"'' ~~Id" " ''''''''''.' W"" of ",",Yo G~"" i"""",' ;m~, "~", _ '''' ""kieo"" '",,,, """" '"' d1"" - to "ru" Wilh ''" ',. 0, - ~ c.n"'J, ." "OI",~ ".''''' '" me "'POI!,", to q"~,, "'"' C""",,, " "'"~'~ "" ""'~""'. -.OIe """" H,_" "'''"''' '"' '""'''' "d1~ ,~"" .,.,,' fu, " h" ''''go 0' me ""'''''''' '01., ct"""",". """""''''-, of" ~ ,,_, "" L::'!0 '"", "'-0 o'fu, '-'''' _, "'~" '01",,,,, '0 '~''''' ,,.,,,,, _ _ ,': my '" 8>,"'. ''''''''''''~ .""",., '" "" '" - "'''01'", - '" '" Pol", · m,,,...' "'""'. "_", .,. ., 'mJ'", '" 'h,.., Mayor Ferrara opened the PUblic hear; d" "'h" to b, "''' "" me 01,,,., og" "'''''''' ""''''_ "'"' fu"", " .. 'Od''''''' Who "'" So", Jo"" """d< ,"-"" 'Pok, '" b h , . ha~ ',.,,"""'" ,1/ of fu, -",,; """" , ". of fu, "PI".", '.h", fu" h, b,1/..", fu,y "'''h"", "'"' Co''"'' "',"',' fu, """', '!" ';"':~, ''''0 ., /HOj",. H, '.0 '''''''_ to .0" "'""""J' "'~'" 'oo to" of :,'''''' "'. '01' '., A,. fu, _ _,,_. ~'my-." "m'" "d1~ '_ <>, '::'",~':g;J' :"_, "'"",, ","""", ',"""""" ,~"",- of.." ... ,_ Ii'm me F' , Ii """"- '""'''' "''' "'Ole", ""_ '"'''''~ me "". of C_ r <ma", -Id '01::;' ''''IOn"""., '01_ R_J, ""'''' ." to dri~""y, """"'''' fu, -",,, "'"'" ",;", '~h' '''''''''' of """'og "" _, """" of me '"' ,~"" """''''og me -II", 'lop, ,f.. ,;" ';"01'" ""'Id '"'' b, ".'''''''' .. '" ~, oghl..,~,y " " "'''''' to """" "'""","., " """01'",,,, "" fu, ""fu of L, Pol", S"", bu'Id'og "''''h" '" '00 y", '- '~J'''''''' me '''''og PIa, " , ".,,, " ""'."",, "".p-, "''''' """ ~ h'"",;, ,: p~~'~, ""~_ Pa~'" ., /h, """01"0.' HlIlICm." r ,- "'"-,, " "'" m", "" "'" may "'" b, ",.,"~ " fu, Cm." -""" of 'pp""", .., ... ,"'..;','" to ';:' '~"''"'''' '''' ""P '.'" '''''''''''' ""'''' me, "', of L, Pol", ",""" '." ",,' '''' "'''"'y ''''' "'" '''' " "'01"',," ,mpm"m",. "" 'b, """h bigg", ""'- '''' ""''' me, '" ,- " "'::-'" "'"' "" ""''''''' ""_... me '''''''' "" """ -,. ".", ." , "" ',""'""'l '" "'" "'''''''' >,,,"" 'h"'Id "''''' ,,,.,,"" "'/h,. """'h '""ve,,,.,, HII/ . ,"'" '," " '''' ADA ""'PI", '"' ,,_ _, be ha, """ -",;, ""''''' _~ b, OW"" ;~~- ." __ me, , 25-100, """ '-,,,, WOuld have no pUblic access' address d mamtame,d by the Homeowners ASsoCiation and "'" , " -, "Paid"" .. """, 0/ . . "'''Yod '''.'' """Pal/bII', "',,".. "'" >, , . '''''''_" ""]eo, -" 01''''.,,, 01"",,,, '''"0'", '" /h, p"j,;" ,: -;~ 0' '_.,,'" "*'" """"" ,I,,,,, '- of '''"'''' .,,, be """"'-., '"" . '''' ",,,.,, oo"" me, me """og '" me /HOj,.. FOdh~ '"'"_ ""<red:;; ,"::;'01""" "". ... """"''''''0/ pm",,,,,,,, '''0",,,, /h, Proj", b,;", ""'" ,,, , '- """ '"" hi";'''' ~h' ''''''og PIa, '" fu, ""'ieof " , ""'" " me '0/"".,,,,, of "-n r"""" "" ,; PoIO/ SI,,':, "-" "'''''' _"'og 'm'm,,_. " ~, AI/en Street resident and Villa e b : """,,,po '" me "loll -"" Of fu, m',.. ~ ~"'''' OW,,,, """"'" "",,~"" "'''0' ""y -""'''''' b, """".,,,,,. "''''',,,,P,,1,, '.,."'~"'" ." """"y __ "" p,,,,,,,, '''''''' 'ha, .. ""'''''''' om",,,, ih, 'lOP,"" b, " 01, ~' "';; :;'''0''' 'Ollog """"".''''' "" "''''''''' g" """",," '. Pol" 8>,,, """" to ~~ ";': 0"", """""- '"' """"'" , b",., '" "',,,,;, ,"OW fu, /IObII,!'" ~=;-e' _"'" by .. ',ph/,.", ----------------------------------- Minutes: City Council Meeting Tuesday, August 8, 2006 Page 4 Mayor Ferrara called a break at 8:15 p.m. The Council reconvened at 8:25 p.m. Earl Baloeman, Le Point Street, expressed concern about access issues on Crown Terrace; stated that the trees along Crown Terrace should be spared; referred to the intersection at Highway 227 and Crown Terrace and stated it is dangerous to have four driveways and three parking spaces in this area; favored the installation of speed humps on Le Point Street; expressed concern with design of garages over the residences; stated the project was too dense; and expressed concern with pedestrian safety. Kristen Barneich, co-chair of the Tree Guild, expressed concern over the proposed removal of 75 trees and noted that trees around the perimeter of the project could be saved to provide a visual buffer between the residential and commercial uses. She asked the Council to preserve the existing, mature trees. Bill McCann, Crown Hill, expressed concern about traffic impacts on E. Branch Street at the corners of Crown Hill and Crown Terrace and requested that the intersection be designed to address issues. He suggested that methods be explored to encourage traffic to enter the project on E. Branch Street. He further expressed concern about backing out of driveways onto Crown Terrace and stated that Crown Terrace should be widened. Camav Arad, Allen Street resident and Village business owner, stated that the proposed project design is not the best for the Village at this time and submitted a petition for the record (on file in the Administrative Services Department) which states that "Any new structures in the Village and specifically the Creekside Project at 415 E. Branch, should enhance the quaint charm of a vintage western town at the turn of the century. Strict architectural review and detaiied descriptions of roof lines, iandscaping, materials should be cohesive with the iocallandmarks such as the Barn and the Loomis House." She also addressed issues relating to impervious surfaces, and referred to the proposed model as it relates to the scale of the project and expressed concern that the proposed commercial building blocks views of the green Victorian house adjacent to the proposed project. Barbara Freel, Le Point Street, asked that the proposed island not block access to her landscaping. She also expressed concern about light pollution from the project due to installation of additional streetlights along Crown Terrace and the north side of Le Point Street. Hearing no further public comments, Mayor Ferrara closed the Public Hearing. Joe Boud, Joseph Boud & Associates, responded to public comments regarding the flood zone as it relates to the elevation of the building floors; the change in size of the retail area of the existing Loomis Barn and existing business would require full compliance with Uniform Building Codes; noted that construction activities are addressed in the mitigation monitoring measures as it relates to noise, hours of operation, and dust control; clarified issues regarding street widths; noted the residential area density calculation was provided by an electronic calculation from their civil engineers and believes it is accurate; addressed mitigation measures for tree protection, removal, and screening; referred to traffic on Crown Hill and noted that traffic counts are not based on an event, the level of service is based on hourly traffic counts in a 24-hour day; noted that the parking area is a Class 2 base and is considered an impervious surface; stated that the design of the commercial building was made clear through pre-application meetings with the ARC, the community, the Chamber of Commerce, the downtown merchants, the Planning Commission and the Council and the applicant was directed to utilize an agrarian form of architecture; noted that further commercial development on the site was restricted due to existing buildings on the property; Minutes: City Council Meeting Tuesday, August 8, 2006 Page 5 addressed landscaping issues; and noted that the street lights were required by the City's Development Code and agreed to reduce the number of street lights if the City would allow it. Council Member Arnold provided the following comments: - Applicant has met most of concerns, especially regarding connection between the existing use and the proposed uses; Expressed concern with the size and scale of the proposed commercial use and noted that he had requested story poles be placed to determine visual impacts; Thought this was an appropriate project for the site; however, scale and traffic flow are key issues; Would not want to see the existing business impacted during construction; Left hand turn from Crown Hill into site may need some restrictions; Speed humps are needed on Le Point Street to discourage cut-through traffic; Need clarification regarding street lighting on Crown Terrace to ensure lighting is contained to the street; Explore possibility of transplanting existing trees to save mature trees, or consider 48"-60" box trees instead of 24" box trees. Council Member Costello provided the following comments: - Clarified that width of Crown Terrace would consist of two 12' travel lanes and a 5' sidewalk; - Agreed that some trees should be saved if possible; 70 is too many to remove; - Lighting should not be intrusive to the existing residential areas; - Cannot support restriction of the available retail space in the existing structure; can support converting the existing residential structures to commercial use; Noted that the final design is subject to ARC approval. Council Member Dickens provided the following comments: Not enough information about impervious surfaces provided: had many unanswered questions regarding impervious surfaces and related drainage impacts on the site; Flooding issue still a concern which has not been resolved; - Too many outstanding issues with proposed project; preferred original commercial project and did not support the larger residential in this area; does not support this project as proposed for this site; Project location is not downtown urban core; property is in Historic Village; Objected to size and scale of the three story commercial building which dwarfs the existing barn; should be two-story; There are land use conflicts between commercial and residential uses, and residential and open space; Concerned about lack of fencing; Access to private property needs to be addressed; Concerned about removal of 70+ mature trees; Does not support project as proposed. Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie provided the following comments: - Asked for clarification regarding restriction on existing retail use; Minutes: City Council Meeting Tuesday, August 8, 2006 Page 6 - Commented on the impervious surfaces: asked what is there now versus what is proposed and whether staff had reviewed the issue; - Recognized that Le Point Street is residential in nature and thinks that the street should not be widened; - Existing trees were placed to shieid an industrial use; would support saving some of the trees, however, would not need to save all the trees as it would create a visual block between the two residential neighborhoods; - Asked questions about liability issues as it relates to potential flooding; - Noted that commercial uses generate far more traffic intensity than residential uses; believes that the residential component provides a transitional area into the single family residential area; - Supported the proposed layout of the project; - Noted that access from E. Branch is a key element of the project; - Proposed traffic improvements will mitigate some of the existing traffic issues; - Concerned about the size of the proposed commercial building; suggested reducing the height or changing the fa9ade of the building; - The Class 2 impervious surface issue is critical; needs to be further reviewed; - Favored more specific lighting standards. Mayor Ferrara provided the following comments: - Referred to previous concerns expressed from 2005 public hearing regarding the size, scale, and intensity of the commercial building; the need to soften the look of the commercial building, and to provide a more horizontal structure rather than vertical; Acknowledged that the need for western access to the site had been fulfilled; Acknowledged that the creek setback requirement had been fulfilled; Noted that the drainage issue (impervious surface) needs to be further studied; Commented on the appropriateness of the proposed agrarian architectural style; Observed that live/work units do not function well in this type of area; Residential units would help reduce traffic because of project's close proximity to Village services; Tree issue is large concern; does not favor tree removal; Traffic circulation issues need to be addressed; speed humps and/or signage are important to prevent cut-through traffic at Le Point and Crown Terrace; Left turn pocket at Crown Hill is problematic; suggested a "keep clear" lane and additional street markings; Light pollution is a concern; acknowledged that new street lighting points down and does not project into residential windows; requested clarification regarding authority for placement; Flooding issue needs to be further researched through FEMA guidelines; Suggested that the applicanVarchitect research similar style condominiums with garage above living area built on hillside in Pismo Beach as it relates to leaking, water damage, etc.; Need to reach balance point; spoke of goal to preserve existing structures and appreciates efforts to develop a project; Housing will be an asset to the City; Can make adjustments to create a project to compliment the City. Minutes: City Council Meeting Tuesday, August 8, 2006 Page 7 Mr. Boud commented on the Class 2 base (impervious surface) issue and stated it only relates back to whether or not the pervious surface or an impervious surface area would demand the need for a drainage retention basin. He noted that because the property is in the flood zone, it is somewhat irrelevant whether it is pervious or impervious. Council Member Arnold clarified that there appeared to be some ability to transplant some of the trees and suggested that a tree survey be completed in order to determine the status of the trees and to include the Tree Guild in that process. He also referred to the proposed height of the retail building and suggested that the applicant consider an alternative design that steps the top floors back from the street. Mayor Ferrara suggested directing staff to facilitate the issue concerning the impervious surfaces, along with the applicant, and also that staff facilitate the involvement of the Tree Guild concerning the issue of the trees. Council Member Arnold moved to continue the item to a date uncertain, Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Arnold, Guthrie, Costello, Ferrara Dickens None 9.b. Consideration of the 2006 Drainage Master Plan Update. Assistant City Engineer Linn presented an overview of the 2006 Drainage Master Plan Update, noting that the Drainage Master Plan was originally approved on November 9, 1999, it assesses adequacy of existing infrastructure, provides a financial tool for funding current and future improvements, and determines a schedule for maintenance .projects. He noted the Plan includes major components, such as a review of the area drainage patterns, a review of the City's major creeks and flood plain management programs, identifies drainage policy zones, drainage basin policies, best management practices for improvement of storm water quality, identification of drainage problems in the City, and proposed projects to correct City drainage problems. He then introduced Contract Engineer Campbell to present the Newsom Springs project. Council Member Dickens declared a conflict of interest due to his indirect interest in the Dixson Ranch, as it relates to the Newsom Springs project, and said he would need to recuse himself. He expressed concern with due process as it relates to proper notification, inadequate information presented to the Council and the public, and significant material that was not provided to the Council and the public in a timely fashion. He stated that staff was recommending that information be presented specifically with regard to Newsom Springs and that the public notice only referred to a public hearing concerning the Drainage Master Plan. He noted that the Planning Commission had specifically requested that staff notify all individuals that are affected by the Newsom Springs project, and that had not been done. He stated it was inappropriate to move forward and discuss anything regarding Newsom Springs until proper notification is made. I iN De a. M Property, L.LC. 41.ElCu*-_ """l"'o.-..M,CAI342lI 1OU8lI.7_ " ~ m m ~ m 6 m m ~ ~ o z IY' ---+ .~(J 1-1:.-N I ~ ".,h rli~ "\ ~,,~ " k::~ -''Z~' ;J<. :l~'! ,,';:1 ATTACHMENT 7 ~ Iii II iijli II.! .1 m , !r Ii !! ~ 1 .J II i i ~ I ". ..~ .. .. (') m ~ " G z Gl 00 "110 !!s: OS: mm m:xJ cO r=i> Or- -..... Z G") THE CREEKSIDE COMPLEX A Mixed Use Planned Development. 415 E. Branch Street. Arroyo Grande, CA -'~.I .."gO"" _.n.___ -=-:r~ COMMERCIAL BUILDING Proposed redesign w/previous design shown as dashed lines ?-, ('6' 'J./ j , "-V,.J . ,;;.'. .\'<L':', .rt.--\'~."'-"'__~'~ . ~"5="";_-~'~"~ CROWN TERRACE ELEVATION RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION ;i't CREEKSIDE ELEVATION ATTACHMENT 8 \ Carolyn B. Leach Consulting, LLC 444 Blume Street, Nlpomo, CA 93444 (805) 828-9020 Regialered Consulting Arborisl *368. A.S.CA w.e,l.s.A. eer1ifted Arborisl.727 Calif. Lie, Pest Control Advisor IAA02882 Sept. 1, 2006 Mr. Joseph Boud Joseph Baud & Associates 1009 Morro Street. Suite 206 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Re: The Creekside Complex, Arroyo Grande , Dear Mr. Boud: I have completed my examination of the trees located at "The Creekside Complex". at415 East Branch Street In Arroyo Grande. You have asked me to Inventory and assess the trees found In the northern most comer of the property, adjacent to both Crown Terrace and La Points Streets. The trees ara located as In the area shown on the attached sketch marked "Exhibit A". To further clarify, I included all trees along the La Pointe frontage from the intersection westward to the end of the existing paving, .-:11'~"" ~~r">.-_~',' '\-.&.'~:'~ <_.~:;r '"~ F~~ \ -"'" . .~ ....,..-,.... ,. -' ': ..., C S ';1 '~._.., b iu. ; - " o""Loo' .. "p-.1;:. O rC"', , .". 'r~r.'J, <,,;.'.f" _'1'\1 Ot: p",,:."" r~' '''''': \"All I ...,'-" -~. 11'\ III ,,\\T{ 'Q::; ";:;."-"",. ,.' "'''. :\:, ,..~"" f..y'-FI...1 You have asked me to review the potential for these trees to survive transplanting. I have found only two tree species with good chances to thrive after transplanting, that being the Coa&tallive oak and the palm. I have assigned each tree 8 number and am providing you a sketch showing the tree locations, tree species, and trunk size on the attached 'Exhibit B, pgs 1 & 2", I found 85 trees within this portion Of the property. The maJortty ate l.eyland cypress (x Cupressocyparls leylandlQ. A summary of the trees inventoried is found on the following table: Quantity Botanical Name Common Name 70 XCu~ritsl&ylandii Leyland oypress 5 TI18tan/a c:onferlll Ilriabane box 3 SBIIx lee'figalll Willow 2 QuerouB tl{Jrlfo/l8 COiSIaIIlVil oak 2 Populus trlcoc8lpll CollonwOOd 2 Myopctum I9atllm Myoporum 1 P1loenbc csnllr1flnllis Canary Isl8nd.daIe pain Tree ASS688Il1ent Report 1l1e Crwkslde Complex, Arroyo Grande By Carolyn LellCh sept. 1, 200tl 2 Tree Charact8rlstlcs: The cypress trees have moderately good vigor, with dark green foliage and very dense canopies. I found no evidence of insect or disease affecting the cypress. The cypress along Crown Terrace appear to have never been pruned, as they have retained all of their lower branches. Along L.e Pointe street, however, the cypress are planted directly beneath power lines, and have been topped, apparently by PG&E crews, to maintain adequate clearance from the power lines. Tt1e cypres6 were planted extremely close together, about four feet between . eaoh tree, In straight rows that parallel each street. They are perhaps 10 year6 old. They are from 20 to 30 feet tall and about 20 feet wide. The remaining area below the trees is not landscaped and not Irrigated, and has a covering of weeds and other volunteer planta. The aoillevel below the trees along Crown Terrace is a steeply graded slope. At L.e Pointe, the area below the trees has drainage channels, making for uneven terrain. Since the cypress are planted so close together, there is the problem of competition with each other for sunlight and for growing space. When looked at individually, they have thin canopies, with many of their lower branches having died back. This Is not apparent when the entire row Is viewed as a group from a distance. Additionally, the branches are heavily Intertwined, with crossing and rubbing branches common throughout. The cypress are not a native species, but rather are a cultivated hybrid plant. This hybrid has been promoted heavily in the landscape trade over the past 20 years because It grows extremely quickly. From the time It starts as a six inch cutting, it can grow to a 20 feet tall tree within five years. The Brisbane box trees are all very young, perhaps 3 to 5 years old. They have sparse (lEInopies, as they are growing In the shade, and they prefer full sun. . The willows are a native species that Is common to the riparian areas in the Village. They are very old trees. The majority of their major branches are heavily decayed and infested with termites. Their vigor 15 very poor. The two oaks are native speeles, and are likely volunteer seedlings ,from neighboring oak woodlands. They are young, vigorous trees, with trunk dlametenl of 4 Inches for the smallest and 8 inches for the largest tree. The cottonwood trees are also native to our area. They are perhaps 20 years old, with the smaller tree having a single 8. trunk and the larger tree a double Tree Assessment Report The Creekside Complex, Arroyo Grande By Carolyn Leach Sept. 1, 20CJe 3 trunk (8" 17"). Both cottonwoods are heavily infested with rust disease on their foliage. The myoporum are large tree-like shrubs with trunk diameters of 8" and 10", They are not native. They are listed by many expert& as an Invasive weed, as they are easily spread by seed and will invade native habitats. They grow extremely fast. The Canary Island date palm Is a fairly young tree, with an overall height to the top of the newest fronds of about 15 feet. It is not native. This type of palm Is . popular for Its massive size but Is also reviled because its ease In re-seedlng into areas where It is not wanted. This..partlcular palm Is moat likely a'volunteer" seedling, since it is located directly below the power lines, where birds tend to perch while feeding. It Is vigorous and normal in size and coloration. Dlscuaslon on Transplant Potential: A critical question at this point for The Creekside Complex, is whether the trees have the potential of surviving or thriving should they be transplanted, The cypress have several marks against them to be worthy for transplanting. Firstly, they are planted too close together, It will be Impossible to de-langle their canopies and their roots, except perhaps for the very endmost tree on each row. Secondly, the existing gredes are steep, causing the shape of the roots system to likewise be slanted upward on one side of the tree and downward on the other side. This misshapen root ball will be very difficult to move without it breaking apart, and nearly impO$sible to find an adequate planting site that matches the root shape. Thirdly, c:onlferous trees are difficult to transplant because the amount of root loss will trigger dehydration in the tree, attracting bark boring Inseot& which then attack and kill the tree. Cypress bark borers are one of the most common reasons for death In cypress. Since this species of cypress grows extremely vigorously, it would be wiser to plant new trees. The new trees will no doubt out-pace any transplanted tree in growth and vigor. as well as In potential lifespan length. The Brisbane box trees are young enough to transplant, but are h<!rdly worth the alTort, since trees this identIcal size are easily available in 24" and 36" boxed sizes, The willow trees are too large to transplant, and are too diseased. Tree AlI_ment Report The Creekside Complex, Arroyo Grande By Carolyn Leech Sept. 1, 2006 4 The oak trees are young and small enough to transplant. if adequate care is taken during and following the move. The cottonwood trees are too large to transplant. The myoporum shrubltrees are not,worth the effort to transplant, since they grow extremely rapidly from new plantings. They are available in most nurseries. But I would caution Using this plant, as it may become a noxious Invasive if it spreads into unwanted areas. ; The palm is easily transplanted. It is currently growing directly beneath power lines, so It can not remain in this location for long regardless. Transplanting Notes: Tree transplanting is a precise, complex task that should only be undertaken by expet1enced profesliionals. Species of tree, time of year, size of root ball, preparation of planting site, care of tree while boxed, drainage, and care following transplantation all have a big effect of the success of the transplanting. Guidefines are available in the tel<t Principles end PraatJces of Planting TfHS and Shrubs by Gary Wataon and E. B. Hlmellck, pUblished by the International Society of Arboriculture. Addltlonallnforrnation is found In the articles titled Tree Transplanting and Establishment Arbor Age magazine June 2000, and Transplanting Trees Arbor Age magazine January and February 2000. In general, a broadleaf tree with a 5-inch trunk diameter needs a root ball that is 50 inches wide and 30 inches deep. Palms root balls are not sized In the same manner, and are often moved with smaller root balls. At all times, adequate soli moisture and proper drainage must be maintained in the root ball, whether stored in a box or immediately planted in the ground. Loetl of roots are inevitable during transplanting, and lack of lIOiI moisture or poor drainage are the key causes of stress following transplanting. Tree .t..ssenment Report The Creekside Complex, Arroyo Grande By Carolyn Leach Sept. 1,2006 5 Conclusions: The trees at this site that are good candidates for successful transplanting are the Coas1allive oaks and the palm. The remaining trees are either too large, too diseased, or too problematic to transplant. Additionally, all of the remaining species are very faet growing and easy to find commercially, SO replacing with new trees Is recommended. ~4 <{5,~ Carolyn B. Leach . A.S,CA Registered Consulting Arborlst #368 LIMITING CONDITIONS: Information In this report covers only the trees examined and reflecta the conditions of the trees at the time of Inspection. There Is no warranty, either express or implied, that the subject trees will not develop problems or dSficiencies in the Mure, Sources of information used in this report are accepted as standard resources, however, the author cannot guarantee the accuracy of Information provided by others. PO$$8sslon of this report or a copy thereof does not imply the right of publication or use for any purpose by any other than the person to whom it is addressed. without the prior written consent of the consultant. Loss or alteration of this report Invalidates the entire report. The Inspection is limited to visual examination of tree location. as viewed from the ground, without dissection, excavation, probing, or corIng. No review of tree structural conditions or hazard potential has been provided. till i II II 1 1 \III "" . f ~ rn....""..IiIiI/IiHI h rfr utI" lii~' n, ,. !IIllltIUIU'IIIIIUI!I :1 H .!.!I Il!I;f ; I , ,. "~l I Oil I( I C:el Wtj2,: n geec: ,l '6"':i : 'ON:KI1d ",,,,ooeet> 'II p....S ~<I..Q!. : wow 'a . 1m Ii JIm !!J ... (\\ x =+ - ~ - "1 ~ . 31 U"/K" S . J& t"lfI/'#'~ ~ex. rfl6 (-r 9'. ~ t./tJ# f A;Gc-rz .. / $~ 001. ~e Lo~b~S ., a..~ 41\1 dot. .p,'l"~f,,' ~ "Jf. ,.~ ~ lo-M 'if." e 'to' . - e .. ~,. Ii ~ ,.' ,"/.(' C. .,'10' 't' " ". q Me SO' ~' , /0' Cl. ~, . __. I'. C. 'U. ,.. C. .. V'. /0 c: If' It" ( ff . ~'f' /0 c. if' ,t" C ..,.", r,4/1" 1/. ct" c ';I' 't' c .. 14' If) t , .. /,. q (! 11 ..,o' << .. /6 . tl C! .. ,1. . e .. ,~. ,t- C ". q' t ,11 ClIo Cl. 't. ,';/e" Cl. '" ,. ". t' 4. It e ,. 10" e .,. ,.. c ". q" c1 ( . " c If' /,' (} .. J' /I t ,. ,," e I' ,""4 f) '3 ~ ~ ~" (!.)f ,l-i17'5 5'" Skj..l v: ,.,.. ~"of/li.A""" ~.. ~c,.J) Nfl" '7'0 t;~ . It' l't" ., ,.,'(, . . . .., 10 e · U. '~~c. .., ,,,:e to If. 4- . . ..,~ 10 C , · .,. q "Co Ie: _." """e , '1r ,~~ 't ,. -/. . . ., ,10 c:. S,Il c: --T'J .. . ,,2. & C- ..,1 f"~c ..,. S c: $"" c:.........6It ..,.... .~ 'f"O · .,'." .... f' S'"c. .~ '" ~"c. .." "'e , '* ... """c._" ~,.& lIO, "",,. .'0 , C - 'f'I 8 c- III I'" S .n 't', ." .... . v I~ ,'c.- 8 . t'V ".. . '1 .. .,.. 't 'c, 1'1. q' At fi '..! ~ 1S1i~ . . . !f. ~ ~. ll.f:ft;l . S"c!.~ q /1 lOt. 0.& '\' ~ -I. \- -~ ..... &. ~ ...j CarOlYn S. Leach ConSUlting LLc 4.. Qr.......~ .......~ .., , ............ 1'", Ita......... - "- . - p~ .z.. '1'e~HtB(r B;~ ~ - t:.'ff~, S .. SJtLI >c M ~ M 'ioPe !Lv"" (.,. po/,V"(.;.I,tS '7'" -rf:4.cpr- - PRELIMINARY DRAFT #3 ATTACHMENT 9 L I G- H TIN G DECORATIVE OUTDOOR (our utility company may provide more than just your gas and electricity; they may also be your outdoor lighting company. fhey can often help upgrade the lighting for your downtown areas, residential streets, parks. marinas and public building 3xteriors. Using the attractive and high performing fixtures and poles on their standards, you can improve security as well lS enhance the daytime. and nighttime appearanc~ of your community. After the fixtures are Installed, your utility company . nay.take care of all of the electrical service and maintenance for only pennies a night. "':::~'i:\il I,f~:!i:';:' Upgrading your outdoor lighting will: . Improve traffic and pedestrian safety . Reduce crime . Attract customers to commercial areas . Enhance the appearance of historic distl'icts . Increase civic price in your community STANDARD FIXTURES Your utility company has approved these fixtures for their standards because they meet their demanding requirements for durability, energy efficiency, reliability, ease of maintenance and appearance. These fixtures feature high-strength, non- yellowing, borosilicate glass globes; side access door for ease of electrical service; and fade resistant polyester powder coat finishes. These features ensure that the lighting fixtures and poles shown here will continue to complement your community for many years to come. GRANVILLE ACORN The Granville is a timeless glass acorn that produces a very wide lateral throw of light. This light distribution allows for efficient pole spacings and increases light levels on important vertical surfaces such as vehicles, pedestrians, building entrances and signage. FEATURES BOROSILICATE GLASS High-strength, borosilicate glass is the ideal material for outdoor fixtures. Unlike plastic materials, glass never discolors or turns brittle. Also, because the clarity of the material does not degrade, there is minimum loss in light output over time Occasional rainfall is all that is required to keep these beautiful globes clean and sparking year after year. LONG-LIFE FINISH What would you like the fixtures in your community to look like in a few years? The components of a successful finish are cleaning, pretreatment, and coating. A seven stage process of cleaning and pretreatment is applied to each fixture housing to ensure that paint firmly adheres to the metal surfaces. Following the extensive preparation process, environmentally friendly, polyester powder coating is electrostatically applied to the fixture housings. This extensive coating system results in a long life finish that stubbornly resists fading and peeling. ~EDUCED UPLIGHT ,KY GLOW OPTIONS s populations have grown, so has the problem of sky glow. Direct and reflected :Jht from streetlights and other outdoor electric lighting cause skies above urban . reas to glow and thereby reduces the ability to view the stars. This problem has , lade it significantly more difficult for astronomers to see and study astronomical , odies. For additional information about this issue, visit the website of the , liernational Dark Sky Association at www.darksky.org. To address the problem of iirect uplight, the Granville is offered with two reduced uplight options. 'JERFORATED UPLIGHT .iHIELD , 0 help reduce undesired uplight, an lternal perforated uplight shield is , ivailable, This option will decrease the Iirect upward component of light without ;ignificantly affecting the pole spacing atios or the illumination of important 'ertical surfaces. A small amount of , Jplight continues to allow the top of the ixture to glow - reminiscent of early gas md incandescent light fixtures, In , lddition, the daytime appearance of the , .Iass globe is not impacted by this option. "CUTOFF" LUNAR OPTICS The Lunar Optics Granville uses an internal reflector to reduce the high angle light output of the fixture, The shielding provided by this reflector reduces light trespass and direct uplight while maintaining the pure daytime appearance of the classic Granville. This unique design allows this product to be classified as a "cutoff fixture" by the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America. L. ", -------- FIXTURE ORDERING INFORMATION .=ixture Housina GVU - Granville 3allast Tvoe 070HP - For use with mogul base 70W HPS lamps 1 OOHP - For use with mogul base WOW HPS lamps \'Q!tgga 12 - t20V 20'- 208V 24 - 240V 27 - 277V 48 - 480V MT - 120/208/240/277V Multi-tap Fixture Finishes B - Black N - Dark Green Gatical Systems (Sea diagrams below) 3 - Asymmetric Distribution 5 - Symmetric Distribution 3PUS - Asymmetric Distribution with Perforated Uplight Shield 5PUS ...:.. Symmetric Distribution with Perforated.Uplight Shield 7 - Lunar Optics Asymmetric Distribution 8 - Lunar Optics Symmetric Distribution l'~l AsymmetriC. bfi:;tdbutiori' . Ooiions and Ac,~essories P -- Protected Starter (Prevents lamp from 'cycling" at end of life) H - NEMA Twistlock Photocontrol receptacle OE120 - Twistiock Electronic, Silicone, Filtered Photoconlroi ( 120V) DE124 - Twistiock Electronic, Silicone, Filtered Pl1otocontroi (12/240/277V) DE240 - Twistlock Electronic, Silicone, Filtered Pllotocontrol (240V) F1 - Single FUSing (120V. 240V, 277V) - field installed F2 - Double Fusing (208V, 240V) - field installed GV1ASD90 - 90'Houseside Shield GV1ASD120 - 120" Houseside Shield GV1ASD180 - 180~ Houseside Shield FIXTURE ORDERING GUIDE Complete Catalog Number Example - GVU100HP12B3PHDE120 i 1- ---.. .,c...r1',:",-:,:T==Lr----r--=-_, Fixture Ballast Voltage Finish Optical Type Options and Accessories P H DE120 DE124 DE240 F1 F2 GV1ASD90 GV1ASD120 GV1ASD180 GVU 070HP 100HP Symmetr"ic'Distributici'ri The light distribution pattern is determined by the fixture's optical system. For illuminating streets and pathways, an asymmetric (Type III) pattern is recommended. For intersections and open area applications (parks, outdoor malls, etc,), the symmetric (Type V) pattern is tvoicallv used. 12 20 24 27 48 MT B N 3 5 3PUS 5PUS 7 8 STANDARD POLES To complement the fixtures shown on the previous pages, these durable and economical poles are available. These poles feature corrosion resistant cast aluminum bases and extruded aluminum shafts. Both smooth and fluted shafts are offered. For twin fixture applications, the decorative crossarm may be used. The poles and crossarm are finished with fade and abrasion resistant, polyester powder coat paint. , ,\.Im i' I'~ " 111 Iii P 'Ill II' ,I ,I! ;11 'II i I 'I 'I! . , I A~~.HO&\c;?E GUIDE ~'" - 'y / ~ /....:p..j;:',,",,- .\., '\ ..w-t'77' -^""'~\ \ _ " r," ~~ i~' p~ . ~ ,.' .' .', .,' .~..... ""t~,; # '-,;",-:,-..:...,,::,-,,:>'i; rOo 't<4.:_ .,'\-'[ ..~ "1. .:.14 .,,' . . f i;l'-~~~j .. ,i,J :-::::::-.... 'T--t' )'.'."..' T n J-..i r--, CHARLESTON (shown with fluted stlaft) A .A~CHORAGE GU!QE I, ! I I! I I , I I I I I I , I II ! I II , I I' i I , , ~~ ~. i " I r:11 j;:'~\ "'I ,/'. L(f. ~*~., ,..>, .'/'" .......:\ ./ \l'li> i~' ",L' ~ ,j tT \i:> '<,'1 ~'i . r"J'~:+:~A~ bxt I ..;;"r',._' ! _ '1" '"' I ~ 1kI~ f-" --"-""--1" -r-', ' ~. -J;- & ' .1., '_"'_'. ,... i ft I ....<if'. 'J,-...~~ L~ L~r,~~~ i"porrJl>::rldl HAMILTON (shown with smooth shaft) O---i) - ~=';;-=-;,"'=--1 IIE~ . ~. 1i ~~~":-='=I............... '" ..~ ........ f' 8'" .-3 TWIN FIXTURE CROSSARM POLE ORDERING GUIDE Pole Ordering Example CH 14 S4j12-CNBK.WPRT i.--- . =~~cJ=..J ~ ---c:~ L -- Pole Type Height Shaft Type Finish CH -Charleston 12 14 84/12 - Smooth F4112 - RUled CAlBK - Black CA/DG - Oar~ Green CROSSARM ORDERING GUIDE Crossarm ordering example PCP36-CNBK --_.__.._-~ l Opticns WPRT'" - Receptacle H - HamillOf'! WPRP -Receptacle B 10 12 14 84116 - Smcoth F4116 - FIUled CA/BK - Slack CAlDG - Oar...:; Greer. 'Weatherproof receptacfe mounted at lop of pole Twin Crossarm PCP36 Finish CAlBK - Black CAlDG - Dark Green ~ HOLOPHANE. LEAllEK IN UClllll\G 5OLlo"'TJONS A(1~""(lllty8rilf1dsCo:uJP<lny ATTACHMENT 10 . FLOODPLAIN LIMIT OF DETAILED STUDY ZONE B "- '~ "~ "\. "\\ / 1 ( I \\ \\ ATTACHMENT 11 " J LIMITED SOILS ENGINEERING REPORT LOOMIS BARN TENTATIVE VESTING TRACT 2346 EAST BRANCH/CROWN HILL STREET ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA PROJECT SL05829-1 Prepared for DB & M Properties, LLC Attn: Duane DeBlauw 411 EI Camino Real Arroyo Grande, California 93420 . _, _......"_~. .~".~ 1""' -""~I ~_.- ;' I . ......,.; . .......j ~,~c() ~). ; ~,; ,-;f',;:~ v~~ ..' -' '.> ~'-' .' Prepared by CINe;: " co:: ,.. , ...........,,- ':',j ';:,/,'.r.; ~~.:. , ,.'" _-_..:,(.0'::1 ~T GEOSOLUTIONS, INC. 220 HIGH STREET SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA 93401 (805) 543-8539 Ii:J September 19, 2006 liE!D!iiolutions. 11\11:. 220 High Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 (805) 543-8539, 543-2171 fax info@GeoSolutions.net DB & M Properties, LLC Attn: Duane DeBlauw 411 El Camino Real Arroyo Grande, California 93420 September 19, 2006 Project SL05829-1 Subject: Limited Soils Engineering Report Loomis Barn, Tentative Vesting Tract 2346 East Branch/Crown Hill Street Arroyo Grande, California Dear Mr. DeBlauw: This Limited Soils Engineering Report has been prepared for the proposed Tentative Vesting Tract 2346 located at the historic Loomis Barn, west of Crown Terrace, north of East Branch/Crown Hill Street, in the City of Arroyo Grande, California. Geotechnically, the near-surface materials are suitable to provide sufficient site drainage for the proposed development. Given the surface layer of imported base material of 5 to 12 inches encountered in the limited soil investigation, it is assumed that the sub-surface infiltration at the site is negligible. Sincerely, GeoSolutions, Inc. o Jztl.,1i1 !/4-1,{ ~~trick B. McNeill, PE Principal CE 59577 S:\Geotechnical\SL05829-1 Loomis.DeBlauw TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE .................................................................................................................2 3.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATION .........................................................................2 4.0 GENERAL SURFACE SOILS DISCUSSION ................................................................................2 5.0 SITE DRAINAGE............................................................................................................................2 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....................,......................................................3 7.0 . ADDITIONAL GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES..............................................................................3 8.0 LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS..............................................................3 APPENDIX A Field Investigation Soil Classification Chart Boring Logs LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Area Location Map......................................................................................................................... 1 Figure 2: Site Plan .........................................................................................................................................1 LIMITED SOILS ENGINEERING REPORT LOOMIS BARN TENTATIVE VESTING TRACT 2346 EAST BRANCH/CROWN HILL STREET ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA 1.0 INTRODUCTION PROJECT SL05829-I This report presents the results of the limited geotechnical investigation for the proposed Tentative Vesting Tract 2346 located at Loomis Barn, west of Crown Terrace, north of East Branch/Crown Hill Street, in the City of Arroyo Grande, California. See Figure I: Area Location Map. The proposed tract area is approximately trapezoidal in shape and roughly 3 acres in size. East Branch/Crown Hill Street abuts the southern tract boundary and provides access to the property. Crown Terrace abuts the eastern property boundary and intersects with East Branch/Crown Hill Street at the southeast corner of the tract. The property will hereafter be referred to as the "Site." See Figure 2: Site Plan Site topography consists of a steep-sloping hill located along the edge of the eastern property boundary and a slight down-slope to the west and northwest across the remainder of the property. The gradient across the majority of the site is at an average slope of approximately 50-to-1 (horizontal-to-vertical) and increases to approximately 15-to- I in the north-central region of the tract. Surface drainage in general follows the topography to the northwest and into Corbett Creek, which runs along the northern property boundary. There are several existing structures located on the tract including a store and wood shed. , !\\4",~;':'\,tJ' """'~~ '~, ,,"~",,,.,,ft, _"",,.:~'~~':_~~;::__ .75 l'o..ile$ 1 1"..2.400 ft. Figure 1: Area Location Map ~;;;;'~#-:~.~T":~~'C-i~~,.?~~~:;::~~~-m:~;:ci~=-=~~< 1'7''''''',I,--.To T'fiiw"-'" jf/." -"'}~ ".,l.'''lc~-",'.-;-,,-'1lil1'~ ;'f:::-- :~11,y:;L.Lt!fj__4--: j, Y' I ...' ,..p.' t :"\. 4-:..-. \'~_.:~i?:.j;i- '.' ", 1'/'"" "'--1 :Y; - .. - ":4' , '-;-"7'" r "FfI' f-+/- --"",_--.:..,.j~< _ "-"~--'IJ:'.__ .J t. I I \l '{', ! ,f. ". '. i!1j' 'W -- ,,,, , .' - .'If'--" 8-1 '~' I I .... 1'- '-tit; ..... &J ,UL4 i!~,?; I 'J'i _. li'i 1/".--:' /-," ----7'-' ..." 't'.I'.........~.,u.....r. j'[;-.:o- "" "I" !<J ,,/. ...... "~,. "..... ~.............' ~Irl(j r~ /' u__J ,,c-:',-,,.ji. '!':n!!- ."!.....-.ru.' ''w.o.. ~ ~...';:o" r bU~ / '" / __.... --rr- ... ~ f " 1 "",f.' ""-1",, .=,."",,8- ill: ",r.' "-',,-, '''V''!1i : /)"/' - ---r-;Aip.'~" ""..... l 'du'-IP. -- J,IJ,'J" 1'/ :L-.h~"r:&::..~~L_~" - '"'JIt. 8-.2 /'.?~,i;", _ "I. -=-' ""l.'\;f,: ,_"I I ",( " ' ,-~ J / <::I '~/~!r-OU'" ----- ~ ,... l. ,,' <<:? 1"1- ~'\;.j~rl II--~I.: I: ,:.,:;-~ ... I ~' 'r ! I,'" __ll-_ ,. Il'NATI"'S"'-", . ,- t -', 1;"- .1'"' 0;1.1;...." . . ~_.., I ft: -- ) ,:::L:f"jl" _~\I~~~~~A~Bk-:-' --:"'-' _.. [ :fj!~ tx I, i:,;?,( ;c/- ''-'" ~ C(';--I_--,;;!,-. C!W~ ..~"'"'7'~ -r---, '-: _-ow> ~...J' I "I 'i., ~;:t:A."'I'I~ F. I: i ."'Ir..- Ii-J-"'~il' 1\, '" :-'(.'~,;:~ I I ~j' r-J..--+ ----tl- ~ ----,.., i i' I -:'1'- , ' I ;L~II"""" JS- "'{ .... ,I I . :,. ~.' ~. , ~h~..-'_ , ~'i7'I: r--I W .f.""Q ~ .-., , <<,- ,(. '!ii' "I -------'. 1'\ I ~ :.., I, ~r.._ IXP-:'--::"" 101; I' M1'If,lf rjl --- : :,\ . , c. " ,~. L~l'~':' -- W I r-"" ;.::,~,,; ~t;:;'-- , .,Rf1~"'" I,' '''''\'~co I J , ,-, I ^ r'I' ,. I I' \":'n.'~~ I" "J)M_~II ""~.... 1 . 1 'I f:-'l I V, '! : mCATIO:O<S'L' 'Ii"-~l' '.r, 'V~J"" 'I'" I '" ,:'~: I, b~ I ""-r" '!'11:J'Ilf-'-, ''''-...L.lJ~~ '~::::m-Y,""n ~-"'-~.'~'''' 'I L----n- :~-~:-~;~~~~~~:~~~~~S~~:~~~~-E~~2T8E-n (~-- I Figure 2: Site Plan September 19,2006 Project SL05829-1 2.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of this study was to explore and evaluate the near surface soil conditions at the Site and develop geotechnical information and design criteria. The scope of this study includes the following items: I. A review of available published and unpublished geotechnical data pertinent to the project site. 2. A field study consisting of a site reconnaissance and an exploratory boring. program to formulate a description of the near surface conditions. 3. Analysis of the data gathered during our field study and laboratory testing. 4. Development of recommendations and geotechnical design criteria for drainage, erosion, and pavement base section. 3.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATION The field investigation was conducted on September 13, 2006 using a track-mounted mobile B-24 drill rig. Six exploratory borings to a maximum depth of 1.5 feet below ground surface (bgs) were placed at the approximate locations indicated on the Site Plan. The surface materials at the Site generally consisted of light grayish brown well-graded SAND with gravel (SW), referred to as imported base, encountered in a dry condition to depths of 5 to 12 inches below ground surface (bgs). Underlying this material, the sub-surface soils consisted of dark brown silty SAND (SM) encountered in a slightly moist and medium dense condition. The borings were terminated at 1.5 feet bgs in this material. Groundwater was not encountered in any of the borings. During the boring operations the soils encountered were continuously examined and visually classified. A project engineer has reviewed a continuous log of the soils encountered at the time of field investigation. The Boring Logs are attached in Appendix A. 4.0 GENERAL SURFACE SOILS DISCUSSION Based on the results of the field investigation, the imported base encountered throughout the Site is suitable as a sub-base material for future development. The base layer was visually classified as light grayish brown well-graded SAND with gravel (SW) and ranged in thickness from 5 to 12 inches throughout the Site. However, in a depression area located in the northern portion of the property, native soils were identified at the surface and the base layer appeared to be minimal or non-existent. The native material was visually classified as dark brown silty SAND (SM) and is not suitable as a base material. See Figure 2: Site Plan. 5.0 SITE DRAINAGE It is assumed that the existin'g surface conditions at the Site provide near impervious surface drainage. In . general, surface drainage is to the west and then north into Corbett Creek. Surface drainage in the western portion of the tract follows the topography, across the existing base sections, to the west and northwest and into the creek. In the eastern portion of the tract, surface drainage flows west into a surface depression, located in the north-central region of the tract, and its topography to the north. Native material consisting of brown silty SAND (SM) was identified at the surface of this depression and may increase erosion potential. Overall, the remainder of the Site is covered with a 5 to 12 inch base layer, limiting the potential for erosi n and increasing the run off in all other areas of the tract. 2 September 19, 2006 Project SL05829-1 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS It is anticipated that the existing base material will provide for non-expansive sub-base in future developments. The recommendations in this report are limited to site drainage, erosion potential, and the suitability of the existing base material. An additional. Soils Engineering Report is recommended for the proposed development to determine deeper sub-surface conditions and foundation recommendations. 7.0 ADDITIONAL GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES The recommendations contained in this report are based on a limited number of borings and on the continuity ofthe near-surface conditions encountered. It is assumed that GeoSolutions, Inc. will be retained to perform the following services: 1. Final Soils Engineering Report including addition. borings providing' .geotechnical recommendations for the proposed development. 8.0 LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS 1. The recommendations of this report are based upon the assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate from those disclosed during our study. Should any variations or undesirable conditions be encountered during the development of the Site, GeoSolutions, Inc. should be notified immediately and GeoSolutions, Inc. will provide supplemental recommendations as dictated by the field conditions. 2. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner or hislher representative to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the architect and engineer for the project, and incorporated into the project plans and specifications. The owner or hislher representative is responsible to ensure that the necessary steps are taken to see that the contractor and subcontractors carry out such recommendations in the field. 3. As of the present date, the [mdings of this report are valid for the property studied. With the passage of time, changes in the conditions of a property can occur whether they are due to natural processes or to the works of man on this or adjacent properties. Therefore, this report should not be relied upon after a period of 3 years without our review nor should it be used or is it applicable for any properties other than those studied. However many events such as floods, earthquakes, grading of the adjacent properties and building and municipal code changes could render sections of this report invalid in less than 3 years. S:\Geoteclmical\SL05829-1 Loorn.is.UeBlauw\SL05829-1 Loomis Barn, AG SER.doc 3 APPENDIX A . Field Investigation Soil Classification Chart Boring Logs FIELD INVESTIGATION The field investigation was conducted on September 13, 2006 using a Mobile B-24 drill rig. The near surface soil conditions were studied by advancing six exploratory borings. This exploration was conducted in accordance with presently accepted geotechnical engineering procedures consistent with the scope of the services authorized to GeoSolutions, Inc. The Mobile B-24 drill rig with a 4-inch diameter solid-stem continuous flight auger bored six exploratory borings near the approximate locations indicated on the Site Plan. The drilling and field observation was performed under the direction of the project engineer. A representative of GeoSolutions, Inc. maintained a log of the soil conditions and obtained soil samples suitable for visual classification. The soils were classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. See, Soil Classification Chart, Appendix A. Standard Penetration Tests with a 2-inch outside diameter standard (SPT) split tube sampler and with a 3- inch outside diameter Modified California (CA) split tube sampler were performed to obtain an indication, in the field, of the density of the soil and to allow visual observation of at least a portion of the soil column. Soil samples obtained with the split spoon sampler are retained for further observation and testing. The split spoon samples are driven by a 140-pound hammer free falling 30. inches. .The sampler is initially seated 6 inches to penetrate any loose cuttings and is then driven an additional 12'inches with the. results (N-values) recorded in the boring logs as the number of blows per foot required to'advance the sample the 12 inches. Logs of the borings showing the depths and descriptions of the soils encountered, geologic structure where applicable, penetration resistance, and results of in-place density and moisture content tests are presented in this appendix. The logs represent the interpolation of soil conditions between siunples and the results of visual classifications. The noted stratification lines represent the approximate boundaries between the surface soil types. SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART " r I"">:.,, ' ;, ~1:AJ'ok DlvisIC)NS .. ."',, : ;"tXA:o~.T9R.f's.~~s~'IFip. Ti~~~:~~.i_T#.~~, ,~.',:>~) ~,':::;-:;, GROUP',:'-'" :r~_~:~i .~~y"l~.I6.N~_ C" ,i':/:'::, ";'.,,: ,,'." ':'.: S'YMSOLS ; '; ".",;.., Cugreaterthan4 and Cz between 1 and 3 GW Well-graded gravels and gravel-sand Clean gravels (less , mixtures, little orno fines ORA VEts than S% finest) Poorly graded gravels and gravel-sand Not meeting. both criteria for OW GP mixtures, little or no fines MoretbanSO%ofcoarse AtterlJerglimitsptotbelow~A"1ineorplasticity fraction retainined on No. Grave\withfines GM 'Siltygtavels,gravel-sancl-siltmixtures 4 (4.75mm) sieve index less than 4 (more than 12% COARSE GRAlNED sons finest) Atlerberg limits plot below "A" line and plasticity GC, Clayey gravels, grave1~sand-c1aymixtures Morethm 50% retained onNo. index greater than 7 200 sieve C. greater than 6 and C1 betwCC'll 1 and 3 SW Well graded sands,gravely sands,Iittleor Clellllsand(1ess no fines SANDS than 5% fines*) Poorlygnlded sands and gravcllyand NotmcetillgbolhcritcriaforSW SP sands, little orno ftncs More than 50% of coarse Atterberg limits plot below "A" line or plasticity fraction passcsNo. 4 Sand with fines index less than 4 SM Silty sands, sand.silt mixtures (4.75nun) sieve (mo~than12% fines") Atttrberg limits plot above ~ A~ line and plasticity SC Clayeysands,sand-c1aymixtufes index greater than 7 In~rganic~i1 PI<4orplotsbelow"A"-line ML Inorganicsilts,veryfinesands,rockfTour, silty or clayey fine sands SILTS AND CLAYS Inorganic soil Inorganic clays oflow to medium (liquid limitless Ihan 50) PI> 7 and plots on or above "A" line". CL plasticity,gravellyclays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays FINE GRAINED sons Organic Soil LL (oven dried)ILL (not dried) < 0.75 OL Organic silts lInd organic snty clays oflow 50"10 or more passes No. 200 plasticity sieve Inorganic soil Plots below "A" line MH lnorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous finesandsorsilts,eJasticsilts SILTS AND CU..YS (liquid limit 50 or more) lnorganicsoil Plots on or above "A" line CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity,fttclays Organic Soil II (oven dried)ILL (not dried) < 0.75 OH Organicsiltsandorganicc1aysofhigb plasticity p", Highly Orpnic Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor PT Peat, muck and other highly organic soils .Fines are those soil particles that pass the No. 200 sieve. For gravels and sands with between 5 and 12% fines. use of dual symbols is required (le. GW.GM, OW-Ge, GP-GM, or GP-GC). **lfthe plasticity index is between 4 and 7 and it plots above ~e MAti_line, lh~ dual symbols (Ie. CL-ML) are required CLASSIFlCA nONS BASED ON PERCENTAGE OF FINES Less than 50/... Pass No. 200 (7Smrn)sieve) GW, GP, sw, SP More Ihan 12% Pass N. 200 (75 nun) sieve GM, GC. SM, SC 5%.12% Pass No. 200 (75 mm) sieve Borderline Classification requiring ~e of dual symbols . ,-,.- --.--_. . , .'c',. ..c_" '.,,'_ '.- SANDS; G'RAVELs AND' Bl.OWS/. . NON=PUSTIC SILTS FqQT ~ . .,. VERy LOOSE 0-4 LOOSE 4-10 MEDIUM DENSE 10-30 DENSE 30-5'0 VERynENSE Over 50 " I 1/ PLASTICITY CHART Forclasslf1caUrmofflne-gralnedsoilsand flnefracUOfIofcoal'$e-gr.l[nfldsofts m ,/ I I ,,- A/feroerpUmft$ploliing / V ~.U<I. betwoondotfedlfnll!rare borderlinecta~slflCafjOilS requlrfngllS8ofdualsymboIs. " 7 EquatlonoIA.Lina: Pic 0.73 (LL-20) ./ / .......D.. ---- -cCMl. - --,/ NLotOL ~ - . . ML..OL .., , 'co"'- sTiENc:ri~ CLAVSA'NDPLAs-rlC Bi.'O\\;S/ ::;~iI,:TS.----.'-'" -t~~~Q, IT, . foq(i- '" , ..' VERY SOFT 0-[/4 0-' SOFT 114--1/2 '.4 FIRM 112-1 4-' STIFF I.' 8.16. VERY STIFF '.4 16.32 HARD Over4 Ovcr32 CONSISTENCY " '" " i t 30 . RELATIVE DENSITY " o o " " " " '" LlquldLbnll " " " 00 ,~ Drilling Notes: + Number of blows of a 140-pound hammer falling 30~ inches to drive a 2~inch 0.0. (I-3/B-inch I.D.) split spoon (ASTM DI586). ++ Unconi"med compressive strength in tons/sq.ft. as determined by laboratory testing or approximated by the standard penetration test (ASTM D1586), pocket penetrometer, torvane. or visual observation. 1. Sampling and blow counts a. California Modified - number of blows per foot of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches b. Standard Penetration Test - number of blows per. 12 inches of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches Types of Samples: X-:-In-Situ 8PT - Standard Penetration CA - Catifolllia Modified N ~ Nuclear Gauge PO - Pocket Penetrometer (tons/sq.ft.) -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 GeoSolutions, Inc. BORING LOG 220 High Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 BORlNG NO. B-1 JOB NO. SL05829-1 DRILLING INFORMA nON DRILL RIG: Mobile B-24 HOLE DIAMETER: 4 Inches SAMPLING.METHOD: SPT HOLE ELEVATION: Not Recorded Boring Terminated At: 1.5 Feet PROJECT INFORMA nON PROJECT: Loomis Barn, Arroyo Grande DRILLING LOCATION: See Figure 2, Site Plan DATE DRILLED: September 13, 2006 LOGGED BY: KN: :Y: Depth of Groundwater: Not Encountered Page I of6 ~ f!:; o ,. o o (5 ~ ~ ""' '-- ,. '" ,. '" '" t:! ~ t:! '" ?S'g z;Q 0 '" z;- 0'-- ..; "'Q ;;! !::! '" ; :015. ::* 0", ~t- , 0.. t: ;:...~ ::;; ,.- ;;;~ ::;; ~ f- :0 "'f- ::;;f-- :Of- z;fS "'~ 0 S f- ~~ :oz; ~ti5 ~o t::~ 0 ;;; ::;;S >0: i;)~ ..;""' ri i=: &2 .:t !!I 0. 0 <!!I ~ Ou SOIL DESCRIPTION '" u E o . . WELL-GRADED SAND: imported base, light SW X 26 grayish brown, dry, with gravel . . SM . ':""I.' SILTY SAND: native soil, dark brown, slightly -r.:T.;-r.' -r" ", moist TT~. -j-':r.' ~2;: -I -2 -3 -4 -5 GeoSolutions, Inc.. BORING LOG 220 High Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 BORING NO. B-2 JOB NO. SL05829-1 DRILLING INFORMATION DRILL RIG: Mobile B-24 HOLE DIAMETER: 4 Inches SAMPLING METHOD: SPT HOLE ELEVATION: Not Recorded Boring Terminated At: 1.5 Feet PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT: Loomis Barn, Arroyo Grande DRILLING LOCATION: See Figure 2, Site Plan DATE DRILLED: September 13, 2006 LOGGED BY: KN ::!I!: Depth of Groundwater: Not Encountered Page 2 of6 i5 "- '" o ,.. D o is i5 :::; 'E '" " tiJ ,.. ?; '" '" ,... ~ BC;- D :2' 58. ..; --. "'=:- '" ,... o " ..., ~ It; ~ 2t;!{ "- -::! "'& ~ iil ,... C ;:...~ ~,...- ~,..- !q!;j {;1,... ;,; ~ f:j i2 ~,... ;;iE ;;1:: ;[0 ;:~ 0 u <;; ?E~ ;::!i s<IE [;j2E ..;"" ;4 :? ~ '" ..;'" 0 "-0 ;;0 Ou SOIL DESCRrPTION B o WELL-GRADED SAND: imported base, light SW X 28 grayish brown, dry. with gravel SILTY SAND: native soil,dark brown, slightly 8M ~;2: moist .y.::T., T:T.... ..;.;:-r:.,.:. ";'::T.:-r:' t~:,..:: ...;.:,-:1"": "';"::T~ T GeoSolutions, Inc. BORING LOG 220 High Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 BORING NO. B-3 JOB NO. SL05829-1 DRILLING INFORMATION DRILL RIG: Mobile B-24 HOLE DIAMETER: 4 Inches SAMPLING METHOD: SPT HOLE ELEVATION: Not Recorded Boring Terminated At: 1.5 Feet PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT: Loomis Barn, Arroyo Grande DRILLING LOCATION: See Figure 2, Site Plan DATE DRILLED: September 13, 2006 LOGGED BY: KN "'" Depth of Groundwater: Not Encountered Page 3 of6 .... E!J ,.. E!J ,.. '" '" ,.. ~ "" ,.. "".... 2:Q "", '" ;;< ,.. g'8. <( o/i "'Q ~ 0 ii! !::! Ii! ~ ~~ 0", Sf: 13 ::;;,..- i;;~ ~ SOIL DESCRIPTION i5 ::;; ;;, 5 t: >-.~ et ::0,.. ~fJ !3 ~ 0 -" ::0 ~,.. ::;;- t::'E 0 ,.. ~~ ::;;1':1 Roo Q~ - : iZ ..;>-i >-i >-i ~ ;:: "'- co f!j 68 ~o o WELL-GRADED SAND: imported base,light SW X 7 grayish brown, dry, with gravel SM . '....' SILTY SAND: native soil, dark brown, slightly ~;~. moist ~;;: t;::r.:r. ~:T;r. rr.:T.:T.. h-::T.:T. fT.:,..::T.' ':-r:; :r.'r]: ;r.-r::~ To:::-. ':1.:;-:, ':T':' . .~~:- - -I -2 -3 -4 -5 GeoSolutions, Inc. BORING LOG 220 High Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 BORING NO. B-4 JOB NO. SL05829-1 DRlLLING INFORMA nON DRlLL RlG: Mobile B-24 HOLE DIAMETER: 4 Inches SAMPLING METHOD: SPT HOLE ELEVATION: Not Recorded Boring Terminated At: 1.5 Feet PROJECT INFORMA nON PROJECT: Loomis Barn, Arroyo Grande DRlLLING LOCA nON: See Figure 2, Site Plan DATE DRlLLED: September 13, 2006 LOGGED BY: KN "'" Depth of Groundwater: Not Encountered Page 4 of6 is Ii; o ;,.. o o cf g " ... ;,.. '" ;,.. '" Iii. I!! ~ '" Za 6:::;- 0 '" ",' ,... 0'" .; "'G- O:! !::! f{3 ; ",8. $~ ;;;E:B "'& i;\ t; :;..: ;;: ;,..' me ;;: :< ,... i2 "'. ;;: ,.... "',... "'fJ ~ d .~ ~fE ~r;; ;{o t::~ 0 " ?Ei ;::~ ><20 f;)~ .;" oJ 0 ~ '" ~;g 0. 0 0.0 Ou SOIL DESCRIPTION IJ !:J o WELL-GRADED SAND: imported base,light SW X 15 grayish brown, dry, with gravel . . SILTY SAND: native soil, dark brown, slightly SM ~S;: moist r::-r.:T. r:;~' i-=TT:' i-=T' r" r" r" r" r" ,0. . .1 .2 -3 -4 .5 GeoSolutions, Inc. BORING LOG 220 High Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 BORING NO. B-S JOB NO. SLOS829-1 DRILLING INFORMATION DRILL RIG: Mobile B-24 HOLE DIAMETER: 4 Inches SAMPLING METHOD: SPT HOLE ELEVATION: Not Recorded Boring Terminated At: 1.5 Feet PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT: . Loomis Barn, Arroyo Grande DRILLING LOCATION: See Figure 2, Site Plan DATE DRILLED: September 13, 2006 LOGGED BY: KN ~ Depth of Groundwater: Not Encountered Page 5 of6 is ~ ,. " o ..., o is :::; '- ,. '" ,. '" r;J t:! " '" ~'t; 5Q " '" :z;' '" g'g '" "'Go ;;! !::! '" if ~~ 0. ~!:!. "'e" ft 0- f::: >-~ ~!io' ~>; ff2fJ t2", ;;; '" i2 "'i- ~~ E~ ~ '" ;t~ ~Q 0 i] ~ ~ff2 ;;;~ ><:z; fJ~ ","" ~ ~ '" i:: ;~ Q 68 SOIL DESCRIPTION i3 !3 o WELL-GRADED SAND: imported base, light SW X 11 grayish brown, dry, with gravel . . <> . . , SM . ',' SILTY SAND: native soil, dark brown, slightly " " moist " TT :2;' " ,T " ':-r.T ':-r,:T . ,I -2 .3 -4 .5 GeoSolutions, Inc. BORING LOG 220 High Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 BORING NO. B-6 JOB NO. SL05829-1 DRILLING INFORMATION DRILL RIG: Mobile B-24 HOLE DIAMETER: 4 Inches SAMPLING METHOD: SPT HOLE ELEVATION: Not Recorded PROJECT INFORMATION 'PROJECT: Loomis Barn, Arroyo Grande DRILLING LOCATION: See Figure 2, Site Plan DATE DRILLED: September 13, 2006 LOGGED BY: KN ~ Depth of Groundwater:' Not Encountered Boring Terminated At: 1.5 Feet Page 6 of6 'Pi rg >- til >- ~ "" '" g'g, ~~ " '" :Z;' ~'g, .; ""~ i::J::-- S:! !::! It! ~ ::~ ......fg fZ"" ~ t: ;:... ~ ~ 'i' ~ >-' ~f;'j '" ;:,; g OJ "'" ",. "'- 0 6 '" 2E@ ;:';{:';1 ~F;) ;:;;0 t::;g 2 ><:z; Gj:E -.i ;:: ~!!! .;-' co 0 !!! 0.6 0. 00 ~ & >- " o 15 ~ - -.i SOIL DESCRIPTION () :g o WELL-GRADED SAND: imported base, light SW X 12 grayish brown, dry, with gravel .. . .. . ... . ...... .. . SILTY SAND: native soil, dark brown, slightly SM !-:-=T'" fi-TT moist h-TT h-TT h-TT h-';' h-T~. 1-:-' ". h-T~. .;;: ,I ,2 ,3 -4 ,5 ATTACHMENT 12 I , , Detention Basin Analysis City of Arroyo Grande June 28, 2006 WALlACE GROUP A California Corporation 4115 Broad Street, Suite B-5 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 T 805-544-4011 F 805-544-4294 Job Number 0232-0506 CERTIFICATION Preparation of this report included efforts by the following persons: In accordance with the provisions of Section 6700 of the Business and Professions Code of the State of California, this report was prepared by or under the direction of the following Civil Engineer, licensed in the State of California: ENGINEER IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE: 4~ Cheryl A. enhardt, PE 65306 (Expires 9/30/07) Civil Engineer ltlz:1> 0(, Date WG 0232.0506 City of Arroyo Grande Detention Basin Analysis June 28, 2006 DETENTION BASIN ANALYSIS TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................... 2 PURPOSE .............................................................................................................................................. 3 EXISTING POLICiES............................................................................................................................. 3 EXISTING FLOOD CONTROL STRATEGIES...................................................................................... 4 SCOPE OF STUDY ............................................................................................................................... 5 REPRESENTATIVE STORMS...............................~................................................................................... 6 LOPEZ DAM INFLUENCE .............. ..... ....:.................... ....... ..... ...................................................... ........ ... 6 LOCATION ........ ...................................... ......................................................................... ..................... 6 DEVELOPMENT .................. ... ..................... ........................................................................................... 6 CHANGE IN IMPERVIOUSNESS ..... .............................. ...................... ............................................ .... .... ... 7 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS.......................................................................................................................... 7 TIME OF CONCENTRATIONS........... ............ ......................... ..... .............................................................. 7 DETENTION BASIN SIZING ........................................................................................... .......................... 7 HYDROLOGIC MODEL......................................................................................................................... 7 EVALUATION CRITERIA....;...........:..................:.................................................................................. 8 RESUL TS............................................................................................................................................... 8 LOPEZ RESERVOIR INFlUENCE...... ...... .......................................................................................... ... ..... 8 PEAK FLOW RATES OF DETENTION BASINS VS MAIN CHANNEL .................................................................. 8 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS.......................................................................................................................... 8 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................... ......... ....... ..................................... ..... 8 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1- THEORETICAL DETENTION BASIN LOCATIONS........................................................................... 6 LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1 - EXISTING FLOOD CONTROL STRATEGIES3.................................................................................. 4 TABLE 2 -SCENARIOS EVALUATED .... ........... .................. ... ..................................................................... ... 5 APPENDICES A MAPS B LIST OF REFERENCES C SUMMARY TABLE OF MODEL RUN RESULTS D ApPLICABLE CITY CODES E MODEL PARAMETER EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Detention andlor retention facilities are already required in two of the three Flood Management Zones identified in the City of Arroyo Grande Drainage Master Plan. This study analyzed the potential benefit of installing on-site detention facilities in the remaining flood management zone-Zone B. It was found that: . In some situations storm water detention basins can increase flooding potential in Arroyo Grande Creek. This is related to the timing of the peak flow in the creek. It takes approximately 3.5 hours for the creek to reach its highest stage in the area along the City limits, following a peak rain event. With the City located so close to the creek, and so' near to the" outlet at the ocean, it can be detrimental to hold "runoff back and release it over time (where it can coincide with the delayed peak stage in the main creek). · Modeling of typical development sites within the City of Arroyo Grande Drainage Zone B, and with development runoff detained in accordance with San Luis Obispo County 50/2 detention policy showed the following effects: o The effect of individual basins on the flooding potential in the Arroyo Grande Creek ranges from generally ineffective, to actually making the flood potential in " the creek worse. Modeling shows that peak runoff rates leaving a development site are decreased, but in many cases the ultimate peak runoff rates in Arroyo Grande Creek were increased. o If Lopez Reservoir is not overtopping, detention basins within Zone B increased the flooding potential of downstream properties for two-thirds of the storm event 1 development size scenarios analyzed. o The presence of detention basins within Zone B provided mixed results. Some basins had a marginally beneficial impact on peak flows in Arroyo Grande Creek, and some had a marginally detrimental impact. In most cases, the highest peak runoff from the detained developed site was conveyed through the main downstream channel prior to peak flood stage in the main channel. Within the city limits, it is not recommended that a uniform policy be adopted to require all new individual developments to construct and maintain detention basins at their site if the proposed developed is located in Zone B. Detention facilities should only be required where they are shown to be beneficial by hydrologic, hydraulic and cost analysis. The detention basins evaluated in this study differ from the off-channel flood storage areas (Alternative 5) and the tributary peak detention basin (Alternative 6) concepts proposed by Swanson in their January 2006 Arroyo Grande Creek Erosion, Sedimentation and Alternatives Study'. Swanson's basins were regional in nature while the detention concepts evaluated in this report are more local in nature. Other issues related to storm water quality such as sedimentation control and control of runoff contaminants are not a part of this study. Regional basins serving large watersheds that require a significant duration to reach peak stage could have a beneficial affect at reducing creek flooding risk but were outside the scope of this study. WG 0232.0506 City of Arroyo Grande Detention Basin Analysis . June 28, 2006 Page 2 of 8 PURPOSE The City of Arroyo Grande is evaluating how to better prevent storm water pollution, erosion and siltation, improve riparian habitat conversation and refine creek setback and development policies and standards in the City's watershed areas. The intent is not only to better manage the creek areas within the City, but also to prevent negative impacts downstream from erosion and unnecessary storm water runoff. (City Newsletter: Stagecoach Express (Volume 13, Number 1, May 2006) The city currently requires the installation of storm water detention or retention basins for all developments located in Zones A or C as identified in the Basin Management Zone map in Appendix A. However, theci.ment policy only requiresdelielopments located in Zone B to provide a detention basin where the incremental increase in runoff created by the development substantially changes, concentrates or increases the natural flow of surface water onto adjacent property, and no adequate outlet is available or easement has been made for drainage purposes across the affected property. This report evaluates the feasibility of site specific local detention basins at reducing the risk of flooding to neighboring and downstream properties for all developments proposed within in Zone B. It does not evaluate the potential of regional detention basins to achieve the same goals. Regional detention basins typically are larger in scale, and are owned and maintained by a public entity. While local detention basins are often privately owned and typically only serve a single site. EXISTING POLICIES All proposed development within the City of Arroyo Grande City Limits must adhere to applicable City codes2. There are several codes that related to storm water runoff. . Per paragraph 13F1 of Section 13.24.060 "Permit application, plans, specifications and reports required" of Municipal Code 13.24 "Excavation, Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control", the city requires that pre and post development hydrological calculations for the 10 and 100 year storm frequencies be calculated by a civil engineer and provided in preliminary civil engineering report. . Section 13.24.120 "Design standards for drainages and terraces" requires that all 'site development have no adverse impacts on adjacent and downstream locations. If adverse impacts are identified, off-site erosion, sediment and flood control improvement to the drainage way will be required to eliminate the adverse impacts. Paragraph A of the same section goes on to require that adverse impacts of runoff and sediment may be managed through a combination of storage, infiltration, and controlled released of storm water runoff. The developer must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the building official that the cumulative effects of the tributary flows will not have an adverse effect upon ultimate peak discharge through a channel due to modifications to the channel resulting from detention. . Paragraph A3 of Section 16.68.030 "Flood control and drainage" allows the City Engineer to prohibit the use of streets for flood control and drainage purposes where not in the interest of public health, safety and welfare. WG 0232.0506 City of Arroyo Grande Detention Basin Analysis June 28, 2006 Page 3 of 8 . Subparagraph iii of paragraph 2e of Section 16.68.030 "Flood control and drainage" requires the subdivider or developer provide on-site retention facilities for the incremental increase in runoff which will be created by the subdivision or development for all subdivisions or other residential, commercial or industrial development substantially changes, concentrates or increases the natural flow of surface water onto adjacent property and no adequate outlet is available or easement has been made for drainage purposes across the affected property. . Maintain consistency with the City of Arroyo Grande Drainage Master Plan3 (see Existing Flood Control Strategies section of this report). Additional requirements are placed on proposed developments within the Floodplain Management District. The floodplain management district covers areas of special flood hazard identified by the Federal Insurance Administration of the Federal Emergency,. Management Agency (FEMA) in the Flood Insurance Study (FIS) data March 19, 1984 and accompanying Flood Insurance Rate maps (FIRMs) and Flood Boundary and Floodway Maps (FBFMs) dated September 19,1984, and all subsequent amendments and lor revision. Per paragraph 03, subsection Hi of Municipal Code Section 16.44.050 "Floodplain Management District", the proposed development will not be approved unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Floodplain Administrator that it: . . Is safe from flooding . does not adversely affect the carrying capacity of areas where base flood elevations have been determined but a floodway has not been designated. ("Adversely affects" means that the cumulative effect of the proposed development when combined with all other existing and anticipated development will increase the water surface elevation of the base flood more than one foot at any point.) " Acopy of the latest available FIRM map is provided in appendix A. EXISTING FLOOD CONTROL STRATEGIES For flood control purposes, the City divides itself into three zones': The three zones have three different strategies which are summarized in the table below: Table 1 - Existing Flood Control Strategies' . ,ZoNE' ,.,;.~t~iJ~~Xc:.". , ,'" Retain runoff on-site or in regional infiltration basins . ~ . ~ ,'; .~. Southwest 'A' Northeast 'B' Send runoff directly to creek as quickly as possible unless a site specific study indicates otherwise Detention basins that discharge post-development runoff and pre-developed runoff rates. Northwest 'C' A map indicating the area covered of each of the zones is provided in the appendix. Due to the sandy soil types associated with Southwest 'A' zone, this zone utilizes infiltration (retention) basins and pumping operations to manage storm water. WG 0232.0506 City of Arroyo Grande Detention Basin Analysis June 28, 2006 Page 4 of 8 The Northeast 'B' zone consists primarily of clayey soils that were previously determined to not be suitable for infiltration basins. Watershed areas in this zone generally drain toward neighboring creeks. The area creeks, particularlY.T.?lIy Ho and Arroyo Grande Creeks, do not have excess capacity to accommodate increased peak flows. Therefore the drainage strategy for this area currently is not to limit or reduce the peak flow in the creeks unless detention is warranted to keep from overwhelming adjacent properties or storm drain facilities. The use of detention basins is avoided within Zone B (except when a site specific study indicates a benefit to downstream area) and that runoff be conveyed directly to the creeks through storm drains or other facilities. The Northwest 'C' zone watershed generally drains to Meadow Creek and toward neighboring cities. Because of capacity limitations downstream, it is recommended that peak storm flows not exceeding existing levels as development occurs. This can be achieved with detention basins. Lopez reservoir provides significant flood control benefits to Arroyo Grande Creek and therefore to'the City of Arroyo Grande. This benefit is less pronounced when the basin in full and able to pass peak flows attenuated only by the spillway. Flows currently being released from the reservoir serve to maintain water levels at a low elevation in Arroyo Grande Creek and therefore provide significant flood protection for low-lying properties along Arroyo Grande Creek. SCOPE OF STUDY This section provides a narrative of the individual study components chosen for use in the study. Individual study components addressed in this section include: . Representative storms · Change in Imperviousness . Location of theoretical development . Influence of Lopez dam . Size of theoretical development · Cumulative effect A summary of the scenarios evaluated in this study is provided in table 2. The peak flows and time of concentrations for each scenario will be analyzed at the theoretical development site and at the point of convergence in either Los Berros Creek or Arroyo Grande Creek. Table 2 -Scenarios Evaluated . .' l. '.; 2 '.$tO~M'" .:..', .',~0~E-or;~I~V~t;;i>~j~ ;~;~,~};~t!:~~t~l~f~~~f.~~~~~t*~(~~:ti~~@Ifti;<o ., ,:.~- _ _ _ ",,' ,,,,,:,:~,,,:,~:.,:.t:";'~W"F-:',?:,." _ _ ''0''-'' ': .-,.,>,.0 .;-.. '.'j'.::..}'2~ ~'j;'~:-:E:-'DAM>"\:; ';'..:"',~":-' _ >'<'i:'-,~,~;:\.!": '... - ;:.O.M1-;" :No .DAM SPILl. ';;.PANiSpiLv ; NO. DAM SPI!-L'.: :u:;.."....j.?".; .NoDMlcS.PILl, .... co,,,.' ,'. .. "f ,.., '.... . ....f.~.. '. .... :...., . ....,":. .SPIL!-.. ..,......,. ....... '.' ..,SPILl'" 100 x X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 5 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 10 20 50 X X WG 0232.0506 City of Arroyo Grande Detent!on Basin Analysis June 28, 2006 Page 5 of 8 Representative Storms Each scenario was analyzed using the 2,5,10,20,50 and 100 year storms. The 2-year storm peak flow rate from the site is necessary to establish the proposed detention basin discharge rate. The 1 O-year storm was chosen because that is the return storm where the water surface elevation is just below the levee elevations at certain key levee locations and above the levees between Highway 1 and the lagoon'. The 5, 20, 50 and 100-year storms were selected to document the anticipated change in the peak flow rate for each of those recurrence intervals. Lopez Dam Influence Lopez reservoir provides significant flood control benefits to Arroyo Grande Creek and therefore to the City of Arroyo Grande. The benefit is less pronounced when the basin is full and able to pass peak flows attenuated only by the spillway. To fully gage the performance of detention basins in Zone B, each scenario combination was analyzed twice-~ once ass.uming that the Lopez Dam was not spilling and the other assuming that it was. Location Since Zone A and C already recommend the use of retention or detention basins, the effort to analyze the value of requiring detention basins was. limited to development that is proposed within the Northeast Zone-- Zone B. The two locations shown on the adjacent map were chosen as theoretical development locations. They represent development in the upper and middle areas of Zone B (the only area where detention basins are not already required by City Code). T ....... v Figure 1 - Theoretical Detention Basin Locations Development The approach consisted of looking at pre and post development runoff of two different sized developments (5 acre and 15 acre) located within two different areas of Zone B. WG 0232.0506 City of Arroyo Grande Detention Basin Analysis June 28, 2006 Page 6 of 8 Change in Imperviousness Pre-developed impervious rates remained unchanged from Swanson assigned rates. Post- development rates were set to 70% to represent commercial development typical site characteristics. Cumulative Effects Data generated in this analysis will be examined for potential cumulative effects. Time of Concentrations A minimum of ten minutes was used as a time of concentration. Pre-developed times of concentration were longer than post-developed time of concentrations. Detention Basin Sizing. The detention basin was sized in accordance with San Luis Obispo County's 50/2 detention basin policy. The 50/2 policy is to detain the post-developed 50-year storm return runoff and release it at the 2-year pre-developed storm runoff rate. The 50/2 policy was chosen to be consistent with existing San Luis Obispo County detention policy. HYDROLOGIC MODEL Hydrologic calibrated data previously developed by the Army Corps of Engineer, was. entered into a HEC-HMS, Version 3.0.1 model recently developed and calibrated by Swanson Hydrology and Geomorphology in support of their "Arroyo Grande Creek Erosion, Sedimentation and Flooding Alternatives Study." The model was used to establish storm precipitation and existing basin characteristics and uses the initial and constant loss method. The following steps were taken for each storm return and proposed development site evaluated: 1. Load and run original Swanson Hydrology + Geomorphology Model. Verify output of sub basins is consistent with Swanson Report. Document the pre-developed peak flow and time to reach peak flow for the sub basins altered and the reach of Arroyo Grande's creek affected by a proposed development. 2. Break proposed development sub basin into two sub basins: one sub basin was set to the size of the theoretical development and the other to the net remaining area of the original sub basin. Rerun the model and verify that the output is consistent with Swanson Report and previous runs. Document the pre-developed peak flow and time to reach peak flow for the sub basins to be altered. 3. Change the percent impervious and time of concentration of the proposed development sub basin to represent the percent impervious consistent with a commercially developed site. Rerun the model. Document the pre-developed peak flow and time to reach peak flow for the sub basins altered and the reach of Arroyo Grande's creek affected by a proposed development. 4. Create a detention basin between the proposed development sub basin and the junction connecting the proposed development sub basin to the .net area sub basin. Document the pre-developed peak flow and time to reach peak flow for the sub basins altered and the reach of Arroyo Grande's creek affected by a proposed development. WG 0232.0506 City of Arroyo Grande Detention Basin Analysis June 28, 2006 Page 7 of 8 EVALUATION CRITERIA To evaluate the effectiveness of detention basins in reducing the flood risk of Arroyo Grande and their downstream neighbors, the following post-development parameters will be compared and contrasted with the pre-existing counterparts: . Peak flow rate . Time of Concentration The effects are looked at both within the basin the development is simulated in and as carried over to the creek downstream of the development since the basis for the proposed requirement to install detention basins is to reduce flooding risks to downstream properties. The response at Arroyo Grande Creek will be evaluated over a range of storms. Other criteria such as water quality, runoff velocities and depth or the capacity of existing storm water facilities were not analyzed as part of this study. RESULTS Detention facilities should only be required where they are shown to be beneficial by hydrologic, hydraulic and cost analysis. Lopez Reservoir Influence Detention basins within Zone B are slightly more beneficial if Lopez Reservoir is overtopped than when it is not. Peak flow rates of detention basins vs main channel Risk of flooding at downstream locations was increased due to the presence of a detention basin in half of all the scenarios evaluated. Detention basins were most ineffective when the basin peak discharge rates were achieved before main channel peak discharge rate was realized. Development runoff detained in accordance with San Luis Obispo County 50/2 detention policy decreased the peak runoff rates leaving the development site but increased the ultimate peak runoff rates in Arroyo Grande Creek. Cumulative Effects There were no conclusive trends (development size, basin size, storm return, etc) identified that could be applied broadly across the area studied. Recommendations 'It is not recommended that a uniform policy be adopted to require all new individual developments to construct and maintain detention basins at their site. However, it is recommended that all new developments demonstrate the benefit, or lack thereof, of utilizing detention basins to reduce post development peak runoff rates to that of the pre- developed site runoff rates. WG 0232.0506 City of Arroyo Grande Detention Basin Analysis June 28, 2006 Page 8 of 8 APPENDIX A Exhibits & Maps ~ ~ il J 1J ~ ., N i ~ c<) .r ~ .... ~ ~ '" .! .~ '" Ii) - .~ ~ Q ~ .. -4 ~ ! ~ .. ~ .... 11 ~ Q 0 ~ [ '\- . ~ ~ oIi:l ~ ~, 8 ." ~ ~ ! \t . ~~~ en l' r;o? ...i :"'l"" 1l .!; ~ j ] t.; ~ .9 e. a ~ i'~ ~ c:l U ~ &-4 ..8 bO .E gB:ij .iJ "dl1 ~ .sQ~ ~ -< Ii:l (j ~ ~ ~ 000 NNN \ L co co (!).,.: \, " \ It) ~ It) _N I"- ~ -,CO ~\_----\' ) ~, ------/ '---- .--"-,--, ,.:"--' ---- ., ~/ u :-r :J co ~ ~Ol \ '''-. { \c:-/ (i " "- "-,. \., \ ) ( '" ... co ": ..JCO co a: ___-- ,() -----., " '- "-.-' ......_-, '........,"..w-; ,.....- _""00"_"'" 1oCrOoo"".....u"'....i e_......u......,... LeQend Concentration Point SUl)-B$s;n' . Sl' b ..' Deslgnc:ltiO'1 .I0~ as!r1 Area (sq. ~i) "U o ~ . N Arroyo Grand C e reek " ~ ~ O~ ~" ~ ~. an P1o. ~" n"U ~~ ::lil ~ ~n "Z -a n- ~z n n " ~ .........IIr_".... ~5; >15 ...-< ~,o "'''' n" ?O~ ~.~ '" n. ~" "O~ ~ @ L 6.78 , "" (..../ .. .....--.." \ .,.-'. , . it C F -.,\ \. '1'~ 9.80r ' 17..15 '. ,) \1;( f ~ \' 1\' " \ J ,r. \. <"')! i-/ ~ ."...f Ji ;i / ;.j.i". \) )'.,'/ ~a8 ;t-,"" .,;.lI".':t""'/-". @ .:&L @ 'eu"'lYU" _u;" '6' \.. '" \' . ''''''''"H \ ~....f i J?..:..49' . ".... \CP6 F ! ':, -, (.,..~.."", "-'j \. . .~,,,,~. ~ ", " I . ,-' .1 (' .'1 \.,. '> ;/ 25.6@. 1"" ....~\.. \..... ; ..'~ ' / ...,./ ,/ ....,... ""~.~.....- '"\ .. ',_ .' . "v-'-..,......... \ f ,- /'~ r-. :---../ ~-~ r~-t:9 '\""1;'''' -,- " I '-'_ ,~_._.., \ 3.79 'r I ..,/ '~{' to-J ' ,i K Yn~ f''\.. . ..-r...... ,9~ t~1 " 0 '" , ,_ ~ It.0J' \ 6-1 V'" : \,. \ ., ..r-.. {.f '..., j .. . }.. ,,/ ...t . ? ' ,. \ ~ ...._F \..lD l"'~ to-J ..j /' r"'''' " ../ A:;' '\"''6' /. ' ..... -,.,,'/ .., ."..... / "..' 1.-1'/;' '. J ,,~ . ) ffi 4.3' @ ""'..I R~ , "N26 t " .; \ \ @ @ ~ E 11.25 N i I ~ I ! I 'j o ~ ~" .~.~ o ",.:0 c:~ Vi~ o.::c: ~....c ~~ oJ" nO 0'" c:~ ~> ~" ~ ",'" ~< :0'" m- ~'" l'i Scale : Mi les . I , I > I ., I , I z ~ ~ o z .... C/) Ww 3::z :r:o b:N o z "'ft. ~ J, . ;,. ,:\ *~ ,\\\ :1 \~'~"'~;', -.,...."':1:, ..,\ . .'.... ....C/) {<!W ",WZ . 'J:'\~Jl2 .<, , .:~ ! ,. '~,I ;,'i "" r: " ., :1 / ,j- 00/" "'ie". .... C/) Ww ~B ....N ~,., ','0: C/) .'\' \'.\'~' " l~. I ' !.I. .~: .::i~~:;..:.;:: "1 Ii! ~ ~ ~ '" w c ! ~ ~ '" <( ::; W Z -0 N I ~ h ~ II I ~ ?, .. ~ .. '~ ~ VI ... ~ " Q 'G ~ ~ 1: . ~ J .... ~ ~ t , ~ ~ ,., ~ , .. "- ~ X ~ Q ~'t 'i' .'1) ~ .., .. :.t ... - ~ ~ ~ . r 1- :;: E <> .. ~ N ~ ~ VI :!. ~ 'I <<0 ", . , j \.t n ...~ ~ -g ~ . "3- I..t ~d: III ( .~~ ~ . I&l:a \l t ~ 1l.;Ii ~ I I ::lllj ~ ~ I ~ :t iil ~. :I t.~ I I III :5 ... li.' :I. l;l I ~ ' I' Clll.iil I: ..." '" f -1- 1 } );...::1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ! f 2~Q ~ it! [~~ ~ ~ p [~ ~g:s !"'JH ~~~ i it t I if If i U if i I Ii ! i Ii 1111 i It! I &~~\~IIID~III~DDD~~III~.m~l~rnD~rnDrn I L. . .1 i I , ~ , , I APPENDIX B References Arroyo Grande Creek Erosion, Sedimentation and Flooding Alternatives Study for Coastal San Luis Resource Conservation District, Swanson Hydrology + Geomorphology, January 4,2006 2 City of Arroyo Grande Development Code, Adopted by Arroyo Grande City Council, May 1991 9-09 9-15 Special Districts Improvements City of Arroyo Municipal Code, Adopted by Arroyo Grande City Council, November 22, 2005 Title 8 - Obstruction of Streams, Drainage Channels and Watercourse Title 13 Excavation, grading, erosion and sediment control Title 16 Development Code Section 16.44 Special Districts Section 16.68.030 Flood Control and drainage FEMA Flood Insurance Study, City of Arroyo Grande, California, March 19, 1984 3 City of Arroyo Grande Drainage Master Plan 4 ACOE Flood Hazard Mitigation Plan Report, City of Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo County, California, January 1999. APPENDIX C Model Runs ~ ~ .. < " < ii .. < .. ~ . >; c h i ~ . ~ ., . . . , . . . . . - - . . . ,. II i ~~ . , :; . . . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ . , , " " . I Ii l . . :; : . . - " " - - - - - - - - - - f i. !l . " ! . . ji " . " . " " - - - - . . . " " " - , 'i l . " " ~ ~ ;; : - Ij . " " " - - - " - - I. ., l . : :; 5 ~ . p " " . - . . . " " " - - . h H " " " " " " " " " i! i! - " " " i! i! - I- n ! . " . ~ . . s ! ~ . ii 8 ~ ~ . . g 8 a ~ .. ~ ! ;; . " - . . . - i h h " " " . " " i! i! " i! i! " " " - " " - i I- I .. i 8 . . . . . . l' ! ~ 5 ~ * ~ ~ . ~ . ~ 8 ~ ~ . . ;; . . . - } h " " " " " " " " " i! i! g . . " i! i! - I' , i 1 : . . " . . 0 " ! g . -. il . ! " . ~ ~ " . !! ~ . s . . . - a . " - , h . . . Ii ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ . . . , I_ - - - . .. i . . . 0 . . !- . . ! . " ~ - !! . ! ~ ~ " ~ . g " ~ - . f . h H - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . . . - ~ ~ . . . i I' .. f . " " . . . ! I' ! g . - - :; ~ . ;: ~ . a g ~ - ~ , h - - ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ . . . - ~ ~ . . . i I- j ! ~ . . . ~ " ~ ~ ~ ~ ;j a ! . . - . . - " . - h ~ g ~ - - - i! " . . . . " " " ~ ~ ~ ~ I , " ; :; " " ;; . " ! . " " " " " - - " " - - B'I . . . 0 jil . . . . . " " " - . . . . . . . h h . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I_ .. . l' . . . . 0 " . . . . . . . . , . ! " - - - - - - , it . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I- -- . . " . . li c '" - - . . . . . . c - - . " l! ~ . . . . " ~ . . . . " ~ . . . . " _ ! , . . . . . . " - " 0 - - - - - - - - . . l - - - - - - " " " " " " N " N N N N Ii l!(~ l' i , ! i' .1 . . !I .' is APPENDIX 0 Applicable City Codes Chapter 13.24 EXCAVATION, GRADING, EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL Page 1 of 16 Title 13 PUBLIC WORKS Chapter 13.24 EXCAVATION, GRADING, EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL 13.24.010 Puroose. 13.24.020 Scooe. 13.24.030 Permits reauired. , 13.24.040 Hazards. 13.24.050 Definitions. 13.24.060 Permit application. plans. specifications and reports reauired. 13.24.070 Fees. 13.24.080 Bonds and securities. 13.24.090 Desian standards for cuts and excavations. 13.24.100 Fills. 13.24.110 Desian standards for cut and fill setbacks. 13.24.120 Desian standards for drainaae and terraces. 13.24.130 Desian standards for erosion and sediment control. 13.24.140 Inspections and compliance. 13.24.010 Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to safeguard life, limb and property, water quality, safety and the public welfare by regulating and controlling grading, clearing and erosiOn on private property. (Ord. 537 ~ 1 (part), 2003: prior code ~ 7-1.01) 13.24.020 Scope. This chapter sets forth rules, regulations and minimum standards to control e,xcavation, grading, erosion and sediment; requires control of all existing and potential conditions of accelerated erosion; establishes administrative procedures for issuance of permits; and provides for approval of plans and inspections during construction and maintenance. All activities subject to subdivision map requirements and/or building permits shall meet these standards. (Ord. 537 ~ 1 (part), 2003: prior code ~ 7-1.02) 13.24.030 Permits required. No person shall do any land disturbance work without first obtaining a permit from the building http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_DAT A/TITLE 13/Chapter _13 _24_ EXC... 6/2/2006 Chapter 13.24 EXCAVATION, GRADING, EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL Page 2 of 16 official except as follows: A. Isolated area: grading in an isolated, self-contained area if there is no danger to private or public property; B. Emergency work: work necessary to preserve life or property; provided, however, that when emergency work is performed under this section, the person performing it shall report the pertinent facts relating to the work to the building official within fifteen (15) days after commencement of the work and shall thereafter obtain a permit pursuant to Section 13.24.060 and perform such work as may be determined by the building official to be reasonably necessary to correct any erosion or conditions with a potential to cause erosion as a result of the emergency work; . C. Excavation: an excavation which does not exceed one hundred (100) cubic yards and is less than two feet in depth, does not create a cut slope higher than five feet and steeper than two to one (2:1) (see Figure2 in Section 13.24.110); D. Fill: a fill contairiing 'only permitted matenals less than one-foot deep, placed on natural terrain slope flatter than five to one (5:1), does nor exceed fifty (50) cubic yards on anyone site, including stockpiles, does not alter or obstruct a drainage course, will not be used for structural support or roadways and the area graded or filled does not exceed eleven thousand (11,000) square feet (one-quarter acre). This exemption shall not apply to a fill within a npanan zone; E. Basements and footings: an excavation below finished grade for basements and footings of a building, retaining wall or other structure authonzed by a valid building permit. This shall not exempt any fill except as provided under subsection D of this section, made with the matenal from such excavation or exempt any excavation having an unsupported height greater than five feet after the completion of such structures; F. Cemetenes: cemetery graves; G. Refuse disposal: refuse, individual and/or community sewage disposal sites controlled pursuant to other regulations; H. Walls and utilities: excavations for wells, tunnels or utilities; I. Exploratory investigations: excavations under the direction of a soils engineer or engineenng geologist where such excavation is to be returned to the onginal condition within forty-five (45) days after the start of work; J. Cleanng an area of eleven thousand (11,000) square feet (one-quarter acre) or less on five percent slopes or less; K. Agricultural: normal routine farming activities necessary to manage land, crops and/or animals for food production; L. Mining, quarrying, excavating, processing, stOCkpiling of rock, sand, gravel, aggregate or clay where established and provided for by law, provided such operations are conditioned by other permits to preclude discharge of sediments offsite and provided such operations do not affect the lateral support or increase the stresses or pressure upon any adjacent or contiguous property. (Ord. 537 S 1 (part), 2003: prior code S 7-1.03) 13.24.040 Hazards. A. General. No person shall cause or allow the persistence of a condition on any site that could cause accelerated erosion. Accelerated erosion shall be controlled and/or prevented by the responsible person or the property owner by using practices outlined hereinafter as applicable. Additional measures may be necessary, and may be specifically required by the building official when work is on geological unstable areas, thirty (30) percent or steeper slopes, and/or on soils with a severe erosion hazard rating by a USDA Soil Survey. Soil sterilants that last longer than four weeks shall not be used on soils or slopes which may subsequently need vegetation for erosion and sediment control. Where feasible, erosion hazard problems shall be controlled no later than the beginning of the next winter or adverse season. B. Hazardous Conditions. Whenever the building official determines that any existing excavation or embankment or cut or fill on private property has become a hazard to life and limb, or http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_DAT AlTITLE 13/Chapter _13_24_ EXC... 6/2/2006 Chapter 13.24 EXCAVATION, GRADING, EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL Page 3 of 16 endangers property, or adversely affects the safety, use or stability of a public way, drainage channel or causes significant impact on .the natural resources of the area, the owner of the property upon which the excavation, cut or fill is located, or other person or agent in control of the property, upon receipt of notice in writing from the building official shall, within the period specified therein, repair or eliminate such hazard and conform with the requirements of this chapter. No permits of any kind shall be issued if the building official determines that proposed construction work is hazardous to the extent described above, or the work is subject to a major fiood hazard dangerous to life or property, and which hazard cannot be eliminated, prevented, or corrected. (Ord. 537 ~ 1 (part), 2003: prior code ~ 7-1.04) 13.24.050 Definitions. When used in this chapter, the definitions listed hereunder shall have the meanings as specified in this section: "Accelerated erosion" means rapid erosion caused by human-induced alteration of the vegetation, land surface topography or runoff patterns. Evidence of accelerated erosion is indicated by exposed soils, active gullies, tills, sediment deposits, or slope failures caused by human activities, including grazing promoted by human activities. "Access and building envelope" means a delineated area within which all land disturbances for construction of access and/or building will be confined. .. "Applicant" means any person, corporation, partnership, association of any type, public agency or . any other legal entity who submits an application to the building official for a permit pursuant to this chapter. "Approval" means a written engineering or geological opinion concerning the progress and completion of the work. "As-grade" is the surface conditions extent on completion of grading. "Bedrock" means in-place, solid rock. "Bench" means a relatively level step excavated into earth material on which fill is to be placed. "Best Management Practices (BMPs)" are practices, means, methods, measures, devices, structures, vegetative plantings and/or a combination thereof designed to safely control erosion and sediment so that construction wastes or contaminants from construction materials, tools and equipment are prevented from entering the storm drain system. "Building official' means the officer or other designated authority charged with the administration and enforcement of this code, or a duly authorized representative. For purposes of this section, the building official shall be the director of public works. 'Borrow" means earth material acquired from an off-site or other on-site location for use in grading on a site. "Clearing" means the removal or vegetation and debris down to bare soil by any method. "Civil engineer" means a professional engineer registered in the state to practice in the field of civil works. "Civil engineering' means the application of the knowledge of the forces of nature, principles of mechanics and the properties of materials to the evaluation, design and construction of civil works. "Compaction" means the densification of earth and solids or a fill by mechanical means. 'Development permit' means a permit issued for new land use activities, building, grading, land clearing, subdivision, planned unit development, and/or other project approval process. administered by the city. "Drainage course" mean a well defined, natural or man-made channel which conveys storm water runoff either year-round or intermittently. "Earth material' means any rock, natural soil or fill and/or any combination thereof. "Engineering geologist" means a geologist experienced and knowledgeable in engineering http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/ _ DA T AlTITLE 13/Chapter _13 _24_ EXC... 6/2/2006 Chapter 13 .24 EXCA V A TlON, GRADING, EROSION AND SEDIMENT CON1ROL Page 4 of 16 geology and registered with the state to practice engineering geology. "Engineering geology" means the application of geologic knowledge and principles in the investigation and evaluation of naturally occurring rock and soil for use in the design of civil works. "Erosion" means the wearing away of the ground surface by the actions of water, wind, ice, gravity, or a combination thereof. "Erosion control specialist" means a person who is registered in the state or by a professional society and is capable of preparing erosion and sediment control plans. In the event it is the opinion of the building official such plan requires design of civil works, the specialist must be licensed as a civil engineer in the state. "Erosion hazards" means the susceptibility of a site to erode based on soils, condition and steepness of a slope, rock type, vegetation, and other site factors. "Erosion..sediment and runoff control planning" means the application of the knowledge of erosion and sediment control principles and practices in the investigation and evaluation for use in the design of civil works. "Erosion sediment and runoff control practices" means methods, measures, devices, structures, vegetative plantings and/or a combination thereof designed to control erosion and sediment; to safely contain and/or dispose of storm water runoff; and to stabilize soils and slopes. "Excavatio.n" means the mechanical removal of earth materials. "Fill" means the deposit of permitted materials by artificial means. "Grade" irieansthe vertical location of the groundslirface. . 1. "Existing grade" means the grade prior to grading. 2. "Rough grade" means an approximate elevation of the ground surface conforming to the approved plan. 3. "Finished grade" means the final grade or surface conditions of the site which conforms to the approved plan. "Grading" means any excavation, filling, leveling, or combination thereof (excludes stripping and/or clearing). "Key" means a designed, compacted fill placed in a trench excavated in earth material beneath the toe of a proposed fill slope. "Land disturbance" means clearing, stripping, grading or other manipulation of the natural terrain by manual and/or mechanical means. "NPDES" means National Pollution Discharge Elimination System, the national program for controlling discharges under the Federal Clean Water Act. "One hundred (100) year storm" means a storm with such intensity and duration that its magnitude would only be exceeded on the average once every one hundred (100) years.. 'Owner" means the person or persons shown in the county recorder's office as owner of property. "Permittee" means the owner, contractor, or any person undertaking land disturbance activities upon a site pursuant to a permit granted by the building official authorizing performance of a specified activity. "Runoff' means the passage of surface water over ground surface. "Sediment" means eroded earth material that is carried and/or deposited by water, wind, gravity or ice and is a major source of water pollution. "Site" means a lot or parcel of land or contiguous combination thereof, where land disturbance including erosion control, clearing, grading, or construction are performed, permitted. or proposed. "Slope" means an inclined ground surface, the inclination of which is expressed as a ratio of horizontal distance to vertical distance. "Soil" means naturally occurring superficial deposits overlying bedrock. "Soil engineer" means a civil engineer experienced and knowledgeable in the practice of soil http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_ DAT AlTlTLEl 3/Chapter_l 3 _24_ EXC... 612/2006 Chapter 13.24 EXCAVATION, GRADING, EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL . Page 5 of 16 engineering. . "Soil engineering" means the application of the principles of soil mechanics in the investigation, evaluation and design of civil works involving the use of earth materials and the inspection and testing of the construction thereof. "Stabilization" means the prevention of erosion to exposed soil. "Start of construction" means the firstland-disturbing activity associated with a construction project. "Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan" is a plan that provides for erosion control using the specific best management practices to control sediment and erosion on a construction site during and after construction. "Stream" means any water course as designated by a solid line or dash and three dots symbol . shown onthe largest scale of United States Geological Survey map most recently published. . "1 O-year storm" means a storm with such intensity and duration that its magnitude would only be . exceeded on the average once every ten years. "Terrace" means a relatively level step constructed in the face of a graded slope surface for drainage and maintenance purposes. "Topsoil" means loose, pliable, organic and ferule earth materials on top of a soil profile, usually the "A" horizons. "Unstable soil" means soil which in the opinion of the building official, or the civil engineer, or the soils engineer or the geologist, is not competent to support other soil or fill, to support structures, 'or to satisfactorily perform the other functioning for which the soil is intended. (Ord. 537 !l1 (part), 2003: prior code !l7-1.05) 13.24.060 Permit application, plans, specifications and reports required. Except as exempted in Section 13.24.030 oflhis chapter, no person shall do, cause, permit, aid, abet, suffer or furnish equipment or labor for any clearing, grading, erosion or sediment control work until a permit has been obtained from the building official by the owner(s) of the property or his or her agent. To obtain a permit, the applicant shall first file an application therefore in writing on a form furnished by the code enforcement agency for that purpose. A. Application. The application for a permit must include all of the following items: 1. Application form; 2. Two sets of the site map and grading plans; 3. Two sets of the erosion and sediment control plan, where required; 4. Two sets of the soil engineering report, where required; 5. Two sets of the engineering geology report, where required; 6. Two sets of the work schedule; 7. Two sets of a vicinity map showing the location of the site in relationship to the surrounding area's water courses, water bodies and other significant geographic features, and roads and other significant structures; 8. Application fees as stipulated in the current issue of the Uniform Building Code; 9. Performance bond or other acceptable security, when required. 10. Two sets of any supplementary material required by the building official. B. Application Form. The following information is required on the application form: 1. Name, address and telephone number of the applicant with date of application; 2. Names, addresses and telephone numbers of any and all contractors, subcontractors or persons actually doing the land disturbing and land filling activities and their respective tasks; 3. Name(s), address(s) and telephone number(s) of the person(s) responsible for the preparation of the site map and grading plan, erosion and sediment control plan, soil engineering and hllp:l/municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/ _ DA T AlTITLE 13/Chapter _13 _24_ EXC... 6/2/2006 ~ Chapter 13.24 EXCAVATION, GRADING, EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL Page 6 of 16 engineering geology reports; 4. Signature(s) of the owner(s) of the site or of an authorized representative. C. Permit Issuance. The building official may require that operations and project designs be modified if delays occur which incur weather generated problems not considered at the time the permit was issued. 1. A separate permit shall be required for each site and cover both excavations and fills, clearing, grading and erosion control work. 2. Approval of a permit shall require the abatement of any existing human induced or accelerated erosion problems on the property. The building official may seek abatement recommendation from local conservation districts, agencies, organizations and/or associations when available. 3. A permit shall authorize only that work which is described or illustrated on the approved site plans and specifications. . D. Site Map and Grading Plan. Two sets of the site map and grading plan shall be required and shall contain all of the following iriformation: 1. Existing and proposed topography ofthe site taken at a contour interval insufficiently detailed to define the topography over the entire site; 2. Two contour intervals that extend a minimum of one hundred (100) feet off~site, or sufficient to show on~ and off~site drainage; 3. Site's property lines shown in true location with respect to the plan's topographic information; . 4. Location and graphic representation of all existing and proposed natural and man-made drainage facilities;' . . . 5. Detailed plans of all surface and sub-surface drainage devices, walls, cribbing, dams and other protective devices to be constructed with or as a part ofthe proposed work, together with a map showing the drainage area and calculations justifying the estimated runoff of the area served by any drain; 6. Location and graphic representation of proposed excavations and fills, of on-site storage of soil and other earth material, and of on-site disposal; 7. Location of existing vegetation types and the location and type of vegetation to be left undisturbed; 8. Location of proposed final surface runoff, erosion and sediment control practices; 9. Estimated quantity of soil or earth material in cubic yards to be excavated, filled, stored or otherwise utilized on-site; . . 10. Outline of the methods to be used in clearing vegetation, and in storing and disposing of the cleared vegetative matter; 11. Proposed sequence and schedule of excavations filling and other land disturbing and filling activities, and soil or earth material storage and disposal; 12. Location of any buildings or structures, including wells and sewage disposal facilities on the property where the work is to be performed, and the location of any buildings or structures on land of adjacent owners which are within four hundred (400) feet of the property or which may be affected by the proposed grading operations; 13. North arrow, written and graphic scales. Specifications shall contain information covering construction and material requirements. E. Grading Requirements. All grading in excess of five thousand (5,000) cubic yards shall be performed in accordance with the approved grading plan prepared by a civil engineer, and shall be designated as 'engineered grading." Grading involving less than five thousand (5,000) cubic yards shall be designated 'regular grading" unless the permittee, with the approval of the building official, chooses to have the grading performed as 'engineered grading." 1. Engineering Grading. A civil engineer authorized by state law shall prepare and sign the reports, plans and specifications required in subsections D and F of this section. 2. Regular Grading. The building official may require inspection and testing by an approved testing agency. The testing agency's responsibility shall include, but need not be limited to, approval concerning the inspection of cleared areas and benches to receive fill, and the http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/ _ DA T AlTITLE 13/Chapter _13_24_ EXC... 6/2/2006 Chapter 13.24 EXCAVATION, GRADING, EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL Page 7 of 16 compaction of fills. When the building official has cause to believe that geologic hazards may be involved, the regular grading operation shall be required to conform to engineered grading requirements. F. Preliminary Reports. When required by the building official, each application for a permit shall be accompanied by two sets of supporting data consisting of a soil engineering report, engineering geology report, erosion and sediment control report, and/or any other reports necessary. During grading, all necessary reports, compaction data, soil engineering, engineering geology and erosion and sediment control recommendations, in accordance with best management practices, shall be submitted to the civil engineer and the building official by the soil engineer, the engineering geologist, and the erosion control specialist. 1. The civil engineering report when required, shall include, but not be limited to: . ~~~~~ri~i~~i~~d.~lJ~~2~;~no~~H~:J~i1~~u\12~1~~~~'?i~1;~i~d;~e~(1~t'~i~~;f~!~!wl~i;:~~;~ml . b. Inspectioiiand~pprov!ll as toestablishnieiifof iirlesa'nd'g@de~;'desigh i:rii~riWfotforreCtivej;;;'.~ measures, including ttie existing and/or required~iife'siOrm(jriiiiiage'6apa6iiYoLitierOt ciianiiEiI~,,'~l ~:F~!~p:ao:~li~tttend~ti~~~co~~Jngad:~~~;~.~ll~:f;~~~~J!!:p~~l~1~~n~~~t~~'!~:~\.1 2. The soii" engineering report, when required, shall contain, but need not be limited to, all the following information: a. Data regarding the nature, distribution,'strength and erodibility'of existing soils; b. Data regarding the nature, distribution, strength and erodibility of soil to be placed on the site, if any; c. Conclusions and recommendations for grading procedures; d. Conclusions and recommended designs for interim soil stabilization devices and measures and for permanent soil stabilization after construction is completed; . e. Design criteria for corrective measures when necessary; f. Opinions and recommendations covering adequacy of sites to be developed by the proposed grading. 3. The engineering geology report when required, shall contain, but need not be limited to, the following information: a. An adequate description of the geology of the site; b. Conclusions and recommendations regarding the effect of geologic conditions on the proposed development; . c. Opinions and recommendations covering the adequacy of sites to be developed by the proposed grading; d. Need for subdrains or other underground drainage devices. 4. A stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPP) plan, when required, shall incorporate the best management guidelines or requirements for stormwater management that have been defined or adopted by any federal, state, regional, county and/or city agency. The plan shall contain, but need not be limited to, the following information: a. A delineation and brief description of the practices to retain sediment on the site, including sediment basins and traps, and a schedule for their maintenance and upkeep; b. A delineation and brief description of the best management practices for surface runoff and erosion control practices to be implemented, including types and methods of applying mulches, and a schedule for their maintenance and upkeep; c. A delineation and brief description of the vegetative practices to be used, including types of seeds and fertilizer and their application rates, the type, location and extent of pre-existing and undisturbed vegetation types, and a schedule for maintenance and upkeep; d. The location of all the practices listed above shall be depicted on the grading plan, or on a separate plan at the discretion of the building official; http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_DA T AlTITLE 13/Chapter _13 _24_ EXC... 6/2/2006 Chapter 13.24 EXCAVATION, GRADING, EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL Page 8 of 16 e. An estimate of the cost of implementing and maintaining all erosion and sediment control practices. 5. Work Schedule. The applicant must submit a master work schedule showing the following information: a. Proposed grading schedule; b. Proposed schedule for installation of all best management practices for interim and permanent erosion and sediment control; c. Schedule for construction of final improvements, if any. G. Engineered Grading. It shall be the responsibility of the civil engineer who prepares the approved grading plan to incorporate all recommendations from the soil engineering and engineering geology, and erosion and sediment control reports into the grading plan after approval by the building officiaL H. Notification Noncompliance. If, in the course of fulfilling their responsibility under this chapter, the civilenginee'r, ,the soil engineer, the engineering geologist, the erosion control specialist, or the testing agency find that the work is not being done in conformance with this chapter or the approved grading plans, the discrepancies shall be reported immediately in writing to the building official. Recommendations for corrective measures, if necessary, shall be submitted. I. Transfer of Responsibility for Approval. If the civil engineer, the soils engineer, the engineering geologist,'the erosion control specialist, or the testing agency of record is changed during the course of the work, the work shall be stopped until the replacement has agreed to accept the , responsibility within the area of his or her technical competence for approval upon completion of the work. ' J. Final Reports. Upon completion of the rough grading work and at the final completion of the work, the building official may require the following reports and drawings and supplements thereto: 1. An as-built grading plan prepared by the civil engineer, including original ground surface elevations, as-graded ground surface elevation, lot drainage patterns and locations and , elevations of all surface and sub-surface drainage facilities, and providing approval that the work was done in accordance with the final approved grading plan; 2. A soil grading report prepared by the soil engineer, including locations and elevations of field density tests, summaries of field and laboratory tests and other substantiating data and comments on any changes made during grading and their effect on the recommendations made in the soil engineering investigation report, and providing approval as to the adequacy of the site for the intended use; 3. A geologic grading report prepared by the engineering geologist, including a final description of the geology of the site including any new information disclosed during the grading and the effect of same on recommendations incorporated in the approved grading plan, and providing approval as to the adequacy of the site for the intended use as affected by geologic factors; 4. A stormwater prevention pollution report includes a description of the erosion, sediment and runoff control practices applied on the site, including any new information disclosed during site development and the effect of same on recommendations incorporated in the approved grading plan, noting any changes required, and providing approval as to the adequacy of erosion and sediment controls. K. Final approval shall not be given until all work, including installation of all drainage facilities and protective devices, all erosion and sediment control, and vegetative measures, has been completed in accordance with the approved plans and the required reports have been submitted. L. Executed contract(s) or deed restrictions requiring maintenance and upkeep of final plan runoff and erosion control practices for as long as the building official determines necessary and as approved in the erosion and sediment control plan. M. Variances. A request for variance from the provisions of this chapter, the permit conditions, or the plan specifications may be approved, conditionally approved, or denied by the building official. A request for a variance must state in writing the provision to be varied, the proposed substitute provision, when it would apply and its advantages. N. Work Time Limits. The permittee shall fully perform and complete all the work required to be http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_DA T AlTITLE 13/Chapter _13_24_ EXC... 6/2/2006 Chapter 13.24 E.?CCA V ATION, GRADING, EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL Page 9 of 16 done within the time limits specified. If the permittee is unable to complete the work within the specified time prior to the expiration of the permit, a request shall be presented in writing for an extension of time, setting forth the reasons for the requested extension. If, in the opinion of the building official, an extension is warranted, additional time may be granted for the completion of the work. (Ord. 537 ~ 1 (part), 2003: prior code ~ 7-1.06) 13.24.070 Fees. A. Plan-Checking Fee. For excavation and fill on the same site, the fee shall be based on the volume of the excavation or fill, whichever is greater. Before accepting a set of plans and specifications for checking, the building official shall collect a plan-checking fee. Separate permits and fees shall apply to retaining walls or major drainage structures as indicated elsewhere in this code. There shall be no separate charge for standard terrace drains, erosion and sediment controls and similar facilities. The amount of the plan-checking fee for grading plans shall be as " set forth in the latest version of the California Building Code Appendix Chapter 33 entitled "Excavation and Grading." The plan-checking fee for a grading permit authorizing additional work to that under a valid permit shall be the difference between such fee paid for the original permit and the fee shown for the entire project. B. Grading Permit Fees. A fee for each grading permit shall be paid to the building official as set forth in the latest version of the California Building Code Appendix Chapter 33 entitled , "Excavation and Grading." The fee for a grading permit authorizing additional work to that under a. valid permit shall be the difference between the fee paid for the original permit and the fee shown for the entire project. (Ord. 537 ~ 1 (part), 2003: prior code ~ 7-1.07) 13.24.080 Bonds and securities. The building official may require bonds in such form and amounts as rnay be deemed necessary' to assure that the work, if not completed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications, will be corrected to eliminate hazardous conditions. In lieu of a surety bond the applicant may file a cash bond or instrument of credit with the building official in an amount equal to that which would be required in the surety bond. The surety bond, or in lieu thereof, less the costs of remedial work, if any, shall be released when the building official determines that the best management practices for erosion and sediment control practices have permanently stabilized the site, but not later than eighteen (18) months after installation of all permanent erosion control practices. (Ord. 537 ~ 1 (part), 2003: prior code' ~ 7-1.08) 13.24.090 De,sign standards for cuts and excavations. Unless otherwise recommended in the soil engineering and/or engineering geology reports approved by the building official, cuts and excavations shall conform to the provisions of this section. A. The slope of cut surface shall be no steeper than is safe for the intended use. Cut slopes shall be no steeper than two to one (2:1), horizontal to vertical. Due to individual site soils and geology, flatter and shorter slope lengths may be required, or steeper and longer slope lengths may be allowed upon review by the building official when he or she is presented with evidence that this is consistent with the building and safety. Cut slopes shall be rounded off so as to blend in with natural terrain. B. Stockpiles. Stockpile material for trenches and pits will be not adjacent to the excavation to be promptly backfilled and compacted into trenches and pits. Excavated material not needed at the site will be disposed of as approved by the building official. C. Vegetative Protection. All earth cuts shall be planted with temporary and permanent vegetation or otherwise protected from the storm runoff erosion within thirty (30) days of the http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/ _ DA T AlTITLE13/Chapter _13 _24_ EXC... 6/2/2006 Chapter 13.24 EXCAVATION, GRADING, EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL Page 10 of 16 completion of final erosion control and grading work. Planting shall be watered or irrigated to establish a root system before the rainy season, if determined necessary by the building official. (Ord. 537 !i 1 (part), 2003: prior code !i 7-1.09) 13.24.100 Fills. Unless otherwise recommended in the soil engineering and/or engineering geology reports approved by the building official, fill shall conform to the provisions of this section. In the absence of an approved soil engineering report, these provisions may be waived for minor fills not intended to support structures. A. Fill Location. Fill shall not be constructed on natural slopes steeper than two to one (2:1). The area beyond the toe of the fill shall be sloped for sheet overflow or a protected drain shall be provided. S. Fill Slopes. The slope of fill surfaces can be no steeper than is safe for the intended use. Fill slopes shall be no steeper than two to one (2:1). Due to individual soil properties, shorter and flatter slopes may be required or steeper and longer slopes may be allowed upon review by the building official if he or she is presented with evidence that the deviations are consistent with stability and safety. Fill slopes shall be rounded off so as to blend with the natural terrain. C. Ground. Preparation. Natural ground surface over which fills are planned shall first be cleaned of all trash, vegetation, stumps, debris, noncomplying fill, and other unsuitable materials and shall be scarified prior to the placement of the fill. Topsoil shall be removed and stockpiled for use in final. grading. Where slopes are five to one (5:1) or steeper and height is greater than five feet, a bench ten (10) feet wide minimum, as determined by the soils engineer, shall be dug into undisturbed, solid competent soil or bedrock beneath the toe of the proposed fill. The bench must be inspected and approved by the soils engineer and/or engineering geologist as a suitable foundation before placing fill. The area beyond the toe of fill shall be sloped for sheet overflow or a paved drain shall be provided. D. Materials Permitted. Only permitted material free from tree stumps, detrimental amounts of organic matter, trash, garbage, sod, peat and/or similar materials shall be used. Rocks larger than twelve (12) inches in greatest dimension shall not be used unless the method of placement is properly devised, continuously inspected and approved by the building official. Rock disposal areas shall be delineated on the grading plan. The following shall also apply; 1. Rock sizes greater than twelve (12) inches in maximum dimension shall be ten (10) feet or more below grade, measured vertically. 2. Rocks shall be placed so as to assure filling of all voids with fines. Topsoil is to be used in the top twelve (12) inch surface layerto aid in planting and landscaping. E. Compaction of Fill. All fills shall be compacted to a minimum relative dry density of ninety (90) percent as determined by ASTM D-1557-78 or USC Standard No. 70-1. Field density verification shall be determined in accordance with USC Standard No. 70-2 or by an approved equivalent. A higher relative dry density and/or additional compaction tests may be required at any time by the building official. F. Vegetative Protection. All earth fills shall be planted with temporary and permanent vegetation or otherwise protected from the effects of storm runoff erosion within thirty (30) days of the completion of final grading, and planting shall be watered or irrigated to establish a root system, if determined necessary by the building official. (Ord. 537!i 1 (part), 2003: prior code!i 7-1.10) 13.24.110 Design standards for cut and fill setbacks. The setbacks and other restrictions specified by this section are minimum and may be increased by the building official or by the recommendation of the civil engineer, soils engineer or engineering geologist, if necessary for safety and stability or to prevent damage of adjacent properties from deposition or erosion, or to provide access for slope maintenance and drainage. Retaining walls may be used to reduce the required setbacks when approved by the building http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_ DAT AlTITLEl3/Chapter _13_24_ EXC... 6/2/2006 Chapter 13.24 EXCAVATION, GRADING, EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL Page 11 of 16 official. A. Setbacks From Property Lines. The tops of cuts and toes of fill slopes shall be set back from , the outer boundaries of the permit area, including slope-right areas and easements, in accordance with Figure No.1 and Table No. 70. B. Design Standards for Setbacks. Setbacks between graded slopes (cut or fill) and structures shall be provided in accordance with Figure NO.2. Figure No.1 ~ --.... Table No. 70 Required Setbacks From Permit Area Boundary (In Feet) IH I Setback a II Setback b 1 I lunder 5 0 II 1 I 15 - 30 HI2 II H/5 I lover 30 15 II 6 I 1 Additional width may be required for interceptor drain. Figure No.2 http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_DA T AlTITLE I3/Chapter _13 _ 24_EXC... 6/2/2006 Chapter 13.24 EXCAVATION, GRADING, EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL Page 12 of 16 ~~....... .--y-..' , "'" ..-.~.......... C. Stream and Riparian Setback. Tops and toes of cut and/or filled slopes shall be set back far enough to prevent encroachment upon streams, flood plains, or channels, or body of standing water to provide and maintain an undisturbed protective strip between the grading arid the riparian corridor. This strip shall have sufficient filter capacity to prevent degradation of water quality, as determined by the erosion and sediment control specialist and approved by the building official. If it is determined that the filter capacity of the protective strip is insufficient, or development activity will encroach upon riparian zones, additional setback distance and/or erosion control practices may be required. D. Retaining Walls. Retaining walls, when keyed into stable foundations and capable of sustaining the design loads, may be used to reduce the required cut and fill setbacks when recommended by'the civil or soils engineer, or engineering geologist and approved by the building official. ' E. other Restrictions and/or Minimums. Other requirements may also be increased or relaxed upon review by the building official if he or she finds the deviations consistent with safety and stability and to provide access for slope maintenance and drainage. (Ord. 537 ~ 1 (part),2003: prior code ~ 7-1.11) 13.24.120 Design standards for drainage and terraces. Drainage facilities and terraces shall conform to the provisions of this section unless otherwise indicated on the approved permit and plans. Site development shall have no adverse impacts on adjacent and downstream locations. If adverse impacts are identified, off-site erosion, sediment and flood control improvements to the drainage way will be required to eliminate the adverse impacts. A. Runoff Calculations. The approved plans shall show by table and/or calculations the peak rate of storm runoff both before and after development. To eliminate adverse impacts of runoff and sediment, a combination of storage, infinration, and controlled release of stormwater runoff may be required. Calculations may be required to demonstrate that the cumulative effects of the tributary flows will not have an adverse effect upon ultimate peak discharge through a channel due to modifications to the channel resulting from the retarding. B. Drainage Facilities. 1. Disturbance of natural drainage ways shall be kept to a minimum and existing drainage courses shall not be obstructed or obliterated without mitigating measures installed that have been approved by the building official. Grading equipment shall not disturb or cross flowing streams unless absolutely necessary and only with prior approval from the building official. It is the responsibility of the permittee to secure any additional permits from agencies exercising jurisdiction over the stream. 2. Whenever a grading operation obstructs or impairs the flow of runoff in an existing drainage course, a culvert, bridge or other suitable drainage facility designed and acceptable to the building official shall be installed to convey the flow past the point of impairment. 3. No construction materials or construction by-products shall be discarded in any drainage way or riparian zone. 4. Drainage facilities, including paved, rock or vegetative channels, culverts or pipe drains, shall be designed to safely carry existing and potential off-site runoff from a fully developed area http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_DA T AlTITLE] 3/Chapter _] 3 _24_ EXC... 6/212006 Chapter 13.24 EXCAVATION, GRADING, EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL Page 13 of 16 upstream, as well as local on-site surface and subsurface waters to the nearest adequate drainage course designated for such purposes by the building official and/or other appropriate jurisdiction as a safe place to discharge such waters. Properly designed energy dissipators may be required at the point of discharge. 5. Culvert size and materials shall be determined by the civil engineer in accordance with standard design criteria and as approved by the building official. Minimum diameter shall be eighteen (18) inches. 6. Cuts, fills and retaining walls shall have subsurface drainage facilities as necessary for sta bility. 7. Berms, ditches, interceptor drains, or swales shall be constructed at the top of cut and filled slopes for protection against water runoff. Paved interceptor drains shall be installed along the top of all cut slopes where the tributary drainage area above slopes towards the cut and has a drainage path greater than forty (40) feet measured horizontally. Interceptor drains shall be paved with a minimum of three inches of concrete or gunite and reinforced. They shall have a minimum depth of twelve (12) inches and a minimum paved width of thirty (30) inches measured horizontally across the drain. The slope of drain shall be approved by the building official. Energy dissipators may be required by the building official. 8. A minimum five percent grade between approved storm drainage facilities and all building pads, yards, roof drains and driveways is recommended. Building pads shall have a drainage gradient of two percent toward approved drainage facilities, unless waived by the building official. Exception: The gradient from the building pad may be one percent if all of the following conditions exist throughout the permit area: a. No proposed fills are greater than ten (10) feet in maximum depth. b. No proposed finish cut or fill slope faces have a vertical height in excess often (10) feet. c. No existing slope faces, which have a slope face steeper than ten to one (10:1), horizontally to vertically, have a vertical height in excess often (10) feet. C. Terraces. Terraces at least six feet in width shall be established at not more than thirty (30) foot vertical intervals on all cut or fill slopes to control surface drainage and debris except that . where 'only one terrace is required, it shall be at mid-height. For cut or fill slopes greater than sixty (60) feet and up to one hundred twenty (120) feet in vertical height, one terrace at approximately mid-height shall be twelve (12) feet in width. Terrace widths and spacing for cut and fill slopes greater than one hundred twenty (120) feet in height shall be designed by the civil engineer and approved by the building official. Suitable access shall be provided to permit proper cleaning and maintenance. Swales or ditches on terraces shall have a minimum gradient of five percent and must be paved with reinforced concrete not less than three inches in thickness or an approved equal paving. They shall have a minimum depth at the deepest point of one foot and a minimum paved width of five feet. A single run of swale or ditch shall not collect runoff from a tributary area exceeding thirteen thousand (13,000) square feet (projected) without discharging into a down drain. (Ord. 537 ~ 1 (part), 2003: prior code ~ 7-1.12) 13.24.130 Design standards for erosion and sediment control. During site planning, access and building envelopes should be arranged so as to minimize disturbance of particularly erodible areas. These plans should renect the arrangement and specifically stipulate areas to remain undisturbed. All streams, nood plains, channels, bodies of standing water, or other riparian areas shall be identified and delineated on the development plans. If it is determined that certain development activities in or near the riparian zones would be detrimental, those activities may be prohibited. Exposed soil and slopes shall be protected from erosion by temporary and/or permanent measures. As soon as possible and feasible following completion of each stage of grading and/or construction, all sites will be permanently stabilized by installing all required erosion and sediment control practices to insure protection before the normal beginning date of winter or hltp://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_DA T A/TITLEI3/Chapter _13 _24_ EXC... 61212006 Chapter 13.24 EXCAVATION, GRADING, EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL Page 14 of 16 i:" adverse season. A. Structures on existing slopes exceeding thirty (30) percent shall utilize pole, step or other such foundation that does not require major land disturbances. B. Runoff Control. Where concentrated runoff will occur, it shall be carried in pipe or culvert conduits or over a nonerodible surface (paved, rocked or vegetated) to stable discharge points dearly shown on the development plans. All conduits must have proper energy dissipators at the point of discharge when necessary to prevent erosion. C. Building Site Runoff. Runoff from buildings, roads, driveways and the total site area shall be controlled by berms, swales, di\ches, structures, vegetative filler stops and/or catch basins to prevent the escape of sediment from the site. D. Vegetative Removal. Development plans shall indicate the areas where vegetation is to be removed and replaced within the building and access envelopes. Vegetation removal shall be limited to thatamount necessary and as indicated on, the approved development plan. The . method and time shall be such that the erosive effects are minimized: . E. Vegetative Disposal. Vegetation removed during clearing operations shall be disposed of in a manner approved by the building official and in compliance with all state, federal and local laws. Burning requires a separate permit through the Air Pollution Control District to ensure compliance with local air quality standards. No long branches or charred pieces shall be permitted to remain. F. Topsoil: To promote regrowth of vegetation, topsoil graded from cuts and fills and/or secured from other sources shall be stockpiled and/or reapplied upon completion of grading on slopes steeper than four to one (4:1). Soil stockpiles shall be protected from erosion at all limes. G: Vegetative Protection. When needed and planned, all bare slopes and/or disturbed areas will be planted to both temporary and permanent vegetation as each stage of grading is completed. Sufficient temporary, rapid growing vegetation to stabilize the soil will be used until the permanent vegetative cover grows or matures enough to provide permanent stability. H. Winter and/or Adverse Season Operations. .1. Land disturbance or development operations may be restricted or temporarily hailed during the . normal winter or rainy season, and/or other times whenever the building official determines that the weather, soil, slope and general site conditions may cause serious accelerated erosion or sediment damage, either on-site or downstream. EXisting. ground cover shall not be cleared, destroyed, burned or disturbed more than fifteen (15) days prior to grading or construction work, unless approved in advance by the building official. 2. Plans for temporary and/or permanent erosion and sediment control shall be approved by the building official forty-five (45) days prior to October 15111. All approved erosion and sediment control best management practices shall be installed by October 15111. 3. Any land development work between October 15111 and March 15111 shall be in accordance with the approved best management practices during any land disturbance, and applied to all soils based at the end of each working day. An adequate reserve supply of erosion control materaisl shall be kept on site at all times to be installed immediately by the permittee upon advent of any rainfall, winds: or other storm event that may be expected to cause accelerated erosion. 4. All cut and fill slopes, except sand slopes or dunes, without satisfactory vegetative cover between growing seasons shall be mulched with a minimum of four thousand (4,000) pounds of straw or equivalent per acre of slope surface. Mulch will be anchored to the slope by punching or tacking into the soil or with netting installed over the mulch. Additional mulching and/or other anchoring methods as recommended by the erosion control specialist may be required by the building official. . 5. Within ten (10) working days after seeding, fertilizing and/or mulching, when required by the building official due to climate or drought conditions, the permittee will commence irrigation or watering of the seeded areas or slopes and shall continue until the rains come and/or a vegetative ground cover is permanently established. All other erosion and sediment control practices shall be installed prior to seeding and mulching. 6. All best management practices for erosion and sediment control practices shall be closely monitored throughout the winter and/or rainy season and problems corrected promptly. All erosion and/or slippage of cut and fill banks shall be repaired by the permittee at his or her http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/j)A T NTITLE 13/Chapter _13 _24_ EXC... 6/2/2006 Chapter 13.24 EXCAVATION, GRADING, EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL Page IS of 16 expense. 1. Dust from grading operations must be controlled. The permittee may be required to keep adequate equipment on the grading site to prevent dust problems. J. Erosion Control Coordination with Project Installation. 1. All vegetative and/or structural measures required to safely discharge any accelerated runoff generated by the project should be scheduled for installation during the first or initial construction phase of the project. 2. Land shall be developed in units of workable size which can be completed in a single construction season. Best management practices for erosion and sediment control measures shall be coordinated with a sequence of grading operations and all appropriate erosion control measures shall be put in effect prior to the commencement ofthe next work unit and/or winter or normal rainy season. Prior to completion and final acceptance of the project, all erosion control measures must be in place and all exposed bare soil shall be mulched, fertilized and planted to a . permanent vegetative cover. Native or naturalized vegetation should be used. Upon . recommendation by the erosion control specialist, the building official may require watering of planted areas to initiate and assure growth. K. Livestock. Where necessary to assure that water quality is not affected by the keeping of livestock, vegetative buffer and/or fitter strip shall be established on all downhill sides of areas where livestock is kept. The width of the buffer strip shall be determined by the erosion control specialist. Also, additional erosion and sediment control practices may be required by the building official to control runoff and pollution from the areas where livestock has destroyed and torn up the protective vegetation. . L. Maintenance. All on-site erosion control facilities shall be properly maintained by the owners for the life of the project so that they do not become nuisances with stagnant water, heavy algae growth, insect breeding, odors, discarded debris, and/or safety hazards. Vegetative maintenance required may include mowing, fertilization, irrigation and/or reseeding. (Ord. 537 ~ 1 (part), 2003: prior code ~ 7-1.13) 13.24.140 Inspections and compliance. Excavation, grading, filling, clearing and erosion control work for which a permit is required shall be subject to inspection by the building official. The building official may require supervision, regular inspection, and special testing be performed and certified by the civil engineer (or other professionaQ who prepared the approved plan; and the civil engineer shall also be responsible for the inspection and approval of work within his or her area of technical specialty. This responsibility shall include, but need not be limited to, inspection and approval as to the establishment of line, grade and drainage of the development area. The building official may also require special supervision, inspection and testing be done by an independent, approved testing agency to ensure compliance with this chapter, the permittee's permit concerns, and/or in accordance with the provisions of Section 306 of the UBC and Section 13.24.060 of this chapter. The building official shall inspect or provide for adequate inspection of the project by appropriate professionals at the various stages of the work requiring approval, and at any more frequent intervals necessary to determine that adequate control is being exercised by the professional consultants. A. Inspections Required. The following inspections shall be required, but not limited to: 1. Pre-site inspection to determine the suitability of the proposed project and the existing and potential erosion and sediment hazards; 2. Periodic ongoing project operations progress, including compaction and special testing as may be required by the approved plan; 3. Final inspection determining compliance with terms and conditions of this chapter and permit. Final approval shall not be given until all work, including installation of all drainage facilities and their protective devices and all erosion control measures, has been completed in accordance with the final approved plan and the required reports have been submitted. http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_DA T AlTITLE13/Chapter _13 _24~_EXC... 6/2/2006 Chapter 13.24 EXCAVATION, GRADING, EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL Page 16 of 16 B. Notification. The permittee shall notify the building official two working days prior to the beginning 01 the operation authorized by the permit, two working days belore the project is ready lor final inspection, and one complete working day prior to any other inspection or testing requested by the permittee. C. Right 01 Entry. Filing lor a permit under this chapter constitutes a grant 01 permission for the city to enter the permit area lor the purpose 01 administering this chapter from the date 01 the application to the termination 01 the erosion control maintenance period. If necessary, the building official shall be supplied with a key or lock combination, or permitted to install a city lock. D. Notice 01 Violation Recordation. Whenever the building official determines that work has not been completed in accordance with a penmit or the plans and specifications relating thereto, or whenever the building official determines that work has been done without the required permit, the building official may record a notice 01 violation. The owner(s) of the property, as revealed by the assessment roll on which the violation is situated, and any other person responsible for the violation shall be notified of the recordation, if their address is available. lIthe responsible party fails to act in response to written notification of the building official, an erosion problem may be declared a public nuisance and may be abated according to procedures in the city code. Where there is an emergency condition of erosion or sediment damaging a watelWay, marsh, other body 01 water, or private or public property, the building official may have the necessary corrective work done and then bill the responsible party or place a lien against the offending property. E. Additional Procedures to Remedy Unauthorized Grading Without a Permit-Finding and Declaration\ The city council finds and declares that unauthorized grading without a penmit often results in soil erosion; drainage, visual and other destructive long-term impacts which are not satisfactorily alleviated or corrected by the usual enforcement procedures, such as criminal violations or judicial proceedings concerning public nuisances. Further, such grading often causes harm unique to the graded parcel and the properties surrounding it, and the long-term correction measures for each such unauthorized grading requires detailed consideration and formulation, usually after formal public hearings. . 1. Upon discovery of unauthorized grading without a permit, the building official shall, where feasible, contact the owner of the property upon which the grading occurred, and the person who did the grading. II the building official and the owner and contractor can agree within thirty (30) days upon a remedial program which can be accomplished in no more than ninety (90) days, no further city action shall be required at that time. The building official shall obtain a cash bond from the owner or contractor, payable upon' request, and a right-of-entry form signed by the owner to guarantee the city's right to do the remedial program as agreed if not done by the owner or ,contractor within the agreed time period. 2. II the building official cannot reach such a satisfactory agreement, he or she shall, within thirty (30) days, submit a detailed report and recommendations to the city administrator and city council requesting the initiation of formal council proceedings under the city's nuisance abatement ordinance to abate the public nuisance created on the premises by the unauthorized grading. The object of such proceedings shall be the ordering of corrective measures, subject to the city's power to correct the problem and place a lien upon the real property for all costs of correction. For purposes 01 the nuisance abatement proceedings, the council declares that unauthorized grading without a permit is a public nuisance, per se. (Ord. 537 31 (part), 2003: prior code 37- 1.14) . http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_DA T AlTITLE1 3/Chapter _13 _24_ EXC... 6/2/2006 Chapter 16.44 SPECIAL DISTRICTS Page 1 of 17 Title 16 DEVELOPMENTCODE Chapter 16.44 SPECIAL DISTRICTS 16.44.010 Planned development (Po) district. 16.44.020 Desion development (0) overlav district. 16.44.030 Specific plan (SPl district. 16.44.040 Public/ouasi-public (PEl district). 16.44.050 Floodplain manaoement (FHl district. 16.44.019 Planned development (PO) district. A. Purpose and Intent. Planned development (PO) districts have been established more flexible thim those contained elsewhere in this title; ;The purpose of establishing these districts has been -- to grant or require diversification in the location of structures and other site elements which were believed to be appropriately compatible, while ensuring adequate standards relating to the public health, safety, welfare, comfort and convenience. B. Applicability. The planned development district shall apply to existing planned developments of record (listed below) and pending applications complete as ofthe effective date of this title. No new plam1ed development districts shall be created subsequent to the effective date of this title.' All ordinances approving or amending a planned development, along with relevant zoning information, shall be kept in the community development department and city clerk's offices. P-D-1.1 = P-D-1.2 = P-D-1.3 = P-D-1.4 = P-D-1.5 = Oak Park Acres Planned Development - Rancho Grande Planned Development Royal Oaks Planned Development Wildwood Ranch Planned Development Okui Planned Development C. Adoption and Amendment of Plans. Adoption and amendment of planned development ordinances shall occur in the manner set forth in this title for amendments to zoning districts (Section 16.16.040). Amendments to a general or specific development plan relating to an approved planned development shall occur in the manner set forth for conditional use permits (Section 16.16.050). Specific development plans shall be required of the developer as part of an application to amend or change zoning to the planned development (PO) district. D. Development Plans and Amendments. 1. Specific development plans shall be presented, considered and approved as part of the rezoning application process. If a subdivision is required, the development plans and the tentative subdivision map shall be submitted simultaneously. 2. The development plans shall include any or all or the following items where applicable: a. A detailed statement of all uses proposed to be established and an indication of the areas to be occupied by each use, as well as the resulting population and building intensities. The statement shall also include the proposed disposition and use of all areas indicated by the plan http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/ _ DA T A/TITLE 16/Chapter _16_44_ SPE... 6/2/2006 Chapter 16.44 SPECIAL DISTRICTS Page 2 of 17 as common areas, open spaces, recreation or park areas, school sites, and other such private or public facilities; b. The total development plan, showing the dimensions and locations of proposed structures, buildings, streets, parking, yards, playgrounds, school sites, recreational areas, open spaces, and other public or private facilities; c. Detailed engineering site plans, including the proposed finished grades and drainage facilities; d. Landscaping plans, in detail, excepting typical single-family lot residential areas often thousand (10,000) square feet and over. The street tree planting requirements of the city may be waived; provided, that the development plan or covenants provide adequate alternatives to the satisfaction of the planning commission and city council; e. Architectural drawings demonstrating the design and character of the proposed structures, . buildings, uses and facilities, and the physical relationship of all elements; f. Detailed engineering plans for the provision of public utilities for the development, including, but not limited to, water, sewer, drainage, street lighting, and fire hydrants; g. Other pertinent information as may be deemed necessary by the community development director, planning commission, and/or city council to detemnine that the contemplated arrangement of uses make it desirable to apply regulations and requirements differing from those ordinarily applicable pursuant to the provisions of this title; h. A development schedule indicating the time when the commencement and completion oflhe construction will occur under the approved development plan; and i. A statement requesting modification' of regulations and requirements differing from those ordinarily applicable pursuant to the provisions of this title. ' ' 3. The development plan shall meet or exceed the minimum requirements set forth in other portions of this title for land uses corresponding to the land uses proposed. 4. Density transfers shall be permitted subject to planning commission and city council approval. E. Permitted Uses. The following uses shall be permitted in the planned development (P-D) district pursuant to approval by the city council of the planned development ordinance for the area in question: 1. Single-family dwellings, duplexes, and multiple-family residential structures, including clusters, condominiums, townhouses, and similar concepts; 2. Commercial uses and commercial residential uses compatible with the total development plan, including, but not limited to, mobilehome parks, restaurants, specially shops, motels, and convention facilities; 3. Accessory buildings and uses as shown on the development plan, to be constructed with, or subsequent to, the construction of the main building; 4. Accessory buildings, such as garages, guest houses, or cabanas, subject to the lot coverage requirements set forth in subsection H of this section; and 5. Public and private park and/or recreation facilities, public and private schools, and public utility buildings and structures and uses, not including service, corporation, or storage yards. F. Maximum Allowable Building Size and Height. 1. No new structure, expansion of an existing structure to an adjacent structure or modification of an existing structure shall be permitted nor shall any business license or other permit be issued or renewed, that would allow the creation of a retail store or business with a total space occupying more than one hundred two thousand five hundred (102,500) square feet. 2. The maximum allowable height for a building or structure within the poD district shall be as shown on the development plan for the poD district or as recommended by the planning commission. In no case shall any structure be of such height or location as to obscure any view due to elevation differential of building sites. 3. Accessory buildings within the poD district shall not exceed one story and fourteen (14) feet in height. G. Minimum Building Site and Lot Width. 1. Minimum building site and minimum lot width for any permitted use other than single- family hltp:l/municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/ _DAT AlTITLEl6/Chapter _16 _44_ SPE... 6/2/2006 Chapter 16.44 SPECIAL DISTRICTS Page 3 of 17 residences shall be as shown on the development plan, or shall conform to minimum requirements as set forth in other sections of this title with relation to land use. 2. Minimum lot sizes may be reduced by two thirds, providing the area of reduction is devoted to common area, open space, green belt, or other recreational uses. H. Maximum Building Site Coverage by Buildings and Structures. 1. The maximum coverage of a building site by all structures including accessory buildings permitted in the poD district, but not including uncovered patios or swimming pools, shall not exceed thirty (30) percent for the poD district, or as shown on the development plan. . 2. Where lot sizes have been reduced as provided for in subsection G of this section, the maximum building coverage may be increased directly in ratio to the reduction of lot size. I. Minimum Yards Required. The front, side and rear yard shall be shown on the development plan or as recommended by the planning commission. If front, side and rear yards are not , represented on the development plan, then yard requirements shall conform to the minimum: requirements as set forth in'other sections of this title. J. Fences, Walls and Access. Fences and walls may be shown on the development plan and approved or required by the planning commission in the poD district. If such fences and walls are not shown, the following shall apply: 1. Fences, hedges and walls not to exceed six feet in height may occupy any side or rear yard, provid ed: . . a. That such fences, hedges and walls do not extend into any required front yard setback, and in the case of a corner lot, such fence does not extend into the required side yard setback adjacent " ' to'the street. Such fences; hedges and walls shall not exceed three feet in height in aforementioned required setbacks, b. That if there is over one-foot difference in elevation between contiguous buildings sites, the six-foot maximum height shall be a combination of the difference in elevation plus the height of the fence, providing that regardless of any difference in elevation, a fence nollo exceed forty (40) inches may be built in such areas, and further providing that if written approval of the adjoining property owner is obtained, and a permit is obtained from the city community development . department, such fence may be built to a maximum of six feet above the finished grade; 2. Fences exceeding six feet in height to enclose a court area, tennis court, or similar area, may be erected subject to obtaining a conditional use permit, if such fence is constructed of open mesh wire and is on the rear one-half of a lot: 3. A six-foot fence shall be required surrounding a swimming pool. Upon securing a conditional use permit, any such fence may be erected exceeding the required height in this subdivision; 4. Access to any parking area, ponding area, or public street shall be shown on the development plan. K, Required Minimum Off-Street Parking. 1. All residential uses shall have a minimum of two garage spaces. 3. All other uses shall have off street parking provided as required by the provisions of Chapter 16.56. L.Utilities. 1. Utility lines in the poD district, including, but not limited to electric, communications, street lighting, and cable television, shall be required to be placed underground except that electric utility lines shall be required to be placed underground only to the extent required for so-called streamline installation. Where streamline installation is used, the service lines running from the transmission lines to each residence or other service unit shall be placed underground, and only the transmission lines may be above ground, on streamline poles which contain transformers. Transmission lines may be placed underground at the option of the developer or utility with the concurrence of the planning commission. Where transmission lines are placed underground, appurtenances and associated equipment such as, but not limited to, surface mounted transformers, pedestal mounted terminal boxes and meter cabinets, and concealed ducts may be placed above ground provided such appurtenances are landscaped to the satisfaction of the planning commission. http://municipalcodes.Jexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_DA T NTITLE 16/Chapter _16_44 _SPE... 6/2/2006 Chapter 16.44 SPECIAL DISTRICTS Page 4 of 17 2. The developer or builder shall be responsible for complying with the requirements of this subsection, and he shall make the necessary arrangements with the utility companies for the installation of such facilities. 3. Utility lines that do not provide service to the areas being developed, but which pass through or alongside such areas, may be placed above ground only after plans for such installation have been submitted to and approved by the planning commission. M. Variation from Minimum Requirements. Variations from minimum requirements referred to in subsection (D)(2) of this section may be permitted in the planned development (P-D) district. The approval of any plan that requires such variations shall be approved by not less than a majority vote of the total membership of the planning commission upon a finding that such variations will produce anyone or more of the following results: 1. Reduce the area and unsightliness of cut and fill banks; . 2. Reduce the danger of erosion; 3. Create a better community environment through the dedication of public areas, rearrangement of lot sizes, or reforestation of barren areas; or 4. Create other improvements or permit the use of techniques which will produce a more desirable and livable community than can be obtained by strict compliance with such minimum requirements. N. Grading. No construction or grading shall be done until both development plans and subdivision plans have been adopted as set forth in this title; provided, however, minor grading which is necessary for. the enjoyment or safety of the existing use shall be allowed as a matter of right and subject only to city laws pertaining to grading.' O. Subdivision. In the poD district, where from the nature of the size,location, shape or topography of the parcel of land, or where from the nature of the improvements of development shown on the development plan, or any combination of these factors, it appears to the community development director that a future division of ownership or subdivision of the parcel would be required for orderly development, the community development director may require the filing of a tentative subdivision map, as provided in the land division provisions of this title, and the . performing of any other acts required in such regulation. Where any requirement ofthe land division provisions requires any specific act of the land owner or subdivider, the approval of any development plan shall not become effective until compliance has been made with such subdivision provisions. . P. Reversionary Clause. Any land classified as a PoD district shall revert to its former classification in the event that any portion of the development is not commenced within one year from the effective date of the ordinance classifying the land into a poD district. If rezoning is initiated by the planning commission or city council, such reversion shall not take effect. (Ord. 522 S 2, 2000: prior code S 9-09.010) ~6.44.020 Design development (D) overlay district. A. Purpose and Intent. It is the intent of the design development (D) district to establish development standards to address special or unique needs or characteristics of particular areas (e.g., reservation of larger parcels for specific uses in a newly created subdivision, rezoning of land as the result of a specific conceptual proposal, preservation of uniform architectural, structural, or physical characteristics). B. Authority. 1. The city council is authorized to adopt a design development overlay district only in conjunction with a base district. Adoption of an overlay district shall occur in the manner set forth in this title for amendments to zoning districts (Section 16.16.040). 2. When an overlay district is designated over any district, the standards used for that site shall be as set in the overlay district in addition to those regulations specified in the corresponding base district. In the event of a connict between the regulations of the base district and the overly district, the provisions of the overlay district shall govern. 3. No overlay district shall be established unless the commission and council make, but not be http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_DA T AlTITLE16/Chapter _16_44_ SPE... 6/2/2006 Chapter 16.44 SPECIAL DISTRICTS Page 5 of 17 limited to, the following findings: a. That the area for which a'n overlay district designation is proposed has a unique character, identity or environment; b. That the unique character, identity or environment of the are for which an overly district is proposed would be preserved and enhanced to the benefit of such area and the city as a whole by the provisions set forth by the overlay district. c. That an overlay district is necessary to protect, preserve or enhance the unique character or identity or environment of the area for which an overlay district is proposed; d. That an overlay district is necessary to protect the health, welfare and safety of the public. 4. Each overlay district established shall include, but not be limited to, the following provisions to assure the preservation, enhancement or protection of the unique character, identity or environment for which an overlay district is established: . a. Use regulations; b. Site development criteria, such as height, bulk and area of buildings, building lines, required setbacks, distances between buildings, and locations for the parking of vehicles; c. Performance standards; and d. Design guidelines, relating to architectural features, landscaping, lighting, and other amenities. C. Establishment of District. Each design development overlay district shall be indicated on the zoning map by the base district abbreviation followed by "-D" and the reference number of the overlay district (e.g., "2.1", "2.2", etc.). (Prior code ~ 9-09.020) . 16.44.030 Specific plan (SP) district. A. Purpose and Intent. Specific plans prepared pursuant to California Government Code Section 65450, et seq., are a significant tool to implement the general plan, as well as an inducement to the development of large-scale mixed use developments desired by the city. It is the purpose of this section to provide a method for the zoning of lands within adopted specific plans for which customized development and use regulations have been approved by the city council. The creation of a specific plan (SP) zone is necessary to provide adequate development flexibility for innovation in residential building types, land use mixes, site design, and development concepts. B. Applicability. This section shall apply to the properties designated in the Arroyo Grande general plan land use element as requiring preparation of a specific plan or any other project site where the applicant believes that implementation of a specific plan will benefit the project and the city. All specific plan applications shall be accompanied by a zone change application requesting a change from the existing zoning district designation to a specific plan designation. The specific plan district shall be designated on the city zoning map by the symbol "SP" followed by a number to designate the Specific Plan (e.g., "SP-3.1," "SP-3.2," etc.). C. Use and Development Regulations. 1. Residential development standards and regulations shall include, but may not be limited to, the following items: a. Description and purpose; b. Definition of terms (if other than that set forth in this title); c. Permitted uses, building and structures; i. Primary uses, ii. Accessory uses, ili. Conditional uses; d. Minimum building site areas and lot dimensions; e. Minimum building site area per dwelling unit; f. Minimum floor area per dwelling unit, if found to be appropriate by the planning commission; http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_DA T AlTITLE 16/Chapter _16_44_ SPE... 6/2/2006 Chapter 16.44 SPECIAL DISTRICTS Page 6 of 17 g. Minimum setbacks; i. Yards, ii. Building separations; h. Maximum building coverage per lot; i. Building and structural height limitations; j. Recreational leisure areas, open space and private outdoor living areas; k. Off-street parking; i.Open, ii. Covered, iii. Screening from roadways. 1. Distance of dwellirig units from vehicular access ways and parking; m. Walls or fencing; n. Refuse storage areas; o. Tre!ltment of any external lighting and roof-mounted equipment; p. Landscaping (on and off-site); q. Signs; and r. Covenants, conditions and restrictions. . 2. Commercial and industrial development standards arid regulations shall include, but may not be limited to, the following items: a. Description and purpose; b. Definition of terms, if other than that set forth in this title; c. Permitted uses, buildings and structures; i. Primary uses, ii. Accessory uses, iii. Conditional uses; d. Setback and building separations; e. Landscaping (on and off-site); f. Building and structural height limitations; g. Site size; h. Off-street parking; i.Walls; j: Refuse storage and loading areas; k. Access (secondary); I. Treatment of external lighting and roof-mounted equipment; m. Signs; n. Performance standards (standards which might affect adjacent residential uses, i.e., noise, odor, lighting, dust, and the like); and o. Covenants, conditions and restrictions. 3. Any specific plan may be required to address other subjects that in the judgement of the planning director are necessary or desirable for implementation of the general plan. D. Minimum Design Standards. All specific plans shall provide for development which exceeds the minimum standards and quality of development commensurate with what would be permitted under the existing district classification that most closely resembles the type and density of development proposed. The following are considered the minimum standards and concepts acceptable for a specific http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_DA T NTITLE16/Chapter _16_44_ SPE... 6/2/2006 Chapter 16.44 SPECIAL DISTRICTS Page 7 of 17 IH . " plan. Each of the following shall be addressed within the text and graphic illustrations or design manual submitted for approval and a specific plan. a. Lot development, alteration or enlargement shall be viewed not only as one or more free standing objects but also as part of a street, or cluster, or neighborhood within the entire community. Parcel or lot development should respect existing development, topography, views, general vehicle, pedestrian, bicycle and equestrian circulation, and the natural environment . b.Natural featlire~!?Uch as; lTiaturevegetation, laJidforlTis,drai[iage courSes; r(itk6iJtcroppirigs;.';'i! and views should be used to adyantageas design el<iments.Gonversely, ujidesiri;lblesite,.;,};,j features should be [Tlinimized thrOugh proper site planning and building oriEmtati~~.Ai:I!~~ussii>rj .' of view corridorseind opportunitiesisJEjquire,d. . H' ... ..em" .... '.' :Li. .c;.:c'..~;,.__',;::~::".;J.J c. Placement of the building shall be done in a manner compatible with surrounding existing and planned uses and buildings. The setback from streets and adjacent properties shall relate to the scale of the prOposed building. Larger buildings shall require more setback area for a balance of scale and to provide compatibility with adjacent uses. All buildings shall have articulated roof lines and fully dimensional roofs creating shadowing effects, physical offsets, and features of design such as interesting angles, prOjections, rOof overhangs, and other enhancing techniques integrated into the building in a harmonious manner coupled with pedestrian amenities. All exterior wall elevations of buildings and screen walls shall have architectural treatment and articulation of elevation and recesses, which create shadow patterns and texture, and provide variety to the building plans or surface. At ground level, expanses of blank building wall shall be minimized through creative use of materials, textures, color and building form. d. Access and circulation shall be designed.to provide a safe and efficient system for vehicles and pedestrians. Poihtsof access shall comply with city access regulations and shall not conflict with other planned or existing access points. The circulation system shall be designed to reduce conflicts between vehicular and pedestrian traffic, minimize impacts on adjacent properties, combine access where possible, and provide adequate maneuvering areas. Vehicular and pedestrian traffic shall be separated thrOugh the use of a continuous system of public and private sidewalks. Major entry areas shall be treated in a manner which reflects the architectural theme of the development and is compatible in color, texture and materials with adjacent structures. e. Parking shall be. designed to minimize visual disruption of the overall project design. Parking areas should be screened from streets through combinations of mounding, landscaping, low prOfile walls, and especially grade separations. The design of parking areas shall also minimize auto noise, glare, and increases in ambient air temperature. This can be accomplished thrOugh sound walls, screening with fences or hedges, trees, and separation of parking spaces and driveways from residences. f. A unifying landscape design which is clearly identified and included as part of the specific plan is required and shall enhance the building design, enhance public views and spaces and prOvide buffers and transitions. Landscaping shall prOvide for solar access and for shade to facilitate energy conservation. Where apprOpriate, landscape design features such as color accents, specimen tree planting and decorative hardscape shall be prOvided to enhance roadway i(ltersections, driveway apprOaches, pedestrian walkways, and building entries. A discussion of plant materials, minimum sizes, number of plants, placement and anticipated landscape budget for the project is required. g. Fences and walls are discouraged unless needed for a specific screening or safety purpose. Where needed, fences and walls shall relate to both the site being developed and surrounding developments, open space and streets or pedestrian ways. The use of fencing or walls shall be consistent with the overall design theme of the development or adjoining existing developments; and shall incorporate landscape elements, changes in materials, offsets and fenestrations, color or texture in order to screen refuse facilities and prevent graffiti, undue glare, heat or reflection; and minimize aesthetic inconsistencies. h. Adequate on-site lighting shall be provided to ensure a safe environment yet not cause areas of intense light, glare or spill over on adjacent prOperties. Lighting fixtures and poles shall be designed as an integrated part of buildings or complexes and placed in a manner consistent and compatible with the overall site and building design character. L On-site utilities and ancillary equipment shall be located in inconspicuous areas and screened with material or combination of materials which best suit the overall design theme. i. Development should relate to the natural surroundings and minimize grading by following the hltp:l/rnunicipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/ _DA T AlTITLE 16/Chapter _16_44_ SPE... 6/2/2006 Chapter 16.44 SPECIAL DISTRICTS Page 8 of 17 natural contours as much as possible. Graded slopes shall be rounded and contoured to blend with existing terrain. Split-level pads, built-up foundations, stepped footings, etc., are encouraged in areas of moderate to steep gradient. The overall grading shall create differentials in building plotting and shall be used to break up straight visual lines by lowering parking areas and stepping site plans and building pads. k. A recognizable design theme shall be established which is compatible with surrounding planned or existing developments and which is based upon prominent design features in the immediate area (e.g., trees, landforms, historic landmarks). Variations are encouraged which provide visual interest but do not create abrupt changes causing discord in the overall character of the immediate neighborhood. It is not intended that one style of architecture should be dominant, but that individual structures shall create and enhance a high quality and harmonious community appearance. , L The architecture shall consider compatibility with surrounding character, including harmonious building style,form, size, color, material, reveals, overhangs and roof line. Individual dwelling units should be distinguishable from one another and have separate entrances. m. The mass and scale of the building shall be proportionate to the site, open spaces, street locations, and surrounding developments. Setbacks and overall heights should provide an element of openness and human scale. n. Colors, textures and materials shall achieve compatibility of design and to enhance architectural interest. They should blend well with the environment and not create inappropriate abrupt changes. , '0. An integrated sign program or program for the entire specific plan area shall be provided. Conformity to applicable regulations, provisions for 'sign placement, sign scale in relationship to buildings and readability shall be considered in developing the signing concept. While providing the most effective signing, the concept shall also be compatible with the building and site design relative to color, material and placement. p. All equipment, whether on the roof, side of building or ground, shall be screened. Wherever possible, a roof parapet or other architecturally integrated element shall be used to address this requirement. All equipment screening shall be architecturally compatible with respect to materials, color, shape, and size. The screening design shall blend with the building design. Where individual equipment is provided, a continuous screen is desirable. E. Requirements Not Specified. Development within a specific plan district shall be subject to the requirements of the district that most closely resembles the use and intensity of use proposed unless expressly addressed and modified within the text of the approved specific plan. Determination of said district shall be made by the planning director. (Prior code 9 9-09.030) 16.44.040 Public/quasi-public ~;~strict). ' A. Purpose and Intent. The primary~se of the public/quasi-public district is to designate land for the conduct of public, quasi-public, and institutional activities, including the protection of areas needed for such future facilities. B. Use Regulations. Table 16.44.040-A identifies those uses which are permitted within the public/quasi-public district. Uses permitted subject to plot plan review are identified by a "PP" and uses permitted subject to issuance of a conditional use permit are identified by a "C." Uses not identified in the table are prohibited. . Tallie 16.44.040-A Uses Permitted Within Public I Quasi-Public District Legend P Permitted PP Permitted Subject to Plat Plan Review http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_DA T AlTITLEI6/Chapter _16_44_ SPE... 6/2/2006 Chapter 16.44 SPECIAL DISTRICTS Page 9 of 17 C Permitted Subject to Issuance ofa Conditional Use Permit (see Section 16.16.050(B) for additional.information - use may be permitted without a Conditional Use Permit or subject to Plot Plan review based on criteria listed herein) TUP Permitted Subject to Issuance of Temporary Use Permit IUse II PF IA. Public/Quasi-Public Uses II 11. Animal shelter II C 12. Day nurseries and nursery schools II C 13. Churches . . II C 4. Clubs, lodges, fraternities and sororities I C 5. Educational institutions (including public or private I C vocational schools) 16. Fire and police stations C 17. Hospitals C 18. Post offices C 9. Public buildings and grounds not otherwise mentioned C herein 110. Public libraries and museums C 11. Public parks and recreation facilities (public or private) I P 12. Public utilities and public service substations, reservoirs, CJ pumping plants and similar installations not including public utility offices 113. Public utility services offices II C I 14. Recreational facilities such as zoos, country clubs, C tennis and swim clubs, golf courses and private ranges, equestrian centers, with incidental limited commercial uses that are commonly associated and/or directly related to the primary recreational use lB. Recreational Uses II I 1. Convalescent homes, 'congregate care, assisted living I C I facilities for senior citizens 12. Residential care facility II C I 3. Homeless shelters within religious or social organization c=J buildings Ic. Accessory Uses II I 1. Accessory structures and uses located on the same site I PP I as a permitted use 2. Accessory structures and uses located on the same site I PP I as a use requiring a conditional use permit I II I http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_DA T A/TITLEI 6/Chapter _16_44_ SPE... 6/2/2006 Chapter 16.44 SPECIAL DISTRICTS Page 10 of 17 3. Accessory structures and uses located on the same site I C I as a use requiring a conditional use permit D. Temporary Uses (Subject to the provisions of Section I TUP I 16.16.100 and the issuance of a temporary use permit) E. Other uses similar to, and no more objectionable than the CJ uses identified above, as determined by the Planning Commission C. Property Development Standards-Public/Quasi-Public District. The following regulations shall apply to all land and buildings and structures located wilhin the public/quasi-public districts: 1. General Requirements. The following table sets forth minimum site developmentstandards for public/quasi-public development projects. Table 16.44.040-8 Public/Quasi-Public Development Standards 1. Lot area 2. Lot width 3. Lot depth 4. Front building setback 5. Interior side building setback 6. Street side building setback 7. Rear building setback 8. Maximum lot coverage 9. Maximum floor area ratio 10. Maximum building height 25,000 140' 140' 20' . 10' 20' 10' 45% 0.5% 30' ;2. Special Requirements. a. Wherever a lot in any public/quasi-public district abuts a lot in any residential district, a minimum building setback of twenty (20) feet measured from the property line shall be required. A minimum of ten (10) feet of the setback area nearest the residential district boundary shall be landscaped and the remaining area may be used for required off-street parking. b. In the public/quasi-public district, a two-story addition closer than fifty (50) feet to an existing single-family residence shall require plot plan review by the planning director prior to issuance of a building permit. c. Where off-street parking areas are situated such thallhey are visible from any street, a wall, earthen berm, or combination wall/berm three feet in height shall be erected between the required landscape area and the parking area to adequately screen the parking areas. d. Except as otherwise permitted, a street side building setback area shall be used only for landscaping, pedestrian walkways, driveways, or off-street parking. e. Except as otherwise permitted, required rear and interior side building setback areas shall be used only for landscaping, pedestrian walkways, driveways, off-street parking or loading, recreational activities or facilities, and similar accessory activities. (Prior code !l 9-09.040) http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_DA T AlTITLE16/Chapter _16_44_ SPE... 6/2/2006 Chapter 16.44 SPECIAL DISTRICTS Page II of 17 :'Ci"'."1 16.44.050 Floodplain management (FH) district. .', . .,;,' ;';,~i;:(:.~1~;1 A. Statement of Purpose and Intent I~ i~ t~e purp?se of th~ssection to promot~ thepu.bli<nea.l.ih,', :1t,~,1t-.r,'~[,',~,',",',:1'. safety, and general welfare, and to minimize public and pnvate losses due to flood conditions tn,: ;:;$<>;':':' specific areas by provisions designed to: . . . .' ;"':i'>',)J~:~:;l 1. Protect human life and health; . . " . .... . ,,~,j~~~:~ 2. Minimize expenditure of public money for costly flood control projects; '. ..' ),~.{;::'<I 3. Minimize the need for rescue 'and relief efforts associated with flooding and generally' ',;:/\!,;j undertaken at the expense of the general public;,' "}::'.l 4. Minimize prolonged business interruptions; .' \;?D': 1 , ,-' ,.-,.:~ -.: J 5, Minimize damage to public facilities and utilities such as water and gas'mains, electric, .. . :i:;, ; telephone and sewer lines; and streets and bridges located in areas of special flood hazard; '>:';,'{;1 6. Help maintain a stable tax base by providing for the sound use and development of areas of' ., ..... special flood hazard so as to minimize future blighted areas caused by flood damages; ':'\;:..) ':~;:~Y;D:.:;! 7. Ensure that potential buyers are notified that property is in an area of special flood hazard;'," '.' . ~,...- , 8. Ensure that those who occupy the areas of special flood hazard assume responsibility'for their ,,:;,''''i actions; . '_ ';. ;",_";' ,,;' CFi':,'-"1 B. Methods of Reducing Flood Losses. In order to accomplish its purposes, this section inCludes. ,'p: ., the following methods and provisions: .. : :':'::;" ',i,:j ,',-. >..:1 1. Restrict or prohibit uses which are dangerous to health, safety and property due to water or ' . erosion hazards, or which result in damaging increases in erosion or flood heights or velocities; 2. Require that uses vulnerable to floods, including facilities which serve such uses, be protected against flood damage at the time of initial construction; " .'. ',' 3. Control the alteration of natural flood plains, stream channels, and natural protective barrierS,'..,.. which help accommodate or channel flood waters: . .' 4. Control filling, grading, dredging, and other development which may increase flood damage; .", 5. Prevent or regulate the construction of flood barriers which will unnaturally divert flood waters or which may increase flood hazards in other areas, ' .;. C. General Provisions. 1. Lands to Which this Section Applies. This section shall apply to all areas of special flood hazards within the jurisdiction of the city.: 2. Basis for Establishing the Areas of Special Flood Hazard. The areas of special flood haZard; identified by the Federal Insurance Administration (FIA) of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in the Flood Insurance Study (FIS) dated March 19, 1984 and accompanying F.lood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) and Flood Boundary and Floodway Maps (FBFMs), dated September 19: 1984, and all subsequent amendments and/or revisions, are adopted by reference and deClared to be a part of this section. These areas are the minimum area of applicability of this section and may be supplemented by studies for other areas which allow implementation of this section and which are recommended to the city by the floodplain administrator. The study, FIRMs and FBFMs are on file at the Department of Public Works, 214 East Branch Street, City of Arroyo Grande, California 93421. 3. Compliance. No structure or land shall hereafter be constructed, located, extended, converted or altered without full compliance with the term of this section and other applicable regulations. Violation of the requirements Qncluding violations of conditions and safeguards established in connection with conditions) shall constitute a misdemeanor. Nothing herein shall prevent the city from taking such lawful action as is necessary to prevent or remedy any violation. 4. Abrogation and Greater Restrictions. This section is not intended to repeal, abrogate or impair any existing easements, covenants or deed restrictions. However. where this section and another ordinance, easement, covenant or deed restriction conflict or overlap, whichever imposes the more stringent restrictions shall prevail. http.l/municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_DAT AlTITLE 16/Chapter _16_ 44_SPE... 6/2/2006 Chapter 16.44 SPECIAL DISTRICTS Page 12 of 17 5. Interpretation. In the interpretation and application of this section, all provisions shall be: ;'C,' /:) a. Considered as minimum requirements;'. ....., .....:t~:~il b. Liberally construed in favor of the governing body; and'. . . ';'F;:";~:{'l c. Deemed neither to limit nor repeal any other powers granted under state statutes. ..:';' ,./?'!)~ ". ........."1 6. Warning and Disclaimer of Liability. The degree of flood protection required by this sectioni~';:'j cons!dered reasonable for regulatory pu:poses and is based o.n scientific an~ engineE!ring. .'\,,';'tH considerations. Larger floods can and will occur on rare occasions. Flood heights may be '..r.''''...,., increased by man-made or natural causes. This section does not imply that land outside'the:\+;l areas of special flo.od hazards or uses permitted.,,:,ithin such areas ~Il be free from flooding oC~;:j flood damages. This secl10n shall not create liability on the part of city, any officer or employee">> thereof, the state of California, or the Federal Insurance Administration, Federal Emergency.: ~?! Management Agency, for any flood damages that result from reliance on this section or any.:::<'! administrative decision lawfully made' hereunder. . . '. . " .: >'. ;\TI, . D. Administration. .. .)((1 1. Establishment of Development Permit. A development permit shall be obtained before any Sr'::.. .! construction or other development begins within any area of special flood hazard establish'ed ili":j subsection C of this se~tion. Application for.a deve.lopment within an ~reaof special hazaril.sl!~(j be made on forms furnished by the floodplain administrator and may Include, but not be limited' .J'1 to; plans in duplicate drawn to scale showing the nature, location, dimensions and elevation of ,,/. j the area in question; existing or proposed structures, fill, storage of materials, drainage facilitie;;'; , and the location of the foregoing. Specifically, the following information is required:.' {:':.r.l a. Proposed elevation in relation to mean sea level, of the lowest floor (including basement) .of~li i structures in Zone AO, elevation of highest adjacent grade and proposed elevation of 10wes\f1qg.t! of all structures; or proposed elevation in relation to mean sea level to which any nonresidential," i structure will be floodproofed, if required in subsection (E)(1)(c)(iii) of this section.' t.. .:.: 'I b. All appropriate certifications listed in subsection (D)(3)(d) of this section; . .'.:c..., c. Description of the extent to which any watercourse will be altered or relocated as a result of'--: i .. ' . ' .. " I proposed development. . '., .: i 2. Designation of the Floodplain Administrator. The director of public works appointed to . administer, implement and enforce this section. 3. Duties and Responsibilities of the Floodplain Administrator. The duties and responsibilitjesof the floodplain administrator shall include,. but not be limited to the following: .' , a. Permit Review. Review all development permits within the special hazard areas to deterrnin.El' that . i. Permit requirements of this section have been satisfied, is reasonabl safe from floo . Iii. The proposed development does not adversely affect the carrying capacity of areaswhere case flood elevations have been determined but a floodway has not been designated. For' .......... purposes of this section, "adversely affects" means that the cumulative effect ofthe pro~ed <~:',~ 1 development when combined with all other existing and anticipated development will increase, tI).El',! water surface elevation of the base flood more than one foot at any point. " .' _ '.; b. Review and Use of Any Other Base Flood Data. When base flood elevation data has not been . provided in accordance with subsection (C)(2) of this section, the floodplain administrator shall' ' obtain, review and reasonably utilize any base flood elevation and floodway data available from a 181 or state agency, or other source, in order to admin' r . section. c. Notifical1on 0 er ge enever ere is an alteration or relocation of a wate i. Notify adjacent communities and the California Department of Water Resources prior to alteration or relocation; ii. Submit evidence of such notification to the Federal Insurance Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency; iii. Assure that the flood carrying capacity within the altered or relocated portion the watercourse is maintained. http://municipalcodes.lexisnexiscom/codes/arroyol_DA T AlTITLE 16/Chapter _16_44_ SPE... 6/2/2006 Chapter 16.44 SPECIAL DISTRICTS Page 13 of 17 d. Documentation of Floodplain Development. Obtain and maintain for public inspection and make available as needed the following: i. Certification required by subsection (E)(1)(c)Q) of this section (lowest floor elevations); ii. Certification required by subsection (E)(1)(c)(ii) of this section (elevation or flood proofing of nonresidential structures); Iii. Certification required by subsection (E)(1 )(c)Qii) of this section (wet floodproofing standard); iv. Certification of elevation required by subsection (E)(3)(b) of this section (subdivision standards); v. Certification required by subsection (E)(6)(a) of this section (floodway encroachments). e. Map Determinations. Make interpreta-tions where needed, as to the exact location of the boundaries of the areas of special flood hazard, for example, where there appears to be a conflict between a mapped boundary and'actual field conditions.'The person contesting the location of the boundary shall be given a reasonable opportunity to appeal the interpretation as provided in subsection F of this section. f. Take action to remedy violations of this section as specified in subsection (C)(3) of this section. E. Provisions for Flood Hazard Reduction. In addition to the development standards of the district with which the FH district has been combined and the standards contained in Chapters 16.48 and 16.52, the standards contained in this section shall apply. In the event of a conflict in the applicable regulations, the provisions of this section shall govern. . 1. Standards of Construction. In all areas of special flood hazards the following standards are . required: . a. Anchoring. i. All new construction and substantial improvements within special flood hazard areas shall be adequately anchored to prevent flotation, collapse or lateral movement of the structure resulting from hydrodynamic and hydrostatic loads, including the effects of buoyancy. ii. All manufactured homes shall meet the anchoring standards of subsection (E)(4) of this section. b. Construction Materials and Methods. All new construction and substantial improvement with special flood hazard areas shall be constructed; i. With materials and utility equipment resistant to flood damage; ii. Using methods and practices that minimize flood damage; Iii. With electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing and air conditioning equipment and other service facilities that are designed and/or located so as to prevent water from entering or accumulating within the components during conditions of flooding; and if iv. Within Zones AH or AO, so that there are adequate drainage paths around structures on slopes to guide flood waters around and away from proposed structures. C. Elevation and Floodproofing. See Section 16.04.070 for definitions for "basement," "new construction," "substantial damage" and "substantial improvement." i. Residential construction, new or substantial improvement, shall have the lowest floor, including basement: (A) In an AO zone, elevated above the highest adjacent grade to a height exceeding the depth number specified in feet on the FIRM by at least one foot, or elevated at least three feet. above the highest adjacent grade if no depth number is specified; (B) In an A zone, elevated at least one foot above the base flood elevation, as determined by the community; (C) In all other zones, elevated at least one foot above the base flood elevation. Upon the completion of the structure, the elevation of the lowest floor including basement shall be certified by a registered professional engineer or surveyor, and verified by the community building inspector to be properly elevated. Such certification or verification shall be provided to the floodplain administrator. (D) For floodplain management purposes the term "lowest floor" means the lowest floor of the http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_DA T NTITLE 16/Chapter _16_44_ SPE... 6/2/2006 Chapter 16.44 SPECIAL DISTRICTS Page 14 of 17 lowest enclosed area, including basement definition. An unfinished or flood resistant enclosure below the lowest floor that is usable solely for parking of vehicles, building access or storage in an area other than a basement area, is not considered a building's lowest floor provided it conforms to applicable non-elevation design requirements, including, but not limited to: (1) The floodproofing standard, in subsection (E)(1)(c)Qii) of this section; (2) The anchoring standards in subsection (E)(1) of this section; (3) The construction materials and methods standards in subsection (E)(1)(b) of this section; (4) The standards for utilities in subsection (E)(2) of this section. ii. Nonresidential construction, new or substantial improvement, shall either be elevated to conform with subsection (E)(1)(c) of this section or together with attendant utility and sanitary facilities; (A) Be flood proofed, below the elevation recommended under subsection (E)(1)(C)Q) of this section so that the structure is watertight with walls substantially impermeable to the passage of water; ./ (B) Have structural components capable of resisting hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads and effects of buoyancy; and (C) Be certified by a registered professional engineer or architect that the standards of this subsection are satisfied. Such certification shall be provided to the floodplain administrator. iii. All new construction and substantial improvement with fully enclosed areas below the lowest floor (excluding basements) that are usable solely for parking of vehicles, building access or storage, and which are subject to flooding, shall be designed to automatically equalize hydrostatic flood forces on exterior walls by allowing for the entry and exit of floodwater. Designs for meeting this requirement must exceed the following minimum criteria: (A) Be certified by a registered professional engineer or architect; or (B) Have a minimum of two openings having a total net area of.not less than one square inch for every square foot of enclosed area subject to flooding. The bottom of all openings shall be no higher than one foot above grade. Openings may be equipped with screens, louvers, valves or other coverings or devices provided that they permit the automatic entry and exit of floodwater. iv. Manufactured homes shall also meet the standards in subsection (E)(4) of this section. 2. Standards for Utilities. a. All new and replacement water supply and sanitary sewage systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate: i. Infiltration of flood waters into the systems; and ii. Discharge from the systems into flood waters. b. On-site waste disposal systems shall be located to avoid impairment to them, or contamination from them during flooding. 3. Standards for Subdivisions. a. All preliminary subdivision proposals shall identify the flood hazard area and the elevation of the base flood. b. All subdivision plans within special flood hazard areas will provide the elevation of proposed structure(s) and pad(s). If the site is filled above the base flood elevation, the lowest first floor and pad elevations shall be certified by a registered professional engineer or surveyor and provided to the floodplain administrator. c. All subdivision proposals shall be consistent with the need to minimize flood damage. d. All subdivision proposals shall have public utilities and facilities such as sewer, gas, electrical and water systems located and constructed to minimize flood damage. e. All subdivisions shall provide adequate drainage to reduce exposure to flood hazards. 4. Standards for Manufactured Homes. a. All manufactured homes that are placed or substantially improved within Zones A1-30, AH, and AR on the community's Flood Insurance Rate Map, on sites located: http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/''pA T AlT1TLE 16/Chapter _16_44_ SPE... 6/2/2006 Chapter 16.44 SPECIAL DISTRICTS Page IS of 17 i. Outside of a manufactured home park or subdivisions; ii. In a new manufactured home park or subdivision; iii. In an expansion to an existing manufactured home park or subdivision; or iv. In an existing manufactured home park or subdivision on a site upon which a manufactured home has incurred substantial damage as the result of a flood, shall be elevated on a permanent foundation such that the lowest floor of the manufactured home is elevated at least one foot above the base flood elevation, and shall be securely fastened to an adequately anchored foundation system to resist flotation collapse and lateral movement. b. All manufactured homes to be placed or substantially improved on sites in an existing manufactured home park or subdivision within Zones A 1-30, AH, AR on the community's Flood Insurance Rate Map that are not subject to the provisions of subsection (E)(4)(a) of this section will be securely fastened to an adequately anchored foundation system to resist foundation collapse'and lateral movement, and will be elevated so that either the: , i. Lowest floor of the manufactured home is at least one foot above the base flood elevation; or ii. Manufactured home chassis is supported by reinforced piers or other foundation elements of at least equivalent strength that are no less than thirty-six (36) inches in height above grade. 5. Standards For Recreational Vehicles. a. All recreational vehicles placed on sites within Zones A1-30, AH and AR on the community's Flood Insurance Rate Map will either: i. Be on the site for fewer than one hundred eighty (180) consecutive days, and be fully licensed and ready for highway use. A recreational vehicle is ready for highway use if it is on its wheels or jacking system, is attached to the site only by quick disconnect type utilities and security devices, and has no permanently attached additions; or ' ii. Meet the permit requirements of subsection D of this section and the elevation and anchoring requirements for manufactured homes in subsection (E)(4)(a) ofthis section. 6. Floodways. Located within areas of special flood hazard established in subsection (C)(2) of this section are areas designated as floodways. Since the floodway is an extremely hazardous area due to the velocity of flood waters which carry debrts, potential projectiles, and erosion potential, the following provisions apply: a. Prohibit encroachments, including fill, new construction, substantial improvement, and other new development unless certification by a registered professional engineer or architect is provided demonstrating that encroachments shall not result in any increase in the base flood elevation during the occurrence of the base flood discharge. b. If subsection (E)(6)(a) of this section is satisfled, all new construction, substantial improvement, and other proposed new development shall comply with all other applicable flood hazard reduction provisions of subsection E of this section. F. Variances and Appeals. 1. The planning commission of the city shall hear and decide appeals and requests for variances from the requirements of this section. 2. The planning commission shall hear and decide appeals regarding any decision or determination made by the floodplain administrator in the enforcement or administration of this section may be appealed to the city council. 3. The variance criteria set forth in this section are based on the general principle that variances pertain to a piece of property and are not personal in nature. A variance may be granted for a parcel of property with physical characteristics so unusual that complying with the requirements of this section would create an exceptional hardship to the applicant or the surrounding property owners. The characteristics must be unique to the property and not be shared by adjacent parcels. The unique characteristic must pertain to the land itself, not to the structure, its inhabitants, or the property owners. 4. Review of Variance Requests. In passing upon requests for variances, the planning commission shall consider all technical evaluations, all relevant factors, standards specified in other sections of this section, and the: a. Danger that materials may be swept onto other lands to the injury of others; http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_DA T AlTITLEI6/Chapter _16_44_ SPE... 6/2/2006 Chapter 16.44 SPECIAL DISTRICTS Page 16 of 17 , i, b. Danger of life and property due to flooding or erosion damage; c. Susceptibility of the proposed facility and its contents to flood damage and the effect of such damage on the existing individual owner and future owners of the property; d. Importance of the services provided by the proposed facility to the community; e. Necessity to the facility of a waterfront location, where applicable; f. Availability of alternative locations for the proposed use which are not subject to flooding or erosion damage; g. Compatibility of the proposed use with existing and anticipated development; h. Relationship of the proposed use to the comprehensive plan and floodplain management program for that area; i. Safety of access to the, property in time of flood for ordinary and emergency vehicles; j. Expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise, and sediment transport of the, flood waters expected at the site; and k. Costs of providing governmental services during and after flood conditions, including maintenance and repair of public utilities and facilities such as sewer, gas, electrical, and water system, and streets and bridges. 5. Conditions for Variances. a. Generally, variances may be issued for new construction, substantial improvement, and other proposed new development to be erected on a lot of one-half acre or less in size contiguous to and surrounded by lots with existing structures constructed below the base flood level, providing that the procedures of subsection D and E of this section have been fully considered. As the lot size increases beyond one-half acre, the technical justification required for issuing the variance increases. b. Variances may be issued for the repair or rehabilitation of historic structures upon a determination that the proposed repair or rehabilitation will not preclude the structure's continued designation as an historic structure and the variance is the minimum necessary to preserve the historic character and design of the structure. c. Variances shall not be issued within any mapped regulatory floodway if any increase in flood levels during the base flood discharge would result. d. Variances shall only be issued upon a determination that the variance is the minimum necessary considering the flood hazard, to afford relief. "Minimum necessary" means to afford relief with a minimum of deviation from the requirements of this section. For example, in the case of variances to elevation requirement, this means the city need not grant permission for the applicant to build at grade, or even to whatever elevation the applicant proposes, but only to that elevation which the city believes will both provide relief and preserve the integrity of the local ordinance. e. Variances shall only be issued upon a: i. Showing of good and sufficient cause; ii. Determination that failure to grant the variance would result in exceptional hardship to the applicant; and ili. Deterl11inatioll that thegraniing of avariance wiil not result in increased~ood heights; additional threats to public safety,oreXlraordinary public expense, create a nuisance cause fraud or victimization of the public, or confl.ict with existing local laws or ordinances. "Hardship," as used in this subsection, means the exceptional hardship that would result from a failure to grant the requested variance. The hardship must be exceptional, unusual, and peculiar to the property involved. Economic or financial hardship alone is not exceptional. Inconvenience, aesthetic considerations, physical handicaps, personal preferences, or the disapproval of one's neighbors likewise cannot, as a rule, qualify as an exceptional hardship. "Public safety and nuisance," as used in this subsection, means that the granting of a variance must not result in anything which is injurious to safety or health of an entire community or neighborhood, or any considerable number of persons, or unlawfully obstructs the free passage or use, in the customary manner, of any navigable lake, or river, bay, stream, canal or basin. htlp:l/municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/ _ DA T AlTITLE 16/Chapter _16_44_ SPE... 6/2/2006 Chapter 16.44 SPECIAL DISTRICTS Page 17 of 17 "Fraud and victimization," as used in this subsection, means that the variance granted must not cause fraud on or victimization of the public. In examining this requirement, the city will consider the fact that every newly constructed building adds to government responsibilities and remains a part of the community for fifty (50) to one hundred (100) years. Buildings that are permitted to be constructed below the base flood elevation are subject during all those years to increased risk of damage from floods, while future owners of the property and the community as a whole are . subject to all the costs, inconvenience, danger and suffering that those increased flood damages bring. In addition, future owners may purchase the property, unaware that it is subject to potential flood damage, and can be insured only at very high flood insurance rates. ~lTfx~'[~r:€e.s:W~xI[~}~g~~)~I[~~:~~,~~ifu~oh.;~~~~liKQ~~nlfiR.~0li11~~'(~i1~:~Ni~Tpro~~~~d: ....:f;l :,,\':new .'development .nec.essary..for the'conductof.a.functlonally.dependent.use .provlded .that the ".....,:' i h'~~i~~s~~t%~p~fn~~i~ru~ruWJaJ~Wk~\W~?lh~~~f~1e~Ro~j'j:~lj~w~Wt\ht%t~~~~~(ce:l ..tf.'.~~d;a?~~r<>(r,~.i?ql\ j~.~~~i~~rialt!ii'~~~:tqPlJbli9!iaf~tY.~MCli:ie~ [i~tc,riilWa .pu.~j\c,niii~~~ce:.:i,/ ....j "'g:-(J"pon -corisldE;f'aiion 'ofth'e'ia"C~of ~ub~ectioo (f)(4')of ttiissectio~-andihe purposesofihls " .... section, the planning commission may attach such conditions to the granting of variances as it deems necessary to further the purposes of this section. 6. Any applicant to whom a variance is granted shall be given written notice that: a. The issuance of a variance to construct a structure below the base flood level can result in substantially increased premium rates for flood insurance, as determined by their insurance carrier, b. Such construction below the base flood level increases risks to life and property. 7. The floodplain administrator will maintain a record of all variance actions, including justification for their issuance, and report such variances issued in its biennial report submitted to the Federal Insurance Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency. (Prior code !i 9-09.050) http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_DA T AlTITLE 16/Chapter _16..44.. SPE... 6/2/2006 Chapter 16.68 IMPROVEMENTS Page 1 of 11 Title 16 DEVELOPMENT CODE Chapter 16.68 IMPROVEMENTS 16.68.010 Imorovement standards and olans. 16.68.020 Circulation. transoortation and trails facilities. 16.68.030 Flood control and drainaae. 16.68.040 Street lighting and tree olantina. 16.68.050 Underaround utilities. 16.68.060 Other reauired imorovements. 16.68.070 Imorovement aareement. 16.68.080 Suoolemental imorovements.. 16.68.090 I morovement securitv. 16.68.100 Amount of securitv. 16.68.110 Imorovement securitv release. 16.68.120 Forfeiture of imorovement securitv. 16.68.130 Securitv for taxes and assessments. 16.68.010 Improvement standards and plans. A. Improvement Standards. 1. Standards for design and improvements of subdivisions and other developments shall be in accordance with the applicable sections of this title, the city's general plan, any specific plans adopted by the city, the requirements otTilie 15 of this code, Arroyo Grande Standard Plans for Public Works Construction, and such other standards as may, from time to time, be adopted or recognized by the city council, and incorporated into this chapter by reference. 2. In the absence of a standard for an improvement, the city engineer may establish a standard in keeping with good construction and engineering practices. B. Improvement Plans Required. 1. All improvements constructed or installed in subdivisions or other residential, commercial or industrial developments shall be in accordance with detailed plans and specifications as approved in writing by the city engineer prior to commencement of the improvement .work. 2. All improvements plans shall be submitted to the city engineer, and shall be approved by him or her before submitting a final map to the city council, or before commencing construction if no final map is required. 3. All improvements constructed or installed in subdivisions or other residential, commercial, or industrial developments, other than rough grading for physical access, whether such work is required by the city or is done at the option of the developer, shall be in accordance with plans http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_DA T AlTlTLE 16/Chapter _16_68_ IMP... 6/2/2006 Chapter 16.68 IMPROVEMENTS Page 2 of 11 and specifications as approved by the city engineer. 4. Improvement plans shall be required for all improvements, whether installed before or after recordation of the final map or equivalent if a final map is not required. 5. Contractors shall secure an encroachment permit for all work done in connection with subdivision or other residential, commercial or industrial development projects within public right- of-way. 6. The improvement plans shall show the location of all existing improvements, electrical, natural gas, telephone, and any other service facilities. 7. Improvements proposed or required within state highway rtghts-of-way shall be located in the improvement plans and designed to California Department of Transportation standards. Prior to approval by the city engineer the subdivider or developer shall acquire the Department of Transportation's approval of such improvements. 8. All improvement plans shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer. The improvements shall be completed by each subdivider or developer as required, prior to acceptance of the final tract map or equivalent if a final subdivision map is not required, unless otherwise secured as provided in this chapter. (Prior code !l9-15.010) 16.68.029 Circulation, transportation and trails facilities. A. General Street Design. 1. All streets, highways, alleys and ways shall be designed and constructed in accordance with. Arroyo Grande Standard Plans for Public Works Construction incorporated into this chapter by reference, and the Arroyo Grande general plan. 2. The street system in the proposed land division shall be related, in general, to the existing streets in the area adjoining the proposed land division. 3. The proposed street plan shall give consideration to the future land division of adjoining undivided property. 4. All streets shall be designed to serve the proposed use of the abutting land. 5. Part-width boundary streets in a land division adjacent to undivided land shall have a minimum width of one-half street section plus one driving lane. The additional dedication shall be acquired from the adjacent undeveloped property at the time it develops. 6. Additional right-of-way or easements shall be provided where necessary to accommodate roadway slopes, drainage structures, and other facilities related to land division improvements. 7. Design of streets shall make provisions for parkways, grade separations, flood control channels, prevailing geological conditions and local drainage facilities. 8. Whenever lots of a proposed land division are located on a cul-de-sac that is more than six )1undred (600) feet in length to the center of the turnaround, a secondary access shall be provided, unless the cul-de-sac serves twelve (12) or less lots oris waived as part of the tentative map review. If secondary access is waived, adequate fire protection measures shall be required. Documentation and improvement for such access shall be established as part of the tentative map review. 9. Dead-end and part-width streets shall not be permitted if it is determined that adjacent land use or topographical features will not permit the extension of such street. Dead-end streets shall be so designed that access to abutting property shall be physically possible. A satisfactory temporary turnaround may be required, as well as the installation of a standard barrier, to prevent ingress and egress. 10. Denial strips identified by a number, where required to control access over certain lot lines or over the ends of street subs, shall be dedicated to the city. 11. The minimum center line curve radius on streets shall be designed to accommodate the following speeds: a. For major, arterial and collector streets, thirty-five (35) miles per hour; b. For all other streets, twenty-five (25) miles per hour. http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_DA T AlTITLE16/Chapter _16_68 _IMP... 6/2/2006 Chapter 16.68 IMPROVEMENTS Page 3 of 11 B. Private Streets. 1. Private streets may be permitted when it is determined that there is adequate provisions for their construction and continued maintenance, that the welfare of the occupants of the development will be adequately served and that it will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare. 2. All streets that are permitted to be private, whether offered for dedication or not, may provide for access control by land division design, posting or gating. Gating shall subject the project to additional fire protection measures approved by the fire chief. 3. Interior streets of residential planned developments or specific plans, if not offered for dedication, shall be constructed at widths approved by the city engineer. 4. When a special design for a cul-de-sac, length of a slreet terminating in a cul-de-sac, landscaped median, or any other improvement design is proposed and is not provided for in this chapter or in the Arroyo Grande Standard Plans for Public Works Construction, the design shall. be submitted to the city engineer for approval. 5. Sidewalks shall be required to be constructed in conjunction with dedicated or nondedicated private streets unless it is determined by the approving body to be unnecessary, considering the design of the development. Sidewalk construction shall be in accordance with the city improvement standards. 6. Improvement plans, agreements and bonds shall be required for all dedicated and nondedicated private streets in accordance with the applicable provisions ofthis chapter. C. Street Grade. 1. Street grades for local streets may exceed fifteen (15) percent only when engineering design shows that the grade is safe and the lesser grade would deny access to land appropriate for use. Design of streets with grades exceeding fifteen (15) percent are subject to the approval by the fire chief. 2. Street grades of less than 0.50 percent may be approved only when engineering design show that local drainage provisions are adequate and steeper gradients cannot be obtained. The utilization of combinations of steep and minimum gradelines as a means of generating embankment materials for onsite tract grading to the detriment of street maintenance and good engineering design will not be approved. Every effort shall be made to design street grades that will be in conformance with the existing terrain. 3. The minimum cross fall across intersections shall be four-tenths of one percent. D. Street Alignment. 1. All street intersections shall be at right angles, plus or minus five degrees, unless otherwise approved by the city engineer. 2. Centerline offsets of less than two hundred (200) feet shall not be permitted, except that in special design cases offsets of less than five feet may be used when approved by the city engineer. 3. Curb Returns: a. A minimum curb return radius of twenty-five (25) feet shall be provided at intersecting streets designated as collector or local streets. . b. A minimum curb return radius of thirty-five (35) feet shall be provided when one or both of the intersecting streets is designated as an arterial or greater. c. In hillside areas, the curb return radius may be modified if required because of the topography, subject to city engineer approval. E. Alleys. 1. Improved alleys not less than twenty (20) feet in width may be approved at the rear of all lots intended for industrial, commercial and multiple-family uses. 2. Alley intersections shall have minimum corner cutbacks of twenty-five (25) feet. 3. Dead-end alleys shall provide an adequate turnaround for emergency vehicles and trash trucks and shall be approved by the fire chief. http://municipa1codes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_DAT A/TITLE 16/Chapter_16 _ 68_ IMP... 61212006 Chapter 16.68 IMPROVEMENTS Page 4 of 11 F. Curbs, Gutters and Sidewalks. 1. Sidewalks shall be required to be constructed in conjunction with public and private streets, unless they are determined by the approving body to be unnecessary, considering the rural nature of the development and pedestrian circulation needs. Sidewalk construction shall be in accordance with the city's adopted improvement standards. 2. Except as otherwise provided in this section, upon an application for a building permit, the installation of concrete curbs, gutters, and sidewalks along the full frontage of the parcel to which the building permit applies, to the grades and locations approved by the director of public works, shall be required in any district other than the A, AG, RE, RH and RR districts. This subdivision shall in no way be construed as.to preclude the city's right to require concrete curbs, gutters, sidewalks, street paving, and necessary dedications in any district within the city. If an exception is requested for any permit, regardless of the district within which the construction is permitted, it shall not be considered effective without the written approval of the director of public works, pursuant to this section. 3. In the event a frontage has been previously improved with concrete curbs, gutters, and sidewalks, the installation shall be subject to inspection by the public works director prior to the final approval of the construction for which the building permit was issued. In the event the existing concrete curb, gutter and/or sidewalk is damaged or fails to meet acceptable grades established for the frontage, the permittee shall be required to remove and replace those portions found unacceptable. 4. Where, in the opinion of the public works director, such installation of concrete curbs, gutters, . and sidewalks is not desirable at the time the building permit is applied for, due to extreme . drainage conditions, location, grading, or where no grades have been established, an exception to the requirements set forth in this section may be granted, provided a cash deposit is made to the city clerk to guarantee installation when directed to do so by the city. 5. In the case of property having frontage exceeding one hundred (100) feet, the amount of curbs, gutters and sidewalks required shall be based on a normal lot frontage, as determined by the public works director. 6. Any person may appeal any determination of the public works director regarding the installation of concrete curbs, gutters, and sidewalks to the planning commission pursuant to Section 16.12.150. G. Walking Paths, Bicycle Paths and Horse Trails. The city may require the dedication of walking paths, and equestrian and other trails for public use when such paths are deemed to be necessary to further the goals and objectives, policies, or programs of the general plan. In addition, and in conjunction with required street dedications, a project sponsor may also be required to dedicate such additional land as may be necessary and feasible to provide bicycle paths for the use and safety of the residents of the development. If a subdivision is involved, such dedication requirements shall only be made if the subdivision as shown on the final map thereof contains two hundred (200) or more parcels or is an environmental impact mitigation measure. (Prior code ~ 9-15.020) 16.68:030Floodcontrolaiid drainage. . '-.' A. General Provisions. . 1. The minimum design for facilities which control drainage of storm water generated .within a . subdivision or otherresidential, commercial, or industrial development, or for floodwater flowing into or crossing a subdivision or other residential, commerCial, or industrial development shall be based on it storm having a frequency of once in one hundred (100) years. Hydrologic and hydraulic calculations for the design of drainage facilities which control drainage water generated within a .subdivision or other residential, commercial or industrial development shall be submitted for approval to the city engineer. Hydrologic and hydraulic calculations for the design of flood control facilities to control floodwater flowing into or crossing a subdivision or other residential, commercial or industrial development shall be submitted for approval to the city engineer. 2. Watercourses shall be shown a~ easements when required by the staff advisory committee, and storm drains shall be .placed in easements when public rights-of-Way are not available or http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_DA T AlTITLE 16/Chapter _16_68 _IMP... 6/2/2006 Chapter 16.68 IMPROVEMENTS adequate. The staff advisory committee shall require watercourses to be placed entirely in underground conduits, adequately fenced, or otherwise improved in accordance with the city's. adopted improvement standards and this chapter. Where sumps are approved to handle drainage as an interim solution, feasible easements shall be provided for necessary channels and sump areas. Fences required for watercourses and sumps shall meet the requirements set forth in the city's adopted improvement standards and this chapter. 3. The use of streets for flood control and drainage purposes may be prohibited by the city . engineer if the use thereof is not in the interest of the public health, safety and welfare. 4. When the city engineer permits the use of streets for flood control and drainage puiposes, the ten (10) year frequency design discharge shall be contained between the tops of curbs or asphalt concrete dikes, and the one hundred (100) year frequency design discharge shall be contained within the street right-of-way. If either of these conditions is exceeded, additional flood control'. . facilities shall be provided. B. Flood Control. 1. The city engineer shall review the hydrologic calculations submitted by the subdivider or developer, and determine the adequacy of peak discharges of off-site floodwaters impinging upon the subdivision or other residential, commercial or industrial development from which protection must be provided. 2. Improvement plans for flood control facilities to control floodwater flowing into or crossing a . subdivision or other residential, commercial or industrial development shall be approved by the . city engineer. 3. After receipt of an acceptable tentative map, or other equivalent application fora discretionary; permit for development pursuant to this title, the city engineer shall recommend conditions to. be. imposed. He or she may also require that a flood hazard report be furnished by the subdivider or developer. A flood protection study review fee as established by city council resolution shall be'.' paid upon the submittal of the hydrology report to the planning director. There shall be no flood protection study required for reverting subdivided lands to acreage. C. Drainage. 1. Improvement plans for drainage facilities to control drainage or storm water generated within a subdivision or other residential, commercial or industrial development shall be approved by the city engineer. 2. In subdivisions or other residential, commercial or industrial development where grading is not proposed, the following criteria are established. a. Where streets on sustained gradients cross natural drainage courses, adequate culverts shall be provided to accommodate, the one hundred (100) year storm with maximum ponding to an elevation two feet below the road centerline profile grade, provided diversion of ponded water into another drainage area will not result therefrom. b. Runoff in natural drainage courses exceeding the ten (10) year storm may be permitted to overtop the roadway in dip sections where, in the opinion of the city engineer, topography, soil conditions, adjacent development and available all-weather routes indicate its feasibirrty. If permitted, the roadway embankment slopes shall be adequately protected. c. Culverts of adequate size, but not less than eighteen (18) inches in diameter or equal, to prevent the ten (10) year storm from overtopping the roadway shall be provided in dip section, or as approved by the city engineer. d. Streets crossing improved channels shall be provided with culverts of adequate size to permit passage of the channel design flow or such other type of crossing as approved by the appropriate flood control agency and the city engineer. e. When a subdivision or other residential, commercial or industrial development subStantially changes, concentrates or increases the natural flow of surface water onto adjacent property, one of the following shall be required: i. The water shall be directed to an adequate outlet which is either existing or will be constructed as part of the subdivision or development; ii. The subdivider or developer shall obtain a recordable easement or written agreement for http://municipalcodeslexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/ _ DA TAlTlTLE 16/Chapter _16_68 _IMP.. Page 5 of II 6/2/2006 Chapter 16.68 IMPROVEMENTS Page 6 of 11 . -"7 '. '"' ,- "_"n ~.". _". ..,.,.~ ~_,_~,., '__. _. " _ _ ~ '".~r~;!;:~\~@~;s~~.;;j:I:~;;f~;~;;.;~~en~~;:bi~:~Mi~;~:t~~?J~iq~:;~~~~:~;tihk~&i~1{:~tX{lj ., JaSIIJti~sJ!?r.th~l.ngc!lr)le.rtal m"rlja~El'..l.)l,r!;'9Pff"Yh'sh wl\l.p~.~El.a,!e.;~P.~t~~ .~~-~Jy!~t~r-~tXJ;'\!i,2~:~~"'11 -de.v('~fl1).e.nt(~rl~fcf:~~2:fL1~8:1),~?:;'Y:.~::~"'.~.; .~o:~~. ~::~..~~~:;,I{f:;:{; ~:~:~: :~~_ 'iL~, 16.68.040 street lighting and tree planting. A. Street Lighting. 1. Unless othelWise waived by the city engineer for developments within the RH and RE distlicts, the provision of street lights shall be a requirement of all tentative tract maps and other residential, commercial or industrial development for which a subdivision is not involved. 2. At a minimum, a subdivider or developer of a residential, commercial or industlial development for which a subdivision is not involved shall construct or enter into an agreement to construct prior to acceptance and approval of a final map or equivalent approval if a subdivision is not involved, a street lighting system of either: a. A utility-owned system consisting of standard electroliers customalily furnished by the utility or other design approved by the utility and the city engineer; or b. A municipally-owned system consisting of reinforced concrete or steel standards with underground wiring or other design approved by the city engineer. . 3. If a utility-owned system is installed, the subdivider or developer of a residential, commercial or industrial development for which a subdivision is not involved shall be liable for and shall pay charges of such utility attributable to such installation. 4. If a municipally-owned underground system is installed, the subdivider or developer of a residential, commercial or industrial development for which a subdivision is not involved shall be liable for and shall pay all costs incurred in installing the entire system and appurtenances thereof. 5. Installation of street lighting shall be underground and shall be in accordance with plans and specifications of or approved by the utility owned system and the city engineer. B. Street Tree Planting. Requirements for street tree planting are contained in Section 12.16,030. (Prior code ~ 9-15.040) 16.68.050 Underground utilities. Unless exempted by the Subdivision Map Act, the provisions of this section, regulating the location and installation of utilities, shall apply to all final tract and parcel maps, lot line adjustments, and lot mergers created subsequent to enactment of this title, as well as to discretionary land use approvals of residential, commercial or industrial developments not involving a subdivision. However, where permitted by applicable law, the city council may require the undergrounding of utility lines as a condition to approval of an application for an extension of time in which to complete and file a final subdivision map. A. When Underground Installation is Required. Underground installation is required of all electlical distribution lines of less than one hundred fifteen thousand (115,000) volts, telephone, cable antenna television and similar service wire or cables which: 1. Provide direct service to the property being developed; 2. Are existing and located within the boundaries of the property being developed; 3. Are existing between the property line and the centerline of the peripheral streets .of the property being developed; or 4. Are located along or within six feet of the rear or side lot lines of the property to be developed. B. Exceptions-Generally. The following exceptions shall apply: 1. Utility service poles may be placed in the area within six feet of the rear lot line of the property to be developed for the sole purpose of terminating underground facilities, 2. Temporary utilities along with necessary service poles, wires and cables may be permitted for http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_DA T AlTITLE 16/Chapter _16_68 _IMP.. 6/2/2006 Chapter 16.68 IMPROVEMENTS Page 7 of 11 the period during which authorized construc~on is continuing for which valid building permits have been issued or for temporary uses which comply with requirements of this title, the Uniform Building Code, and other applicable regulations. . 3. Appurtenances and associated equipment including, but not limited to, surface-mounted transformers, pedestal-mounted terminal boxes and meter cabinets, and concealed ducts in an underground system, may be placed above ground. C. In-Lieu Fee-Required Approvals. On the basis of a formal written request, a fee may be accepted in lieu of the required undergrounding of utilities as follows: 1. The underground utility in-lieu fee will only be available for residential development projects that meet one or more of the following conditions: a. There has been no undergrounding of utili~es in the surrounding neighborhood; b. The projects property line is located at least three hundred (300) or more feet from an underground u~lity district; c. The undergrounding connec~on to the nearest utility pole will require the applicant to underground u~lities fifty (50) or more linear feet beyond the project's property line; d. The estimated cost of under grounding for the project is more than twenty-five (25) percent of the estimated total cost of the project; e. Subdivision projects often (10) or less parcels; f. Subdivision projects of more than ten (10) parcels may be eligible for payment of an underground utility in-lieu fee based on a specific finding by the approving authority that special and unique circumstances exist. 2. Underground u~lity in-lieu fees should be calculated per linear feet of each side of the property with overhead utility lines. 3. Underground u~lity in-lieu fees shall be paid prior to issuance of the building permit. 4. The approving authority of a discre~onary land use application may approve payment of an underground u~lity in-lieu fee, based on a recommendation from the director of public works and director of community development. . 5. The amount of the underground utility in-lieu fee shall be established by resolution of the city council. 6. Underground u~lity in-lieu fees collected by the city shall be deposited in a separate fund and shall be used solely for the planning, administration and implementa~on of utility undergrounding. D. Nonconforming Structures. Buildings and structures, that on the effec~ve date of this title, or any subsequent amendments thereto, are nonconforming in regard to above ground on-site utility lines, may con~nue to be used, altered or enlarged in the same manner, as if such nonconforming utility lines did not exist. However, when the building or structures are enlarged over two thousand five hundred (2,500) square feet in area, or when atteration or enlargement requires the installation of utility lines at new loca~ons on the building or structure, or when exis~ng electrical capacity to the building or structures is increased one hundred (100) percent or more, or when the building is improved in an amount more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00), the u~lity lines shall comply with the requirements of this sec~on. E. Responsibility for Compliance. The developer or owner is responsible for complying with the requirements of this sec~on, and he or she shilll make all necessary arrangements with the appropriate utility company for the installation of such facili~es. When arrangement are made with the serving agency, a letter stating that arrangements have been made for underground facilities and such other comments the agency may have regarding easements, utility locations, and other . pertinent matters must be submitted by the agency to the city engineer. Provision to the satisfac~on of the city engineer shall also be made at ~me of subdivision development for future installation of underground communication and cable television. F. Exceptions. The undergrounding utility requirement may be waived by the approving authority if it is determined that such undergrounding is entirely infeasible. (Ord. 555 SS 2, 3, 2004; prior code S 9-15.050) 16.68.060 other required improvements. http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_DA T NTITLE 16/Chapter _16 _ 68 _IMP... 6/2/2006 Chapter 16.68 IMPROVEMENTS Page 8 of 11 A. Additional improvements to be installed by each developer or subdivider shall include, but not be limited to, the following: water lines, gas, and other utility services to serve each lot and stubbed to the property line prior to paving; fire hydrants; sanitary sewers and laterals to serve each lot and stubbed to the property line prior to paving; silt basins or other forms of erosion control where required; and street and traffic control signs. B. Off-site improvements may be required as follows: 1. The development of water storage facilities or financial contrtbutions for the improvement of any existing source of water supply and the construction of transmission lines from that supply to the proposed development; 2. The development of trunk sewer lines or financial contributions for the improvement of any existing sewage disposal system and the construction of transmission lines from the proposed improvements to the site of disposal; . 3. When flood zones or other lawful special purpose zones are established by the council, the subdivider or developer shall pay the fee set out for the particular zone in which the subject land lies; 4. Properiy graded, drained and improved paved access roads; and 5. The extension of any other utilities. Agreements may be made, upon the approval of the council for reimbursements by future developers for facilities required by the city to the extent that such facilities are in excess of the sizes, lengths and locations needed to serve the subdivision or project involved. Requests for reimbursements shall be made in wrtting at the time of submitting the final map or equivalent documentation if a subdivision is not involved. (Prior code !i 9-15.060) 16.68.070 Improvement agreement. Any act or obligation required as a condition of the approval of a final tract or parcel map, or any act, obligation, or environmental impact mitigation measure required as a condition of the approval of a residential, commercial, or industrial development for which a subdivision in not involved, and for which acts are to be undertaken or obligations will exist beyond final project approval, shall be guaranteed by execution of a suitable agreement in a form prescrtbed to be reviewed and approved by the city engineer and city attorney. The agreement shall include the following minimum terms and conditions: A. Construction of all improvements as set forth in the approved plans and specifications; B. The maximum period within which all improvements shall be completed to the satisfaction of the city engineer; C. In the case of a deferred improvement agreement, the agreement shall provide for the commencement of the construction of all required improvement within ninety (90) days of receipt of a notice to proceed from the city upon a finding by the city engineer that fulfillment of construction requirements is immediately necessary for the reasons of: a. The public health and safety, or b. The required construction is a necessary prerequisite to the orderly development of the surrounding area; D. Provisions for inspection of all improvements by the city engineer and payment of fees by the subdivider or developer for the cost of such inspection and all other incidental costs incurred by the city in enforcing the agreement; E. A provision that, i!.the subdivider or developer fails to complete the work within the specified period of time, or any extended period of time that may have lawfully been granted by the city, the city may, at its option, complete the required improvement work and the subdivider and his or her surety shall be firmly bound, under a continuing obligation, for payment of the full cost and expense incurred or expended by the city in completing such work, including interest from the date of notice of the cost and expense until paid; F. That in the event of litigation occasioned by any default of the owner or subdivider, his or her successors, or assigns, all costs involved, including reasonable attorney's fees, shall be paid by http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_DA T AlTITLE 16/Chapter _16_68 _IMP... 6/2/2006 Chapter 16.68 IMPROVEMENTS Page 9 of 11 the owner or subdivider, his or her successors, or assigns, and that the same may be recovered . as part of a lien against the real property; G. The agreement shall bind not only the present owner,.subdivider, or developer, but also his or her heirs, successors, executors, administrators and assigns so that the obligations run with the real property; H. All agreements shall be executed by the owner, developer, or the subdivider of the property or land being divided, with all signatures acknowledged before a notary public. Where required by the city attorney, the agreement shall be recorded in the office of the county recorder at the expense of the owner, subdivider or developer; I. Additional terms or provisions, as may be necessary, pertaining to the forfeiture, collection and disposition of improvement security upon the failure of the contracting party to comply with the terms and provisions thereof or with the terms and provisions of this title. (prior code S 9-15.070) 16.68.080 Supplemental improvements. A. Requirement. The city may require that improvements installed by a subdivider or developer for the benefit of the subdivision, or other development if a subdivision is not involved, shall contain supplemental size, capacity or number for the benefit of property not within the subdivision, and that such improvement be dedicated to the public pursuant to Section 66485 and 66486 of the Subdivision Map Act. B. Supplemental Improvement- Reimbursement Agreement. Where the subdivider or developer is required to install supplemental improvements pursuant to the provisions of this title, the city shall enter into an agreement to reimburse the subdivider or developer pursuant to Section 66486 of the Subdivision Map Act. (Prior code S 9-15.080) 16.68.090 Improvement security. Improvement securities shall be required to be posted as a guarantee of the performance of any act, improvement or obligation required as a environmental impact mitigation measure or condition of approval of any final map, lot line adjustment, or lot merger, and not completed or otherwise satisfied prior to recordation of the map, or any act or obligation required as a environmental impact mitigation measure or condition of the approval of a residential, commercial or industrial development for which a subdivision is not involved, for obligations that will exist beyond final project approval, unless otherwise provided in one of the following forms at the option and subject to the approval of the city engineer: A. A bond or bonds by one or more duly authorized corporate sureties; B. A deposit with the city of cash; C. An irrevocable instrument of credit from one or more financial institutions subject to regulation by the state or federal government pledging that the funds necessary to carry out the agreements are on deposit, guaranteed for payment, and constitute a trust fund which is not subject to levy or attachment by any creditor of the depositor until released by the city; . D. An irrevocable letter of credit issued by a financial institution subject to regulation by the state or federal government guaranteeing that all or any portion of the funds available pursuant to the letter of credit will be paid upon the written demand of the city engineer, and that such written demand need not present documentation of any type as a condition of payment, including proof of loss; E. An irrevocable assignment and delivery of a passbook account, together with the entitlement to insurance of the account, in a financial institution subject to regulation by the state or federal government, pledging, agreeing and covenanting that the city may redeem, collect and withdraw the full amount of the account at any time and without notice, and further pledging, agreeing and covenanting that the funds stated or shown to be in the assigned account are on deposit, guaranteed for payment, and constitute a trust fund which is not subject to levy or attachment by any creditor olthe depositor or the depository. (Prior code 99-15.090) http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_DAT NTITLE 16/Chapter _16_68 _IMP... 6/2/2006 Chapter 16.68 IMPROVEMENTS Page 10 of 11 16.68.100 Amount of security. Security to guarantee the performance of any act or agreement shall be in the following amounts except as otherwise provided by subsection (c) of Section 66499.3 of the Subdivision Map Act: A. An amount determined by the city engineer equal to one hundred (100) percent of the total estimated cost of the improvement or of the act to be performed, conditioned upon the faithful performance of the act or agreement. The total estimated cost of the improvement shall provide for increase for projected inflation computed ,to the estimated mid-point of construction; a. An additional amount determined by the city engineer equal to fifty (50) percent of the total estimated cost of the improvement, or the performance of the required act, securing payment to the contractor, his subcontractors, and to persons furnishing labor, materials, or equipment to them for the improvement or the performance of the required act; C. An additional amount equal to ten (10) percent of the estimated cost of the improvements for the guarantee and warranty of the work for a period of one year following the completion and acceptance thereof against any defective work or labor done, or defective materials furnished. (Prior code ~ 9-15.100) 16.68.110 Improvement security release. Improvement security may be released upon the final completion and acceptance of the act or work; provided, however, such release shall.not apply to the amount of security deemed necessary by the city engineer for the guarantee and warranty period, nor to costs and reasonable expense fees, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by the city in enforcing any improvement agreement. When appropriate, such release shall be recorded in the office of the county recorder. (Prior code ~ 9-15.110) 16.68.120 Forfeiture of improvement security. In addition to any other remedy provided by law, upon the failure of the subdivider or developer to complete any improvement, acts or obligations within the time specified in the improvement agreement, or upon failure of the subdivider or developer to faithfully comply with the terms and provisions of this chapter or any improvement security given thereby, the city council may, upon notice in writing of not less than ten (10) days served upon the person responsible for the performance thereof or upon notice in writing of not less than twenty (20) days, served by registered mail addressed to the last known address of such person, determine that the foregoing have not been complied with or the work has not been completed, and may cause to be forfeited to the city such portion of said improvement security given for the performance of the foregoing. (Prior code ~ 9-15.120) 16.68.130 Security for taxes and assessments. Certificates for taxes and special assessments, as prepared by the tax collector, and security for unpaid taxes and special assessments shall be furnished as required by Article 8, of the Subdivision Map Act. A. If the certificate shows that there are no liens against the subdivision or any part thereof for unpaid taxes or special assessments collected as taxes, the city clerk shall certify that such certificates have been filed and shall transmit the final map to the county recorder without placing the matter on the agenda of the city council. B. If the certificate shows that there are no liens against the subdivision or any part thereof for unpaid taxes or special assessments collected as taxes, except for taxes or special assessments that are not yet payable, the divider shall file with the city clerk acceptable security in the amount determined by the tax collector as necessary to pay the taxes and special assessments which are a lien but not yet payable. Upon approval of the security by the city council, the city shall certify that such certificates and security have been filed and shall transmit the final map to the http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_DA T AlTlTLE 16/Chapter _16_68_ IMP... 6/2/2006 Chapter 16.68 IMPROVEMENTS Page 11 of 11 county recorder without placing the matter on the agenda of the city council. C. Acceptable forms of security for taxes shall be as provided in Section 16.68.090 for security for improvements; provided, however, that a cash bond shall be required to guarantee the payment of taxes in the amount of two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500.00) or less. (Prior code !j9-15.130) \ http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/arroyo/_DA T A/TITLE 16/Chapter _16_68 _IMP... 6/2/2006 APPENDIX E Model Parameters HEC-HMS Project: AG Detention Basin Study Basin Model: I Dev w det w dam Jun 28 03:44:42 PDT 2006 Q . 0 r,;r.' DE Subbasin-1 b K LOS BERROS CONFL l!!! l'1J CP18 HEC-HMS Project: AG Detention Basin Study Basin Model: I Dev no det no dam Jun 2814:59:12 PDT 2006 (), ~' D (), DE E c G (J. ~ Subbasin-1 b NK-LOS BERRO~ K AG above LB ~~ LOS BERROS CONF JL HEC-HMS Project: AG Detention Basin Study Basin Model: I Dev w det no dam Jun 28 03:44:10 PDT 2006 Subbasin-1 b ~~ (), ~ JL ~~ o LOS BERROS CONF CP18 ~i+t I 5 acre site ~ Subbasin I 200 x 200 and Total Contour Storage Contour area Stage Elev (ft) Area (sn (aeft) (ae) a, efs, 6" 9" 10" 0 200 40000 0 0.92 0.230 0.000 0 0.3 200.3 40966 0.279 0.94 0.559 0.308 0.33 0.6 200.6 41943 0.564 0.96 0.762 0.999 1.11 0.9 200.9 42932 0.857 0.99 0.921 1.541 1.826 1.2 201.2 43932 1.158 1.01 1.057 1.932 2.324 1.5 201.5 44944 1.462 1.03 1.177 2.256 2.733 1.8 201.8 45987 1.775 1.06 1.288 2.539 3.088 2.1 202.1 47002 2.095 1.08 1.286 2.793 3.407 2.4 202.4 48049 2.422 1.10 1.386 3.027 3.698 2.7 202.7 49107 .2.757 1.13 1.480 3.243 3.968 3 203 50176 3.099 1.15 1.568 3.446 4.22 3.3 203.3 51257 3.446 1.18 1.651 3.638 4.459 3.6 203.6 52349 3.805 1.20 1.730 3.820 4.685 3.9 .203.9 53453 4.169 1.23 1.806 3.993 4.901 4.2 204.2 54569 4.541 1.25 1.879 4.160 5.107 4.5 204.5 55696 4.921 1.28 1.949 4.320 5.306 4.8 204.8 56835 5.308 1.30 2.016 4.474 5.498 5.1 205.1 57985 5.704 1.33 2.082 4.623 5.683 5.4 205.4 59146 6.107 1.36 2.100 4.768 5.862 5.7 205.7 60319 6.518 1.38 2.207 4.908 6.036 6 206 61504 6.938 1.41 2.267 5.044 6.205 1 sf. 2.30E-05 300 x 300 and 8" outlet Contour Storage Stage Elev(ft) Area fsn (aeft) 6" Q, cfs 8" a,efs TO,cfs 0 200 9000 0 0 0 0 6.5 0.3 200.3 91446 0.625 0.23 0.285 0.259 0 0.6 200.6 92903 1.26 0.559 0.873 0.714 0.244 0.9 200.9 94372 1.904 0.762 1.265 1.004 0.637 1.2 201.2 95852 2.56 0.921 1.564 1.226 0.88 1.5 201.5 97344 3.225 1.057 1.815 1.414 1.069 1.8 201.8 98847 3.9 1.177 2.035 1.58 1.23 2.1 202.1 100362 4.586 1.286 2.234 1.73 1.372 2.4 202.4 101889 5.283 1.386 2.416 1.868 1.5 2.7 202.7 103427 5.99 1.48 1.585 1.997 1.619 3 203 104976 6.707 1.568 2.744 2.117 1.729 3.3 203.3 106537 7.436 1.651 2.895 2.232 1.833 3.6 203.6 108109 8.175 1.73 3.037 2.34 .1.931 3.9 203.9 109693 8.925 1.806 3.174 2.444 2.024 4.2 204.2 111289 9.686 1.879 3.305 2.544 2.113 4.5 204.5 112896 10.458 1.949 3.43 2.639 2.199 4.8 204.8 114515 11.241 2.016 3.552 2.732 2.282 5.1 205.1 116145 12.35 2.082 3.669 2.821 2.361 5.4 205.4 117786 12.841 2.145 3.783 2.908 2.438 5.7 205.7 119439 13.658 2.207 3.893 2.992 2.513 6 206 121104 14.486 2.267 4 3.074 2.585 2.655 sqmi acres Lao Te Basin I whole 25.65 16415.93 6.7 671.34 min 1 mi2 639.9974 acres SubAl 25.63 Sub A2 0.02 15.44 0.15 15.00 Sub A2 pre 20.00 Pond Report s ;+ -e. ( Wednesday, Jun 28 2006, 2:53 PM Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Pond No. 2 - I basin Pond Data Bottom LxW = 200,0 x 200.0 ft Side slope = 4.0:1 Stage I Storage Table Stage (ft) Elevation (ft) Bottom elev. = 200.00 ft Depth = 6,00 ft Contour area (sqft) Iner. Storage (aeft) Total storage (aeft) 0.00 0.30 0.60 0.90 1.20 1.50 1.80 2.10 2.40 2.70 3.00 3.30 3.60 3.90 4.20 4.50 4.80 5.10 5.40 5.70 6.00 200.00 200.30 200.60 200.90 201.20 201.50 201.80 202.10 202.40 202.70 203.00 203.30 203.60 203:90 204.20 204.50 204.80 205.10 205.40 205,70 206.00 40,000 40,966 41,943 42,932 43,932 44,944 45,967 47,002 48,049 49,107 50,176 51,257 52,349 53,453 54,569 55,696 56,835 57,985 59,146 60,319 61,504 0.000 0.279 0.285 0.292 0.299 0.306 0.313 0.320 0.327 0.335 0.342 0.349 0.357 0.364 0.372 0.380 0,387 0.395 0.403 0.411 0.419 0.000 0.279 0.564 0.857 1.156 1.462 1,775 2,095 2.422 2.757 3.099 3.448 3.805 4.169 4.541 4.921 5.308 5.704 6.107 6.518 6.938 Culvert I Orifice Structures [A] [B] [C] [0] Rise (In) = 10.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 Span (In) = 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. Barrels = 1 0 0 0 InvertEI.(ft) = 200,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Length (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 N.yalue = .013 .013 .013 .013 Orif. eoeff. = 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Multi-Stage = n/a No No No Weir Structures [A] [B] [C] [0] Crest Len (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 CrestEI.(ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Weir eoeff. = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Weir Type - - Multi-Stage = No No No No Exfiltration = 0.000 in/hr (Wet area) Tailwater Elev. = 0.00 ft Note: CulverVOrifice outflows have been analyzed under inlet and ouUet control. Stage I Storage I Discharge Table Stage Storage Elevation ClvA Clv B ClvC Clv D WrA WrB WrC WrD Exfil Total ft aeft ft efs efs efs efs efs efs efs efs efs efs 0.00 0,000 200.00 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.279 200.30 0.33 0.33 0.60 0.564 200.60 1.11 1.11 0.90 0.857 200.90 1.83 1.83 1.20 1.156 201.20 2.32 2.32 1.50 1.462 201.50 2.73 2.73 1.80 1.775 201.80 3.09 3.09 2.10 2.095 202.10 3.41 3.41 2.40 2.422 202.40 3.70 3.70 2.70 2.757 202.70 3.97 3.97 3.00 3,099 203.00 4.22 4.22 3.30 3.448 203.30 4.46 4.46 3.60 3.805 203.60 4.68 4.68 3.90 4.169 203.90 4.90 4.90 4.20 4.541 204.20 5.11 5.11 4.50 4.921 204.50 5.31 5.31 4.80 5.308 204.80 5.50 5.50 5.10 5.704 205.10 5.68. 5.68 5.40 6.107 205.40 5.86 5.86 5.70 6.518 205.70 6.04 6.04 6.00 6.938 206.00 6.20 6.20 Project: AG Detention Basin Study Basin Model: J dev w det no dam Jun 28 14:59:52 PDT 2006 HEC-HMS ::' 0 NK-LOS BERROS C~ K CP18 .., c ;;; .. ... -'! J - ;; " ~ u .. .. ;: o 0= " '" .. ... ,., :s c o E u f-- Cl .. -' '" " 13 .. 'E 0- '" " Cl ~ " Ie " c. 00 00 "":0 '" E u .. ..,. i!. '" '" en I') co N 'E c 'E '" I') '" l::J 00 00 cui ~~ '" '" co I') N 0'" ~~ cia <D .... 0 .. 0 ~ ui ..,. [Omc; cD cD 0 " o -'=~ ;:<( ...,... c " "in en .. '" E ~c. ...~ "... (f) " (f) 'U .. .l'!.l'! u U ~<D "'I') C\i""": ~ 0; N '5 tf~ 'L .0 o ~ '" OI()('I)I,()'<t 001'--(0(0 N co N lO ci ci . . l{}t()'<t<O a;8~~ "":NNN C'1NOlMM<I;;t 'CtlOWOJO> C"il() co I"-CO <'iC"icriC'i I'- co N NN ~O ("')..0 ,," " " c.c. o 0 0 com.....NCOOlct),...... I') co <D N I') co N..,. I') '" '" ..,. ~ ~ 0 CTl"<t"MI.OMo)N """"1') '" '" ~ 1').... N co 0 ..,. MCTllOO>NI.OI"-ON'<t(O M m .. ...,. wt--cno I') . > " cjcj"":"":NNNMMMM M ..,. . -.:i..f..fu:i iO ~g en ..,. 0 N .. N'" ...,..., 0 '" MI.O"<tl.Ol()vCOl.()'<tI.Of'-..VlO I') N "'I') I') ..,. ..,. I') '" I'- co co - I') I') - "'..,. m 1')1'-0 ..,. '" co'" m - I') N OJNIDCODNVl.Cll'--COO.....(") M '" co I'- '" N M '" d O"":"":"":NNNNNNMMM M riM M 1;jO~~ 0<'1 . 0 0.00 r-- Q)DOg ...(")'It . c.. . '1() 00_ '2$ ~~ In ~ III c.~ g ~ ..5 ('iJ c: Ul~ ;g~~~m .c8E8J3 :s c o E "'c -'~ " c > 0 .8 u ~~ <(~ .l: g o '" .. "00 0.....1'- " E i= ~ m oC'1~ ~~~ coco ~ - "N 0"" ~!:f ...,,, - " = c ~:c e g 0.0 ll)..;fl()f"-.Vl() Q)'<tOlMI'--O LOf'-..<OQ..-C") NNNMMC"1 en OOOO)..-C\I<OOlMI"-M(OOONMIDN'<tMOO Omv(f)l()MOlN'<t'<tC")OOQ).....M,.....C\IW ('I)O>l()OlNI(),......ON'<t~M~...j~'<t<O,...... dd"":"":NNNMMMM M ~~~ "'" a" mo oiu:i N'" ",,:0 _N iJ 0 I') I'- N NO I'- 00 ~'" N I') 0 N ~ co '" '" " m -0 I'- I') - I')N'" ..,. '" -I') '" co I'- I'- co '" ..,. I') N " '" "'.... 00 I') '" - <'1 "1 ~ ~q - NI')..,. '" co <D m 0 ~ "":N <D d d d ~ ~ -~ ~~ NNNN NN N N N M M M x '" ",0 u .!!. " Cl !" .s (f) rn 15 f-- ~;gj8~:e O.....C\I(f)C'1'V cicidcidci CO'<fM......lll (0(0(0<01'-- LOW,......OOO) ciocida I'--v'<tll1o)MNW'<;t COONV,...........lOOl"<T q"'!"1....:U1~<<!q..... ............... ....................C'\i ~ooaooooo - ~~q"'!~<<! ~gg88ooo WNNNNNC\lN 000000 .....'I:f.......O(")(() NNNMMM 000000 NNNNNN 00000000 ~~~~~:i~~ 00000000 NNNNNNNN " Cl .l'I (f) O~~~~~~~~~M~~~~~~~~~W OMCDWNW {oONl,()"""'O>O cicicicici""':..-- COO>O>CO"""'l,()M ..--~~~~C!!f'-: ..--a)tnNro CJ)o:)O)oo ..--"":""':""':NN "'~.... ~NN NNN " Cl .. .stg[O~~g~~ (/)Rl~""":~~t.q,IX!:~ g_oooooo..--..-- o f-- o '" ~ x o '" ~ ~"'''' ~oo ~~t.q, ~N ~N <DO ""':N ml') I') co N" NN 0.1"""'0:)<.00 0>0.1<.0..--""'" WO>..--'V<.o NNMMM ~OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO -OMt.q,~~~IX!:~~,......OM<'OO>Nl,()IX!:..--~f'-:~ >cicioo..--..--..--NNNMMMM~~~~t[)l,()W ~OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO WNNNNNNNNNNNNN~NNNNNNN OM<.oO>~~IX!:~'V"""'MMCDO>Nt[)o:)..--~"""'<.o cicici..--..--..--NNN MMM~~~~~~ " Ol " iij 0.... I')m m_ M-.i OI !J!I Pond Report s ;+~ 7.. S O-C Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Pond No.8 J 100 8 in basin Pond Data Bottom LxW = 100.0 x 100.0 It Side slope = 4.0:1 Wednesday, Jun 282006. 2:50 PM Bottom elev. = 200.00 It Depth = 6.00 It Stage I Storage Table Stage (ft) Elevation (Il) Contour area (sqft) Iner. Storage (aeft) Total storage (aeft) 0.00 200.00 10,000 0.000 0.000 0.30 200.30 10,486 0.071 0.071 0.60 200.60 10,983 0.074 0.144 0.90 200.90 11,492 0.077 0.222 1.20 201.20 12,012 0.081 0.303 1.50 201.50 12,544 0.085 0.387 1.80 201.80 13,087 0.088 0.476 2.10 202.10 13,642 0.092 0.568 2.40 202.40 14,209 0.096 0.664 2.70 202.70 14,787 0.100 0.763 3.00 203.00 15,376 0.104 0.867 3.30 203.30 15,977 0.108 0.975 3.60 203.60 16,589 0.112 1.087 3.90 203.90 17.213 0.116 1.204 4.20 204.20 17,649 0.121 1.324 4.50 204.50 18,496 0.125 1.450 4.80 204.80 19,155 0.130 1.579 5.10 205.10 19,825 0.134 1.713 5.40 205.40 20,506 0.139 1.852 5.70 205.70 21,199 0.144 1.996 6.00 206.00 21,904 0.148 2.144 Culvert I Orifice Structures [A] [8] [C] [0] Rise (in) = 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Span (In) = 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. Barrels = 1 0 0 0 InverlEI. (Il) = 200.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Length (Il) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 N-Value = .013 .013 .013 .013 Orif.Coeff. = 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Multl-Stage = nla No No No Weir Structures [A] [8] [C] [0] Crest Len (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CrestEI.(Il) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Weir Coeff. = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Weir Type - - Multi-Stage = No No No No Exfiltration = 0.000 in/hr (Wet area) Tailwater Elev. = 0.00 n Nole: CulvertJOrifice outflows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control. Stage I Storage I Discharge Table Stage Storage Elevation ClvA ClvB ClvC ClvD WrA WrB WrC WrD Exfil Total ft acft ft efs efs efs efs efs efs efs efs efs efs 0.00 0.000 200.00 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.071 200.30 0.28 0.28 0.60 0.144 200.60 0.87 0.87 0.90 0.222 200.90 1.27 1.27 1.20 0.303 201.20 1.56 1.56 1.50 0.387 201.60 1.82 1.82 1.80 0.476 201.80 2.04 2.04 2.10 0.568 202.10 2.23 2.23 2.40 0.664 202.40 2.42 2.42 2.70 0.763 202.70 2.59 2.59 3.00 0.867 203.00 2.74 2.74 3.30 0.975 203.30 2.89 2.89 3.60 1.087 203.60 3.04 - 3.04 3.90 1.204 203.90 3.17 3.17 4.20 1.324 204.20 3.30 3.30 4.50 1.450 204.50 3.43 3.43 4.80 1.579 204.80 3.55 3.55 5.10 1.713 205.10 3.67 . 3.67 5.40 1.852 205.40 3.78 3.78 5.70 1.996 205.70 3.89 3.89 6.00 2.144 206.00 4.00 4.00 Project: AG Detention Basin Study Basin Model: JB dev w det w dam Jun 28 03:45:45 PDT 2006 HEC-HMS D Project: AG Detention Basin Study Basin Model: JB dev w det no dam Jun 28 14:59:38 PDT 2006 HEC-HMS 0. D I!f:' DE E ~ c G NK-LOS BERROS ( K J Detention Basin ~~ LOS BERROS CON FL. 0. ~ JL .., c "in .. .., .., ., i ~ t; .. '" ~. 3: 88 SCll"-:ci 3l g "'- .., c ~~ ~8 o E o l!! " '" s; '" en l6 N "E '" " '" N '" on ~~ " " ;;;r::: <"iN N ." -g~ o 0 - " " > > " l!!o o NIO ..,.., c "E 10 00 " '" 00 >- '" cui '" N ~~ g '" 10 '" 0 CD ~ ~ -' '" cio N 0 '" '" 0 "- 0 1;j 000 I~ '" " ..j 0 C"1...,q "00 t; on g .c 0.1'-"- ~ " "0 c '" ~ 00,,- " ... 0 E E ;:: to C ..J '" " 1;j ~"- "E "-ION 000 > c oC'1CD: 10100 l!! Mvq 0 0 01'-"- wwo dd~ .., " ~NN 0 '" 0 CD CD <:>13 ~~ <l:_ " a e ~;;:~a. ~-g-g~ "ijj en U) -g 01: <I) ~ I<E Ie .! 1-= I'lJ E /net:: III ctl ~c15e~ ~~'~l~ ~8E8~ , 1ft. 1. O~M~"<t~~~ID~'V~~"<t~('I')NmMM"<t ~ OO~IDID~MM~oo"<tmM~O~~IDoom ID NOON~OOON'V~~OOO~~M~c.o:~OO N ro Od"-:~"-:NNNNNNMMM MMMM 0, acocn....NlOOlMI'---M<.oCONC"> OO'l"<tMlJ")(")O'IN'<t"<tMcom C'1OlU1~~U1l':~C'!~c.o:crim OO............NNN(")MMM M "'... 0'" "'0 ~lri tON "<tM co .....('1')"'" "'to -i-i~c.o:,,= ......... '" " ~ ~ I!! o if.) "iij "0 >- ~oooooooaoaooooooooooo -OMf.OmNlJ")co....."<t~OMf.OmN~co....."<t"'O >dcicid"-:"-:"-:NNNcricricriM-i~-iu)lrilriw ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ O..-"<tN Mr--. 1.0 00 t;:!~g~;;:~ ooddcidci 'V ('I')......I(}l'--.;t l.Ow<ot--coo l.Or---comON ciddd""':""': ..;fLOOl('l')NlO"<f N"'<t...........l()O'I"<t C"l,...:lOI"--OOG)..... .....: ""':""':"":""':C\i o o ~ x o o - OMtOmNlnco........,.r--.MMIDmNlnco........,.r--.W ; ddd""':""':""':NNN MMM-i-i-ilrilri~ '" if.) 1n orom.....NwOlMr---MWOONMWN"<tMroro"<t aO'l"<tMlnMOl N"<t"<tMrom.....M......Nwo"<t C'1qU1Ol~~~qC'!~C'O:M~-i-i~C'O:~Olq OO..........NNNMMMM ~ v~v~~ ix> O~M~~~~~w~Vm~~~~NmMMV OO~WW~MM~oovmM~o~~woom ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~M~~~~ OO~~~NNNNNNM~M ~MM~ O(")((lWNtO ~ONlO~mo ddddo""': "''''C1> ~~~ ~ ~~ CO~~(")~CO~N(()U')~~ ~U')w~cnC()mOO~NN ""':"':""':""':""':""':"':'NC\iC\iNC\i .!'! uOM~NNO~OO~U')N~ON~ d8~~~~~ffi~m~~~~~~~ ~odo~...:.....:.....:~.....:C\iNNNNC\iN 10 wC()aJ~m WL()vM~ O'JmO~N NNMMM " '" '" . B~gro?3~g (I)~O~MVW iij~c:iddcid "0 >- <XlN "'N "'0 0"": ::l!llll::!:l NvtOCOO "":""':""':""';N mMNl'--aJ MwmNW N"'<tf.Om~ NNNNM CD 0 ~I'- "'CD MC'i ~OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~q ~ggggooo~~~aa8a~g~~~~~ WNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN OMtOm~~~~"'<t~MMwmNU')O'J~v~w ddd~~~NNN C'iMM~~~~~~ ~ N (5 .., .c ~ ~ ;t .., .., ." if.) ~ 0 - C 10 <I) :is X ~ E 0 0: 0 10 0 ~ NN ~O C'illi ~'" 100 N~ ...'" ~'" NM N'" ...0 ""';N ...'" <Xl"- "':C\i 01'- "'C1> "'~ M~ OI !i!I Pond Report 01+t 7- \ S 0..(. Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Pond No.3. J 1505 by 8 basin Pond Data Bottom LxW = 150.0 x 150.0 It Side slope = 4.0:1 Wednesday, Jun 28 2006, 2:50 PM Bottom elev. = 200.00 ft Depth = 6.00 ft Stage I Storage Table slage (ft) Elevation (ft) Contour area (sqft) Incr. Storage (acft) Tolal storage (acft) 0.00 200.00 22,500 0.000 0.000 0.30 200.30 23,226 0.157 0.157 0.60 200.60 23,963 0.162 0.320 0.90 200.90 24,712 0.168 0.488 1.20 201.20 25,472 0.173 0.660 1.50 201.50 26,244 0.178 0.838 1.80 201.80 27,027 0.183 1.022 2.10 202.10 27,822 0.189 1.211 2.40 202.40 28,629 0.194 1.405 2.70 202.70 29,447 0.200 1.605 3.00 203.00 30,276 0,206 1.811 3.30 203.30 31,117 0.211 2.022 3.60 203.60 31,969 0.217 2,239 3.90 203.90 32,833 0.223 2.463 4.20 204.20 33,709 0.229 2.692 4.50 204.50 34,596 0.235 2.927 4.80 204.80 35,495 0,241 3.168 5.10 205,10 36,405 0.248 3.416 5.40 205.40 37,326 0.254 3.670 5.70 205.70 38,259 0.260 3.930 6.00 206.00 39,204 0.267 4.197 Culvert I Orifice Structures [A] [B] [C] [0] Rise (In) = 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Span (in) = 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. Barrels = 1 0 0 0 InvertEI.(ft) = 200.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Length (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 N.Yalue = .013 .013 .013 .013 Orif. Coeff. = 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Multi-Stage = n/a No No No Weir Structures [A] [B] [C] [0] Crest Len (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CrestEI.(ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Weir Coelf. = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Weir Type - - Multl.stage = No No No No Exfiltration = 0.000 in/hr (Wet area) Tailwater Elev. = 0.00 It Nole: CulvertlOrificlt outflows have been analyzed under inlel and oullet control. Stage I Storage I Discharge Table slage Storage Elevation ClvA ClvB ClvC Clv D WrA WrB WrC WrD Exfil Total ft acft ft cIs cIs cis cIs cIs cfs cfs cfs cfs cis 0.00 0.000 200.00 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.157 200.30 0.37 0.37 0.60 0.320 200.60 0.84 0.84 0.90 0.488 200.90 1.11 1.11 1.20 0.660 201.20 1.33 .1.33 1.50 0.838 201.50 1.52 1.52 1.80 1.022 201.80 1.59 1.69 2.10 1.211 202.10 1.84 1.84 2.40 1.405 202.40 1.98 1.98 2.70 1.605 202.70 2.11 2.11 3.00 1.811 203.00 2.23 2.23 3.30 2.022 203.30 2.35 2.35 3.50 2.239 203.60 2.46 2.46 3.90 2.463 203.90 2.57 2.57 4.20 2.692 204.20 2.67 2.67 4.50 2.927 204.50 2.77 2.77 4.80 3.168 204.80 2.87 2.87 5.10 3.416 205.10 2.96. 2.96 5.40 3.670 205.40 3.05 3.05 5.70 3.930 205.70 3.13 3.13 6.00 4.197 206.00 3.22 3.22 IISANTA BARBARA/PERCENT GRAPHllfTABLEI Ordinate PERCENT GRA... Y ordinates ..n..". -- -.-...--....--. .....m..... ..._.n''''''''''''.......'.m... Labels I Units % % Type UNT UNT 1 0.00000 0.00000 2 5.00000 0.50000 3 10.00000 1.80000 4 20.00000 5.00000 5 30.00000 11.00000 6 40.00000 18.00000 7 60.00000 31.00000 8 80.00000 41.00000 9 100.00000 50.00000 10 120.00000 57.50000 11 140.00000 64.00000 12 160.00000 69.50000 13 180.00000 74.50000 14 200.00000 78.50000 15 220.00000 81.50000 16 240.00000 84.50000 17 260.00000 87.00000 18 280.00000 89.00000 19 300.00000 90.50000 20 320.00000 92.00000 21 340.00000 93.50000 22 360.00000 94.50000 23 380.00000 95.50000 24 400.00000 96.00000 25 420.00000 96.50000 26 440.00000 97.50000 27 460.00000 97.80000 28 480.00000 98.00000 29 500.00000 98.10000 30 520.00000 98.50000 31 540.00000 98.80000 i 32 560.00000 99.00000 I I 33 580.00000 99.30000 , 34 600.00000 99.50000 , Ordinate I PERCENT GRA...I Yordinates I ! 35 620.00000 99.80000' i 36 .640.00000 99.89000 I 37 660.00000 99.90000 I 38 680.00000 99.99000 I I 39 700.00000 100.00000 i IILOPEZ DAM SPILLlNG/ELEVATION-STORAGEllfTABLEI Ordinate I ELEVATION I STORAGE I r .........",. ............"..-. ..............--...--............- H_' - -- Labels I Units. FT ACRE-FT I Type UNT UNT 1 519.77 0.00000 2 520.00 1.00000 3 522.00 2,000.00000 4 524.00 4,000.00000 5 526.00 6,000.00000 6 528.00 8,000.00000 7 530.00 10,000.00000 8 531.00 11,000.00000 9 536.00 14,000.00000 I Ordinate STORAGE FLOW r - Labels Units ACRE-FT CFS Type UNT UNT 1 0.00000 1.2000 2 1.00000 15.0000 3 2,000.00000 3,204.0000 4' 4,000.00000 8,302.0000 5 6,000.00000 13,300.0000 6 8,000.00000 18,300.0000 7 10,000.00000 23,300.0000 8 11,000.00000 28,300.0000 9 14,000.00000 33,300.0000 IILOPEZ-2(AL T -1 OO)!ELEV A TION-STORAGEIIIT ABLE! Ordinate I ELEVATION I STORAGE .- .- . . ~~- - .----- ". -. .- ... . Labels Units - . Type UNT UNT 1 400.00 700 . 2 410.00 1,500 : 3 420.00 2,800 i 4 430.00 4,600 ; 5 440.00 7,000 , 6 450.00 10,000 j 7 460.00 13,200 ! 8 470.00 17,500 ! 9 480.00 22,500 10 490.00 28,000 , 11 500.00 34,500 , , 12 510.00 42,000 i 13 519.77 51,000 I 14 520.00 51,001 i 15 522.00 53,000 , 16 524.00 55,000 , 17 526.00 57,000 i 18 528.00 59,000 , 19 530.00 61,000 20 531.00 62,000 , 21 536.00 65,000 Ordinate ELEVATION STORAGE - - Labels Units I Tvpe UNT UNT , 1 400.00 700 2 410.00 1,500 3 420.00 2,800 4 430.00 4,600 5 440.00 7,000 6 450.00 10,000 7 .460.00 13,200 8 470.00 17,500 9 480.00 22,500 . 10 ... 490.00 28,000 11 500.00 34;500 12 510.00 42,000 13 519.77 51,000 14 520.00 51,001 15 522.00 53,000 16 524.00 55,000 17 526.00 57,000 18 528.00 59,000 19 530.00 61,000 20 531.00 62,000 21 536.00 65,000 CREEKSIDE MIXED-USE CENTER TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 04-004 & PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 04-001 Environmental Impact Report Addendum THE CREEKSIDE COMPLEX A Mixed Use Planned Development - = /" \:,'/"\""""l;~~\:J\:\ . / \ ~> / \ , \ " , I I ATTACHMENT 13 , October 2006 . , ><~ i~ a.f :lE, O. U< Iwl IO~ II~i ',Wi <Il:! lOa ,LIJ. '3:'"' 1"'1 . c, LJ I ~1! j dill! ..!:.-.!~i Prepared by: City of Arroyo Grande Community Development Department CREEKSIDE EIR ADDENDUM 1.0' INTRODUCTION Background In September 2003 the City of Arroyo Grande adopted Resolution No. 3710 certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the Creekside Center mixed use project (Tentative Tract Map 01-002 and Conditional Use Permit 01-001). The FEIR examined potential environmental impacts associated with development of a commercial retail, office and residential complex on a 3.5-acre site located at 415 East Branch Street. The proposed project involved construction of 37,000 square feet of retail, office and residential space in five separate one and two story buildings and reconfiguration of 37 underlying lots into five parcels. The applicant proposed to retain the existing office building, relocate the two former Loomis residences, and remove the E.C. Loomis and Son Feed Store. The FEIR determined that the main residence would be eligible for listing in the California Register as a historical resource, and that the . grain warehouse serves as an important feature of the setting for the main house. Removal of these structures was determined to be a significant environmental impact. Several of the parcels originally included in the project have changed ownership since the initial submittal in January 2000. The property underlying the existing office . building and storage units was sold and therefore is not a part of the proposed development. The property underlying the two residences and feed store has also been sold, but is still included as part of the revised project. A "Consent of Landowner" letter was submitted to the City on September 28, 2004 containing signatures of all owners of record for the redesigned project. Because of these changes in project design and ownership, the applicant withdrew and resubmitted the tentative tract map in September 2004. This created a new processing timeline consistent with the Permit Streamlining Act and Subdivision Map Act. Creekside Center EIR Addendum - 2 - This Addendum provides information to the City of Arroyo Grande's decision-makers on: . The revised site plan for the proposed mixed-use project; . Potential changes in impacts resulting from the revisions to the project; and . Conclusions regarding potential changes in impacts and the applicability of . criteria that would require the preparation of a Subsequent EIR. Revised Project Description The original mixed-use project was redesigned in response to comments contained in the FEIR. Most existing buildings are proposed to remain, except the storage sheds and garden barn in the center and east sides of the site, and the revised project includes considerably more residential floor area as compared to the original proposal. Proposed is a Planned Unit Development application to construct 12 duplexes and a 12,000 square foot commercial/office building, and retain the existing residences and former Loomis store (see Figure 1 for Site Plan). Because the revised project does not include the existing office building and associated storage structures located adjacent to the creek, the project site is smaller (2.5 vs. 3.5 acres). The Tract Map reconfigures 23 existing parcels into 13 parcels. Primary access is from a driveway on East Branch Street and from Crown Hill. Secondary and emergency access through the site is from Le Point Street. Residential "Plan A" contains 8 units in 4 buildings with access from either below at grade level, or above from Crown Terrace. The duplexes are three levels with individual units ranging from 2,000 to 2,655 square feet in size. Residential "Plan B" contains 16 units in 8 buildings, all two stories with access from the ground level. These units are smaller, from 420 to 1,300 square feet in size. The proposed new 12,000 square foot commercial structure has three levels with an elevator and two- story parking garage, a portion of which is accessed from Crown Terrace, with the majority of the spaces at grade level, utilizing the existing driveway to Crown Hill Street near the East Branch Street intersection. Creekside Center EIR Addendum - 3 - ...,.-....-.-.._.._.~ I- . . . 1 .. ; 1Hi;; '!lllt. i :l!~i i j' II [1 j I f1)( ~, iUU' !~~I ':1: <, roil :O~i I LIJ I i ;9;j I~il I~JI 10J 1 LIJ . lJ:~ 11r- ! FIGURE 1: PROPOSED SITE PLAN AS REVISED f'"1:~tt'~O%t,;(lVl\.t; ,t",,-_~~ .,' .. ~tl\T,"" ---. F=;~;~';" ,. .. ..__._......'f.'":;1f':'<~:;::a;j. .y.;..~;::'~.,.....r;r;:.~~:,..:'-,....^,...~~,,~, [ ~. " , , '-'" ",'''FI.",,<,.",..p'~~',i~''i,~ "41;., ., ; _.._-~.tt...,.__.,...-:".~~>."..-,<-.~;;,.L.;.c..,..;.;," i , t'C': I --:",' . 'L, ''''''-1 : .. J f : ! it'} /,.. 1:1 , f' "'"f tt, '""",-" I J ,. . .-"!..i..,--," ~'''-~ .._......:.~< .r: t.~ ... ..,..,,,,,, ___ ..,.... ....... ""'. _'M~~."...,_,,~,,; , . r. 'j. ""c' ". ". ' ,._.,/ .....,.j,...,....,,, .~".r-, ,.".,..... I I ,'i..~..--.:._-~.... ,I LL.,'.' , I < 1 i,r"'''' j I 1 ; . ~~!:;::; i 1._:;, c-'''...r;T.i ~ .' J r IJ' . '. ,,"" . . "<< ILl,', .... ' ',j .. ,E~",.. ! ii'" '-TV ;... ~"'~">A,,'i< , ' ,nu:IlIf"W..lIl>>. ~ r.~"'! ~!'; -- . t .;:::~~; - '"..:.._ ..." -. ~: Lr-' : l,"_.,Ll --', ..,-- n I" i ~J t'" 1 I _.wj_ '1 t,., l~- It 'I , , -f (. , _' ----"i'T-: ~ ;IL,. ./' ~~If ir-'\-i.::-i ..' :',[ , J,!;!,i,l: , " ,'! L-..J'" L' . ....- ......... ' I I :. ,; ~'-~.. ~ _!~ ~.=..:~.~_:'-.i",.L. _1 ~__ ~~ _). : <;t.t.:~, ".~~ . J ; , :! 1; ..; I;T ~ [.- :~~-1 l j ,j , : t .) t',~ r;~l';:" ":"--;-:':-:., , -- j'.1 rt- 1"- f'~ '" ! . "'''''r .-' ,-:---:-:- '''f' ..' j r-=:::;:":"':')'.' . , .-. , 'I '''''[:'';'';'1/: !L._. .jh.. .' I I,"~" ..fr.:.. ,..A :.-..... '. '! [. J. c --. ""J~ri'- .:'~. .' :~::; t~..3 . ..-"~.,,.... -'~--"--""}""-- 'J." "~." ...-.-..... '-".'-" , _".~ --.t. -~_.~---...._-. --~----_.. .,~.. .~~ ~ .. _....~.t', I, ,I ,i~_ .~ - .....'.. "-'u.'_ SITE PLAN i . \ 1\ .i ~..... ..~_...,.,~- ....-.-.,,"- r::l~ \.0... ~ g-,.t:-- -- --... l r" I / ,/ -- ::;~.~.... - ....- ;,;;:.."..':.::'"'....- hl,."}tfH'~. -_.._- ~ .. s: !:.:- --..-- .. - :; 'C':_....n 1'._...... ,: :=-~ :::-:::.:-~-- '::!"" ;:';';:; --- r.:::- ;;:-;::: ---.. -".". ::... :::: -- _...._~ ~...- ."..... ...... Requirements for Preparation of an Addendum The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) provides for the preparation of an Addendum to a Final EIR. Section 15164 of CEQA states in part, "(a) The lead agency or responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred" CEQA Section 15162 requires preparation of a Subsequent EIR in the following cases: (1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; Creekside Center EIR Addendum - 4 - [ ~ !;1 \ 1 H.~ ! l tlt1! 11'ji' I !..II (2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or (3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following: (A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration; (8) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe' than shown in the previous EIR; (C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or (D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. // None of the provisions of CEQA Section 15162 apply to the amended project, and therefore an Addendum (rather than a Subsequent EIR) has been prepared. Pursuant to CEQA Section 15164(c): ':4n addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the Final EIR or adopted negative declaration. // This Addendum has therefore not been circulated for public review, but is provided as an attachment to the Final EIR. 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANAL YSISOF MINOR PROJECT MODIFICATIONS Proposed Environmental Determination Upon review and comparison of the proposed project and original submittal evaluated by the EIR, several minor modifications and refinements have been made. As previously noted, the project description information presented in this Addendum relate only to changes in the land use composition and physical layout of the site. These changes could result in positive and/or negative effects related to the following areas examined in the Final EIR: Creekside Center EIR Addendum - 5 - . Land Use . Parking . Historical Resources . Recreation . Biological Resources The proposed changes would not result in any changes to the conclusions reached from the previously certified EIR, nor would there be a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. Also, no new information of substantial . importance is known to exist that was not known or could not have been known at the time of the previous EIR. . The following analysis identifies the minor changes made to the project plans and design as compared to the original submittal evaluated by the EIR, and explains why the change is considered minor. Modification #1: Land Uses. As previously noted, the original project would have removed the two former Loomis residential buildings and feed store as well as all accessory storage buildings to enable construction of the Creekside Center. The Center was a complex of the existing office building and four new retail or office buildings containing approximately 31,000 gross floor area, with one building also proposing four residential units. This project would have involved significant unavoidable impacts to the existing buildings including the historic resources identified in the certified EIR. The revised project retains the historic resources for potential restoration or reuse and eliminates only accessory structures behind and to the east of the existing houses and former feed store to enable 12,000 square feet of new retail/office building and the 12 duplex residential buildings. The revised Creekside Complex is a mixed-use planned unit development that is approximately one-third commercial/office and two-thirds residential, including 24 dwelling units. Modification #2: Parking. The revised project has different parking requirements than the original project because of the increased number of residential units. However, there is no change to the number of deficient parking spaces. Analvsis: The current project complies with Development Code calculations for residential and commercial parking utilizing a 3.4% parking reduction, allowable for mixed-use projects. Net residential parking has a deficit of one (1) guest space and net commercial parking has a deficit of three (3) spaces. The Development Code (Section 16.56.050) allows up to a 20% parking reduction for mixed-use projects, which is more than adequate for the proposed project. The original project was deficient by a total of four (4) parking spaces as well. The proposed parking would accommodate the project demands using the shared parking scenario described in the EIR. No new impacts would result from the revised parking configuration and no additional mitigation is necessary. Creekside Center EIR Addendum - 6 - Modification #3: Historical Resources. The existing former Loomis houses and feed store structures are proposed to remain, including the main house, which the EIR has determined to be a potentially significant historic resource eligible for listing in the California Register of Historic Places. Analysis #3: The revised project retains all existing historic resource structures and related setting, which changes this environmental determination from a Class I impact (significant and unavoidable) to a Class IV impact (beneficial) and Class II (Significant but mitigable). Retention of these existing structures requires certain mitigation measures be added that were discussed in the EIR but did not apply, because the single historical resource on the project site, the main house, was proposed to be demolished. Subsequently, the applicant sold the property containing the historical resource without adequate and legally enforceable restrictions or conditions to ensure long-term preservation of the property's historic significance. Mitigation Measure 4.4.1 has been added requiring the new owner of the property to register the main residence in the California Register of Historic Places through the State Office of Historic Preservation (OHP). In the event the main house is converted from a residential to a commercial use or is renovated, any alteration (including restoration, rehabilitation, repair, maintenance, stabilization, hazardous material remediation, and provision of handicapped access) must be consistent with the Secretary's Rehabilitation Standards and Guidelines (36 CFR part 68) or technical adYisories (Mitiqation Measure 4.4.2) Modification #4: Recreation. Loss of recreational opportunities. Analysis #4: The revised project does not include an amphitheatre or a pedestrian trail adjacent to the creek as originally proposed. However, the residential component does incorporate a small open space area adjacent to the creek that includes a play structure, picnic table and bench. Mitigation measures have been added regarding requirement of a trail easement (see MM 4.4.30 and MM 4.4.31 below under Biological Resources). This does not constitute a significant impact and no additional mitigation measures are required. Modification #5: Biological Resources. The creekway enhancement component of the original project has mostly been eliminated. Analysis #5: Because the property developed with the office building and storage units is no longer part of the project, the opportunity for enhancement of Tally Ho Creek is reduced. This is a significant impact that can be mitigated with recordation of an open space agreement, and a twenty-five foot (25') creek easement measured from top of bank that includes a trail easement (Mitiqation Measure 4.4.30). The project is further required to construct a footpath to the creek that would be stable and not erosive. The trail must be covered with base rock and designed to be permeable and to avoid the concentration of storm runoff. The developer shall also plant shrubs, such as native Creekside Center EIR Addendum - 7 - blackberry, adjacent to any trails and/or footpaths to discourage use of a shortcut path, and revegetate any existing short paths (Mitiaation Measure 4.4.31). Modification #6: Water. Development of the proposed project would require water for both domestic use and landscape irrigation. The water consumption by this project would further reduce the City's remaining supply of available water. This impact will be minimized by mitigation measures, including using water-conserving designs, fixtures and landscaping. The City currently receives its water supply from both surface and groundwater sources. Ground water extractions are derived from seven (7) wells and two (2) separate basin formulations. Surface water is obtained from the Lopez Reservoir Project, which was constructed in the late 1960's. Reclaimed storm water collected by the Soto Sports Complex Storm Water Reclamation Project is also used as an irrigation supply source. The City adopted a Water System Master Plan in 1999, which identified water resources as being a significant issue, and identified methods to increase and diversify water supply to increase long-term reliability of the City's water service to its residents. The report assessed potential methods to address the water supply issue and prioritized alternatives. The City used approximately 97.7% of its available/allocated water supply, totaling approximately 3,700 acre-feet,between January 2004 and December 2004. Per Chapter 13.05.010 of the City's Municipal Code (Water Supply Conditions), this level of water use is considered a "severely restricted" water supply condition that has not yet reached a "critical" level. To manage its potential water supply deficiency, the City adopted a two-phased strategy in November 2004 that included alternatives to be pursued to meet the City's water demand over the next 10- year period (phase 1), and identified alternatives that will provide permanent water supply increases to meet the long-term demand that are most desirable, feasible and cost effective (phase 2). As part of phase 1, the City adopted a Water Conservation Program in May 2003 that included: . Plumbing Retrofit Program; . Water Shortage Contingency Analysis; . Public Informatio[J and Education; . Information System Assessment for Top Water Users; . Enforcement of City's Water Conservation Codes; and . Optional components, including washing machine rebates, irrigation system or landscaping rebates, and retrofit of cemetery with non-potable water. Other components of phase 1 include construction of Well No. 10 (located on Deer Trail Circle), pursuing oil field water on Price Canyon, implementing a tiered water and sewer rate structure as financial incentives for water conservation, and a utility retrofit upon-sale program. It sh,ould also be noted that pursuant to the agreement entitled Creekside Center EIR Addendum - 8 - Management of the Arroyo Grande Ground Water Basin, dated effective June 10, 2002, the City is entitled to the first 359.1 acre feet of the urban parties share of any increase in the safe yield of the Arroyo Grande Ground Water Basin; an RFP for this study has been implemented. This additional entitlement, potentially presents the most immediate increase in water supply to the City Phase2 provides various permanent water supply options that include: . Conducting a groundwater study; . Pursuing water from the Nacimiento Project; . Implementing a reclaimed water system; . Studying feasibility of a desalination plant; and . Pursuing water from the State Water Project. 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES 4.1 Aesthetics The revised project adheres to the Design Guidelines for the Historic Overlay District (the "Guidelines") per review of the Architectural Review Committee (ARC). The project therefore requires less mitigation for visual impacts than the original project. No additional mitigation measures are required. 4.2 Air Ouality Less air quality mitigation is necessary with the revised project since none of the existing buildings on the project site are proposed to be demolished. All mitigation related to dust control are required, and no additional measures are necessary. 4.3 BioloQV The following mitigation measure has been added: MM 4.3.30: The developer shall record an open space agreement and twenty- five foot (25') creek easement on the property measured from top of bank. No development shall occur within 25' creek setback area. A trail easement is further reqUired within the setback area. 4.4 Cultural Resources The following mitigation measures have been added: MM 4.4.1: The owner of the property containing the former Loomis residences and grain warehouse shall register the main residence in the California Register of Historic Places through the State Office of Historic Preservation (OHP). MM 4.4.2: Alterations to the main house shall comply with the Secretary's Rehabilitation Standards and Guidelines (36 CFR part 68). Creekside Center EIR Addendum - 9 - 4.5 Geoloav and Soil No new impacts are expected with the revised project and no additional mitigation measures are necessary. 4.6 Hazardous Materials No new impacts are expected with the revised project and no additional mitigation measures are necessary. 4.7 Hydroloav. and Water Quality No new impacts are expected with the revised project and no additional mitigation measures are necessary. 4.8 Land Use There are no impacts requiring mitigation with either the original or revised project. 4.9 Noise No new impacts are expected with the revised project and no additional mitigation measures are necessary. 4.10 Public Services and Utilities There are no impacts requiring mitigation with either the original or revised project. 4.11 Water and Wastewater Wastewater disposal is not considered a significant impact and existing facilities . can handle the increased project demand. Cumulative water supply remains a significant impact but mitigable with implementation of mitigation measures. All mitigation measures in FEIR are required. No additional mitigation measures are necessary for water or wastewater impacts. 4.0 CONCLUSION Based on the above discussion, the proposed mitigation measures or minor changes are not considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR, nor would they substantially reduce or change the conclusions. The applicant will be incorporating these and other required environmental mitigation measures into the project. Therefore, a subsequent or supplemental EIR is not considered necessary, and the EIR addendum is appropriate. S:\COMMUNITY_OEVELOPMENT\PROJECTS\TIM\Creekside TIM 2346\Creekside EIR Addendum 2.doc Creekside Center EIR Addendum- 10 - CREEKSIDE MIXED-USE CENTER TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 04-004 & PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 04-001 (THE "PROJECT") ! ATTACHMENT 14 Mitigation Monitoring Program October 2006 Table of Contents Introduction 2 Legal Basis ........................................................................ 2 Program Implementation and Monitoring .................................... 3 Implementation 3 Mitigation Monitoring 4 Mitigation Monitoring Status Reporting ........................... 5 Project Mitigation Measures 5 4.1 Aesthetics ................ .......... ...... ..... .... ............ ........... 5 4.2 Air Quality.......................... ...... .............. .................. 6 4.3 Biology................................................................ 7 4.4 Cultural Resources ....................................................... 16 4.5 Geology and Soil....................................................... 19 4.6 Hazardous Materials .............................................. 22 4.7 Hydrology, and Water Quality ..................................... 23 4.8 Land Use ................................................................ 26 4.9 Noise ......................................................................... 26 4.10 Public Services and Utilities ..................................... 26 4.11 Water and Wastewater .............................................. 26 Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Creekside Center Introduction Mitigation is defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as a measure which: . Avoids the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action. . Minimizes impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the aCtion and its implementation. . Rectifies the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the impacted environment. . Reduces or eliminates the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the project. . Compensates for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments. Mitigation measures discussed below have been identified in Chapter 4 of the FEIR, Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigation Measures, as feasible and effective in mitigating project-related environmental impacts. The effectiveness of each measure is identified in this Mitigation Monitoring Program and discussed in more detail in Chapter 4 of the FEIR. Le~al Basis Overriding Considerations The City Certified the FEIR for the Creekside Center in September 2003 and an Addendum to that document has been prepared to evaluate potential impacts for a revised project. At the time of considering approval of the project, the City must consider the information presented in the Final EIR and Addendum. The FEIR for the original project identified significant and unavoidable impacts with the demolition of historical resources and to the City's cumulative water supply. The revised project reduces impacts to historical resources to a less than significant level by retaining all significant (historic resources or important to their setting) existing structures on the project site. Impacts to the City's long-term water supply remains a significant and unavoidable impact previously recognized in the 2001 GPU Program EIR. If a project is determined to a have significant, unavoidable impact, the City must find that the benefits of the project outweigh the environmental effects before approving the project. This is called a Statement of Overriding Considerations and it must be included in the record of project approval (CEQA Guidelines 315093). The Statement of Overriding Considerations is a written statement, based on substantial evidence, explaining why the Lead Agency will accept the project with significant effects. Because the project has a significant, unavoidable environmental impact regarding water supply, the City must make this finding of Overriding Considerations in its approval of the project. A Notice of Determination is filed after the City makes its final decision. Mitigation and Monitoring Program The legal basis for the development and implementation of a Mitigation and Monitoring Program lies within CEQA. CEQA Sections 21002 and 21001.1 state: Creekside FElR Mitigation Monitoring Program - 2- . Public agencies are not to approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects; and . Each public agency shall mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment of projects that it carries out or approves whenever it is feasible to do so. . CEQA Section 21081.6 further requires that: the public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes made to the project or conditions of project approval, adopted in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. The reporting or monitoring program shall be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation. . The monitoring program must be adopted when a public agency makes its findings under CEQA so that the program can be made a condition of project approval in order to mitigate significant effects on the environment. The program must be designed to ensure compliance with mitigation measures during project implementation to mitigate or avoid significant environmental effects. Proaram.lmplementation and Monitorina Each mitigation measure is described in the following format: Impact: The description of , the specific environmental impact. Mitigation Measure (MM): The description of the mitigation measures. Mitigation Level: The level to which the impact is anticipated to be mitigated. Responsible Party: The agency, Department or individual that has the responsibility for implementing or performing the measure. Monitoring Agency: The public agency that has the responsibility for monitoring to ensure that the mitigation measure is effective in mitigating the impact. Timing: The appropriate points in time at which the mitigation measure is to be initiated and completed. Implementation The City shall be responsible for overall implementation and administration of the Mitigation and Monitoring Program for the project. The City shall designate a staff person to serve as coordinator of all mitigation monitoring among the various government agencies, construction contractors, and interested residents. This person (Coordinator) will oversee all mitigation measures and ensure they are completed to the standards specified in the FEIR and Addendum and will ensure that the mitigation measures are completed in a timely manner. They will also be responsible for the Mitigation Monitoring Checklist. , Creekside FEfR Mitigation Monitoring Program - 3- Duties of the Coordinator include the following: . Coordinate with applicable agencies that have mitigation monitoring and reporting responsibility; . Coordinate activities with the construction manager; . Coordinate activities of all in-field monitors; . Develop a work plan and schedule for monitoring activities; . Coordinate activities of consultants hired by the developer when such expertise and qualifications are necessary; . Conduct routine inspections and reporting activities; . Plan checks; . Assure follow-up and response to citizen inquiries and complaints; . Develop, maintain, and compile Verification Report Forms; . . Maintain the Mitigation Monitoring Checklist or other suitable mitigation compliance summary; and . Coordinate and assure implementation of corrective actions or enforcement measures, as needed. Mitigation Monitoring The implementation of mitigation measures shall be monitored at two levels. The first level of monitoring is done through the use of a Verification Report. This report is to be completed for each mitigation measure by the in-field monitor, responsible agency, or construction manager (whichever is appropriate for the given action and mitigation measure). Frequency of report completion will vary based on the type of mitigation measure. For example, measures that require modification of final design drawings will only require that the Verification .Report be completed at the time of Final drawings are completed and again when they are approved. However, in-field monitoring for activities such as construction may require that a Verification Report be completed daily. Once a mitigation measure has been completed and the measure needs no further monitoring or follow-up, the in-field monitor, responsible agency, or construction manager shall notify the Coordinator that the measure has been completed. This notification shall be done by sending a final Verification Report. The Coordinator shall be responsible for collecting and maintaining completed Verification Reports. Copies of these reports shall be maintained by the City. If the in field monitor, responsible agency, or construction manager determined that non- compliance has occurred, a written notice shall be delivered to the Coordinator describing the non-compliance and requiring compliance within a specified period oHime. If non-compliance still exists at the expiration of the specified period of time, construction may be halted and fines may be imposed upon the party responsible for implementation, at the discretion of the City. The second level of monitoring shall be done through the completion of the Mitigation Monitoring Checklist. The purpose of the Checklist is to provide a summary of the status of adopted mitigation measures for the City, other public officials, and concerned citizens. The Coordinator shall update the Checklist twice a year. The Coordinator shall update the Checklist by reviewing the Verification Reports and contacting the in-field monitors, responsible agencies, and the construction manager to review the status of their respective mitigation measures. A copy of the most current Mitigation Monitoring Checklist shall be maintained at the Community Development Department. Creekside FEIR Mitigation Monitoring Program -4- Mitigation Monitoring Status Reporting The City shall compile a Mitigation Monitoring Status report on an annual basis. The report shall be prepared by the Coordinator and contain the following: o Mitigation Monitoring Checklist to provide the status of every mitigation measure; o List of completed mitigation measures; . List of all non-compliance incidences, with action taken or required' . Evaluation of the effectiveness ofthe mitigation measures; o Recommendations for modifications to the Mitigation and Monitoring Program to improve effectiveness; and . Required modifications to the Mitigation and Monitoring Program to comply with legislation and policies adopted in the previous year (e.g. newly listed threatened species ). Project Mitigation Measures This section presents a listing and description of the recommended mitigation measures that avoid or minimize potential environmental impacts. 4.1 Aesthetics The revised project uses building colors and materials consistent with the Design Guidelines for the Historic Overlay District (the "Guidelines") and therefore requires no mitigation for visual impacts. Impact: Signs added as part of the proposed project may conflict with the existing Design Guidelines for the Historic Overlay District and with the Development Code for the Village Mixed Use District. This is a potentially significant impact that can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level with implementation of the following mitigation measure(s). MM 4.1.1: A Planned Sign Program application shall be submitted to the Community Development Department (COD). All signs to be installed on or around the proposed buildings shall be subject to review by Architectural Review Committee (ARC) and approval by the COD. Mitigation level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: . Timing: Less-than-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande, COD Prior to issuance of Building Permit Impact: Sidewalks installed as part of the project may conflict with the Guidelines. This is a potentially significant impact that can be mitigated to a less-than"significant level with implementation of the following mitigation measure(s). MM 4.1.2: All sidewalks to be installed shall be consistent with the Guidelines and the Development Code, subject to review and approval by the ARC: Mitigation Level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-significant City of Arroyo Grande - COD, ARC City of Arroyo Grande - COD, Public Works Dept. Prior to issuance of Building Permit Creekside FEIR Mitigation Monitoring Program -5 - Impact: The proposed development would result in an increase in external lighting. Night lighting for security, parking and street lighting could be perceived as intrusive to surrounding residential neighborhoods. This is a potentially significant impact that can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level with implementation of the following mitigation measure(s). MM 4.1.3: All lighting for the proposed project shall conform to Development Code . Section 16.48.090 for position, intensity and operation. In particular, street and parking lot lights shall be directed away from the surrounding residential areas, and shall be of minimum intensity. A photometric plan shall be submitted for review and approval by COD and Police Dept. consistent with these lighting requirements. Mitigation Level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Less-tha n-sig n ificant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - COD, ARC, Public Works Dept., Police Dept. Prior to issuance of Building Permit Timing: 4.2 Air Qualitv Impact: The revised project does not include demolition of any primary buildings and therefore no impacts of hazardous air pollutants such as asbestos or lead materials are anticipated. However, construction activities would produce short-term air quality impacts. This is a potentially significant impact that can be mitigated to a less-thari- significant level with implementation of the following mitigation measure(s). MM 4.2.1: The dust control measures listed below shall be followed during construction of the project, and shall be shown on grading and building plans: . During construction, water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used to keep all areas of vehicle movement damp enough to prevent dust from leaving the site. At a minimum, this would include wetting down such areas in the later morning and after work is completed for the day and whenever wind exceeds 15 miles per hour. . Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or . treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation. . All vehicles hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with CVC Section 23114. . Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads on to streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site. Creekside FElR Mitigation Monitoring Program - 6- . Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried on to adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water should be used where feasible. . Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer's specifications. . Maximize the use of diesel construction equipment meeting, as a minimum, the California Air Resources Board's 1996 certification standard for off-road heavy-duty diesel engines. Mitigation Level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-th an-s ign ifica nt Developer City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept., Building and Fire Department Prior to issuance of Grading Permit and during construction 4.3 Bioloclical Resources A biological resources investigation was conducted for the project, with emphasis on identifying sensitive biological resources and associated project impacts given the site's proximity to Tally Ho Creek. Impact: Construction of the project may result in loss of and damage to existing vegetation/botanical resources and species habitat. In addition, the potential loss of trees within the riparian corridor could have substantial effect on habitat. suitability for special- status wildlife species (although no trees are currently scheduled for removal). This is a potentially significant impact that can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level with implementation of the following mitigation measures. MM 4.3.1: A Riparian Restoration, Landscaping, and Monitoring Plan (Restoration Plan) shall be prepared by a qualified restoration/revegetation biologist and a qualified arborist. The Restoration Plan shall include, at a minimum, the requirements within the mitigation measures included in the FEIR, success criteria, and contingency planning if those criteria are not met. Mitigation Level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-significant Developer shall submit the plan to the City and California Dept. of Fish and Game (CDFG) City of Arroyo Grande - CDD and PR&F (Parks, Recreation . and Facilities Dept.); CDFG Restoration Plan shall be submitted and approved prior to issuance of Grading Permit; duration of monitoring shall be no less than five (5) years. MM 4.3.2: Any trees intentionally or unintentionally killed or removed that are greater than or equal to four (4) inches diameter at breast height (DBH) and less than twelve (12) inches DBH shall be replaced at a 3:1 ratio. Trees removed that are greater than or equal to twelve (12) inches DBH shall be replaced at a 5:1 ratio. Replacement trees shall Creekside FEfR Mitigation Monitoring Program - 7 - be limited to appropriate native, riparian tree species as approved by the City Parks, Facilities and Recreation Department's arborist. Mitigation level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: less-than-significant City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, Parks, Recreation & Facilities Dept. City of Arroyo Grande ~ CDD, Parks, Recreation & Facilities Dept.; CDFG During construction MM 4.3.3: Non-native, invasive plant species (German ivy, poison hemlock, etc.) shall be removed from the project site, and replaced with appropriate native herbaceous plant species as directed by a qualified restoration biologist. Mitigation level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, Parks, Recreation & Facilities Dept.; CDFG Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy MM 4.3.4: All disturbed areas of bare soil and slopes within the project site must be protected from erosion during and after construction in conformance with mitigation measures in the Geology and Soils section. Re-vegetation in appropriate areas of the site shall be implemented immediately following construction with locally occurring native plants and native erosion control seed mix (composed of locally-occurring native seed), in conjunction with geotechnical fabrics such as jute netting, for steeper slopes. Implementation of the re-vegetation and other construction Best Management Practices shall be monitored by a qualified restoration biologist. Mitigation level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-s ig n ifica nt Developer Restoration Biologist; City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, Parks, Recreation & Facilities Dept. During and after construction activities MM 4.3.5: The restoration Plan for the site shall contain the following measures for tree protection during construction: . A qualified arborist shall be present on-site during preliminary grading. Two sets of the site map and grading plan shall be submitted Prior to Grading Permit and shall contain all information required under the terms of Section 7-1.06d of the City of Arroyo Grande Grading Ordinance. . To protect trees on and near the site during construction, tree preservation zones (TPZ) shall be established by installing fencing, with stakes embedded in the ground, no less than 48 inches in height, at the dripline (the perimeter of the foliar canopy) of the tree, or at the critical root radius, as defined by the consulting arborist. This installation will be done prior to any grading or construction activities. In addition, herbaceous and shrubby Creekside FEIR Mitigation Monitoring Program -8- vegetation shall be fenced and protective wood barriers shall be provided where these are to be retained. . Storage of construction materials, debris, or excess soil and parking of vehicles or construction equipment shall be prohibited within the dripline of existing trees (the TPZ). Any solvents or liquids shall be properly stored, disposed, and recycled to prevent accidental release. . Soil compaction on the construction site shall be minimized, particularly within the riparian corridor and under the dripline of trees. Soil surface shall be protected with a deep layer of mulch (tree chips) to reduce compaction, retain moisture, and stabilize soil temperature. . The natural grade around trees that are not removed shall be maintained. No additional fill or excavation shall be permitted within areas of tree root development. If tree roots are unearthed during the construction process, the consulting arborist shall be notified immediately. Exposed roots shall be covered with moistened burlap until a determination is made by the on-site arborist. . Any areas of proposed trenching shall be evaluated with: the consulting arborist and the contractor prior to construction. All trenching on this site shall be approved by the on-site arborist. Trenching within a tree dripline shall be performed by hand. Tree roots encountered shall be avoided or properly pruned under the guidance of the consulting arborist. . Mitigation level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: less-than-significant Developer Arborist; City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, Parks, Recreation & Facilities Dept. During construction Impact: The project could substantially degrade the riparian corridor associated with Tally Ho Creek indirectly through introduction of exotic/invasive non-native plant species, introduction of foreign materials (petroleum products, refuse, etc.), erosion, slope slippage, and directly through disruption of a sensitive habitat. This is a potentially significant impact that can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level with implementation of the following mitigation measure(s). MM 4.3.6: To reduce erosion hazards due to construction activities, grading shall be minimized, and project applicants shall use runoff and sediment control structures, and/or establish a permanent plant cover on side slopes following construction as required in Mitigation Measures within the Geology and Soils section of the FEIR. Mitigation level: Responsible Party: . Monitoring Agency: Timing: less-than-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept. Prior to issuance of Grading Permit Creekside FEIR Mitigation Monitoring Program -9- MM 4.3.7: The applicant shall submit a Notice of Intent to the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) to obtain a State Water Resources Control Board General Construction Storm Water Permit. This shall include preparation and approval of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and implementation of Best Management Practices to reduce water quality impacts as required by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). Mitigation level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept. Prior to issuance of Grading Permit MM 4.3.8: Work shall be completed during the dry season (April 15 to October 15) to reduce active construction erosion to the extent feasible. If construction must extend into the wet weather season, a qualified geohydrologist or geotechnical engineer, and restoration biologist shall prepare a drainage and erosion control plan that addresses construction measures to prevent sedimentation and erosion of Tally Ho Creek. Mitigation level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept. Prior to issuance of Grading Permit and during construction MM 4.3.9: No fueling or maintenance of equipment shall take place at the site. Mechanical equipment shall be serviced in designated staging areas located outside of the creek riparian area. Water from equipment washing or concrete wash down shall be prevented from entering the creek. Mitigation level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept. During construction MM 4.3.10: All removed and excess material shall be disposed of off-site and away from the flood plain, outside areas subject to U.S. Army Corps jurisdiction. Mitigation level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept. During construction MM 4.3.11: Erosion control and bank stabilization measures shall be implemented to ensure that the banks used for access do not erode. In addition, when possible, alternative bank protection methods, such as restoration of native vegetation, root wads, or other bioengineering methods of stabilization, shall be used. In order to reduce long- term effects of soil compaction and changes in topography, construction vehicles and personnel shall not enter the low flow channel and wet areas or if necessary, with prior Creekside FEIR Mitigation Monitoring Program - 10- City and DFG approval, only to the extent necessary to complete construction activities. Construction mats, wood planking, and other devices shall be used whenever possible to reduce impacts associated with soil compaction. Mitigation level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept. During construction MM 4.3.12: All temporary fill placed during project construction shall be removed at project completion and the area restored to approximate pre-project contours and topography as approved by a qualified geohydrologist and restoration biologist. Mitigation level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-sign ifica nt Developer City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy MM 4.3.13: No construction debris or materials shall be allowed to enter the creek bed, either directly or indirectly. Stockpiles should be kept far enough from the banks of the active channel and protected to prevent material from entering the creek bed. Mitigation level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-sign ifica nt Developer City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept. During construction Impact: The project has the potential to result in significant direct impacts to the southwestern pond turtle in the project footprint (and associated riparian corridor) including through harassment, injury, or mortality from construction equipment, construction debris, and worker foot traffic and from temporary loss of habitat, temporary dispersal disruption, and consumption by predators attracted to the activities. In addition, the project may result in significant indirect impacts to pond-turtle habitat including disturbance of upland slopes during construction and the resulting siltation, sedimentation, pollution, exposure, and reduction of cover. This is a potentially significant impact that can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level with implementation of the following mitigation measure(s). MM 4.3.14: A qualified biologist, preferably with a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), shall perform pre- construction surveys for southwestern pond turtles. If southwestern pond turtles are . observed within the Area of Potential Effect (APE), they shall be relocated (only by a biologist with an MOU) to appropriate habitat elsewhere along Tally Ho Creek. If the surveying biologist does not have an MOU, CDFG shall be contacted regarding southwestern pond turtle presence, to determine an appropriate course of action. Mitigation level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Less-than-sign ifica nt Developer City of Arroyo Grande - COD; CDFG Creekside FEIR Mitigation Monitoring Program -11- Timing: Prior to issuance of Grading Permit MM 4.3.15: An on-site biological monitor shall assess the Area of Potential Impact (API) daily for southwestern pond turtle presence, and relocate any observed individuals to appropriate associated habitat (only if the monitor has a MOU). If the surveying biologist does not have an MOU, CDFG shall be contacted regarding southwestern pond turtle presence, to determine an appropriate course of action. Mitigation Level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - COD; CDFG During construction Impact: The project would potentially result in a significant adverse impact to nesting raptors due to increased physiological stress, increased brood mortality, and potential . nest abandonment. These impacts may occur due to reduced habitat suitability or quality (pbysical or biological changes in the area), increased frequency of disturbance (I.e., noise, dust, vibration, etc.), and increased accidental death (direct mortality). The available nesting raptor habitat at and near the project site that may be impacted by the project includes all trees within 300 feet of project boundaries, including the adjacent areas surrounding Tally Ho Creek. This is a potentially significant impact that can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level with implementation of the following mitigation measure(s). MM 4.3.16: Pre-construction surveys for nesting raptors shall be performed by a qualified biologist. If raptor nests are located during pre-construction surveys, a 300-foot buffer shall be established around each nest for the duration of the breeding season (ending August 1st), or until such time as the young are fully fledged as determined by a qualified biologist in coordination with CDFG. Every effort shall be made to avoid removal of, or impact to, known raptor nests within project boundaries. If trees known to support raptor nests (in past years) cannot be avoided, Iimbing or removal of these trees may only occur during the non-breeding season (March 15 - August 1). Mitigation Level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - COD; CDFG Prior to issuance of Grading Permit . Impact: The project may result in significant impacts to adult and sub-adult California Red Legged Frogs (CRLFs) including harassment, injury, or mortality from construction activities including placement of debris, worker foot traffic, restoration activities, temporary loss of habitat, temporary dispersal disruption, consumption by predators attracted to the activities, and siltation and pollution of the habitat. This is a potentially significant impact that can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level with implementation of the following mitigation measure(s). MM 4.3.17: All work within the sensitive habitats shall be confined to a work-window of May 1 to November 1 to minimize the impact on wildlife species. . Creekside FEfR Mitigation Monitoring Program - 12- Mitigation level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - COD; CDFG During Construction MM 4.3.18: A biological monitor shall be on site during initial construction activities (grading, vegetation removal) to monitor for special-status wildlife. Mitigation Level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-significant Developer, Consulting Biologist City of Arroyo Grande - COD; CDFG During Construction MM 4.3.19: A biological monitor shall conduct protocol-level surveys for CRLF within the riparian corridor associated with the project site to establish site utilization by this species. Mitigation Level: Responsible Party: . Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-sig nifica nt Developer, Consulting Biologist City of Arroyo Grande - COD; CDFG Prior to issuance of Grading Permit MM 4.3.20: Consultation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) is required. This will involve a minimum 135-day review during which time USFWS will prepare a Biological Opinion and Take Permit. Mitigation level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-significant Developer; USFWS City of Arroyo Grande - COD; USFWS Prior to issuance of Grading Permit MM 4.3.21: A permitted biologist (USFWS permit) shall relocate any and all individuals located within project boundaries to suitable habitat without the risk of take (relocation of CRLF also has the potential to take individual frogs, but this will be addressed in the Service's Biological Opinion). Relocation of CRLF, if present, would occurprior to, and for the duration of, construction. Mitigation level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-sig nifica nt Developer, Consulting Biologist City of Arroyo Grande - COD; USFWS Prior to issuance of Grading Permit and during construction MM 4.3.22: An employee education program shall be conducted to familiarize workers with the biology and identification of special-status wildlife species that may potentially be encountered during construction. This education program will also discuss access to and from the site, impact minimization, required avoidance and conditions of construction measures, and communication with appropriate agencies (CDFG and USFWS). One Creekside FEIR Mitigation Monitoring Program -13- person will be appointed the point of contact for these agencies, and will be responsible for appropriate communication in the unlikely event that special status species are encountered during construction. Neither the appointed contact nor anyone else on the crew shall handle special status wildlife at any time. Mitigation Level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-significant . Developer, CDFG and USFWS City of Arroyo Grande - COD; CDFG; USFWS Prior to issuance of Grading Permit MM 4.3.23: Equipment staging areas and vehicle parking and movement shall be restricted to designated construction zones. Flagging shall also be used to keep equipment, vehicles, and personnel from restricted areas. Mitigation Level: Less-than-significant Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, Public Works Dept. Timing: During construction MM 4.3.24: To reduce the potential attraction of CRLF predators, all food-related trash materials (e.g., leftovers, wrappers, and containers) shall be removed from the construction site each day, and sites would be constantly maintained as litter-free. Project personnel shall be instructed not to bring pets on-site, which may also prey upon CRLF. Mitigation Level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Lesscthan-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, Public Works Dept. During construction MM 4.3.25: Strict adherence to erosion control measures, and control of project run-off, is critical to maintaining CRLF habitat. Riparian mitigation, geology and soils mitigation, hydrology mitigation,.and steel head mitigation shall be implemented. Mitigation Level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-tha n-s ign ificant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, Public Works Dept. During construction MM 4.3.26: After completion of construction activities, the Restoration Plan shall be prepared and implemented. At a minimum, this plan shall include post-construction restoration of the site to pre-construction topography and contours, including: re- contouring to provide for appropriate drainage and soil stability conditions, non- native/invasive exotics control, re-establishment and planting of native riparian species, success criteria, and conditions in the event that post-construction restoration does not attain the goals of the plan. Mitigation Level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: . Less-than-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, Public Works Dept. Creekside FEIR Mitigation Monitoring Program - 14- Timing: Prior to a Certificate of Occupancy Impact: The project could result in significant impacts to Steel head and their habitat due to direct and indirect impacts to Tally Ho Creek. The project may also result in indirect impacts to Arroyo Grande Creek due to construction and post-construction downstream erosion, discharge of sediment, and discharge of other pollutants that could affect downstream habitat. This is a potentially significant impact that can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level with implementation of the following mitigation measure(s). MM 4.3.27: The developer shall enter into formal consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) regarding potential impacts to steelhead. Mitigation Level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - COD Prior to issuance of Grading Permit MM 4.3.28: No removal of riparian or upland trees that provide shade to Tally Ho Creek shall occur. Management shall include planting of native riparian species (I.e., willow, big-leaf maple, cottonwood, etc.) along the creek to provide shade and therefore aid in cooling of the creek. The on-site riparian habitat shall be enhanced to result in a net benefit to Tally Ho Creek. Mitigation Level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - COD, Public Works Dept. During construction MM 4.3.29: To reduce the peak runoff volumes (flashiness) of storm events from the site to the adjacent creeks, the developer shall submit a drainage plan prepared by a qualified hydrologist or civil engineer that demonstrates that the project post-construction run-off rate would not exceed pre-construction run-off rate in a 10- and 1 DO-year flood event. . The following specific provisions shall be included in the drainage plan subject to review and approval by the City Public Works Director, and a Restoration Biologist: . The drainage plan should be devised such that the bench immediately surrounding the project site shall capture and retain roof and patio runoff from the site and prevent uncontrolled surface runoff toward the creek. If a gutter system is inappropriate for restoration, a paved ditch shall be constructed around the foundation facing the creek to collect all runoff and feed it into a storm drain system. . Any increase in impermeable surfaces on the property that would lead to increased surface runoff toward the creek shall be prevented. If the amount of impermeable surfaces is increased, the surfaces shall be paved with porous pavement blocks and the drainage plan shall provide for capture of increased runoff and percolation on the bench without additional overland movement of water toward the creek. Creekside FEIR Mitigation Monitoring Program -15- . The drainage plan shall include two water detention facilities: one for clean roof/patio runoff and one for parking lot runoff. Alternatively, the drainage plan can include a single detention and storm water pollution prevention system. Runoff from the roofs and patios shall be sent into an underground detention tank and then metered out slowly to a culvert running down the slope of the creek with appropriate energy dissipation. Runoff from any new parking area on the site shall be directed into the appropriate pollution control facility or facilities, subject to approval by the Regional water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) in their review of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention (SWPP). The stormwater/urban runoff pollution control methodology shall be consistent with mitigation measures in the hydrology and water quality section of the EIR. Mitigation level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept. Prior to issuance of Grading Permit MM 4.3.30: The developer shall record an open space agreement and twenty-five foot (25') creek easement on the property measured from top of bank. No development shall occur within 25' creek setback area. A trail easement is further required within the setback area. Mitigation level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, Public Works Dept. Prior to Grading Permit MM 4.3.31: To combat unwanted creek access and foot traffic that disturbs vegetation, the developer shall construct a footpath to the creek that would be stable and not erosive. The trail should be covered with base rock and designed to be permeable and to avoid the concentration of storm runoff. The developer shall also plant shrubs, such as native blackberry, adjacent to any trails and/or footpaths to discourage use of a shortcut path, and revegetate any existing short paths. Mitigation level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, Public Works Dept. Prior to a Certificate of Occupancy 4.4 Cultural Resources Impacts related to the original project included removal of the primary house and warehouse, which were found to be significant and unavoidable even with implementation of required mitigation measures. Because all structures are proposed to remain with the revised project, there are no significant unavoidable impacts to these resources. However, mitigation is required to ensure the long-term preservation of existing structures that are eligible for listing in the California Register as historic resources. Creekside FEIR Mitigation Monitoring Program - 16- Impact: The project includes removal of the rear loading dock located on the north elevation of the grain warehouse. An historical evaluation was conducted by Chattel Architecture, Planning & Preservation, Inc., for removal of the loading dock to determine if demolition would result in a significant impact to an historical resource. The conclusion of the consultant is as follows: 'While the grain warehouse itself may contribute to the setting of the main house, loss of the rear loading dock would not, in and of itself, cause substantial adverse change to the historical resource (main house). Loss of a loading dock which mayor may not have been an element of the setting of the house during the period of significance would not materially alter the historical resource or its setting to the point where the main house would lose its ability to convey its historical significance. Because demolition of the grain warehouse north loading dock would not constitute material impairment to an historical resource, no adverse impacts are expected to occur as a result of this limited demolition. In concept, demolition of a small portion of the north, rear of the grain warehouse, on a secondary elevation, seems acceptable, if it facilitates retention of the main house and compatible development of the proposed project site." Removal of the rear loading dock therefore does not constitute a potentially significant impact and no mitigation is required. Such removal would require a demolition permit and ARC review in accordance with 0-2.4 Design Guidelines and Standards. Impact: Transfer, lease, or sale of property without adequate and legally enforceable restrictions or conditions to ensure long-term preservation of the property's historic significance. This is a potentially significant impact that can be mitigated to a less-than- significant level with implementation of the following mitigation measure(s). MM 4.4.1: The owner of the property containing the former Loomis residences and grain warehouse shall register the main residence in the California Register of Historic Places through the State Office of Historic Preservation (OHP). Mitigation Level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: . Timing: Less-than-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - COD, Building Dept. Prior to issuance of Building Permit Impact: Alteration of an historical resource, including restoration, rehabilitation, repair, maintenance, stabilization, hazardous material remediation, and provision of handicapped access that is potentially not consistent with the Secretary's Rehabilitation Standards and Guidelines (36 CFR part 68) or technical advisories. This is a potentially significant impact that can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level with implementation of the following mitigation measure(s). MM 4.4.2: Alterations to the main house shall comply with the Secretary's Rehabilitation Standards and Guidelines (36 CFR part 68). Creekside FEIR Mitigation Monitoring Program - 17 - Mitigation Level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - Building Dept. Prior to issuance of Building Permit MM 4.4.3: The segment of the rail bed on the project site shall be left intact and its alignment identified. If it is not possible to preserve the rail bed, then documentary drawings consistent with accepted industry practice shall be made of this historic feature to provide an archival record of its existence prior to disturbance or removal. Such documentary drawings shall be appropriately labeled and placed in the collection of the regional information center at the University of California, Santa Barbara. The documentary drawings shall be accepted by the Community Development Director prior to submittal to the repository and issuance of any final occupancy for the project. A high- quality, laser or equivalent copy, shall be provided to the Community Development Director for retention in the project file. Mitigation Level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - Building Dept. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy Impact: Although no prehistoric resources have been found on the project site, the potential for such resources exists. The project has the potential to disturb such resources and result in their loss. This is a potentially significant impact that can be mitigated to a less-than-significantlevel with the following mitigation measure(s). MM 4.4.4: The following note shall be placed on the grading plans for the project: "In the event that during grading, construction or development of the project, and archeological resources are uncovered, all work shall be halted until the City has reviewed the resources for their significance. If human remains (burials) are encountered, the County Coroner (781-4513) shall be contacted immediately. The applicant may be required to provide archaeological studies and/or mitigation measures. " Mitigation Level: . Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept. Prior to issuance of Grading Permit MM 4.4.5: A qualified archaeologist shall be retained to monitor all earth movement (grading) activity. For the purposes of this project, a qualified archaeologist shall meet the qualifications and be registered on the Register of Professional Archaeologists. In the event that prehistoric cultural materials, or historic cultural materials are encountered, work in the immediate vicinity of the finds shall be suspended and the archaeologist allowed to quickly record, collect and analyze any significant resources encountered. Following the field analysis work, the qualified archaeologist shall prepare Creekside FEIR Mitigation Monitoring Program - 18- a final monitoring/mitigation report that includes a description of the methods used, materials recovered, and the results of historic or prehistoric analysis of those materials. The final archaeological monitoring/mitigation report prepared by the qualified archaeologist shall be accepted by the Community Development Director prior to submittal to the repository and issuance of any final occupancy for the project. A high- quality, laser or equivalent copy, shall be provided to the Community Development Director for retention in the project file. Mitigation level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - COD During construction Impact: Introduction of visual, atmospheric or audible elements that diminish the integrity of an historical resource's significant historic features. MM 4.4.6: The Community Development Director shall ensure the project is reviewed. through design development and construction documents phases for conformance with the "Design Guidelines and Standards for Historic Districts" (the "Guidelines"). The project site is located in an area of transition from formal commercial to single and multiple family residential areas adjoining an agrarian character, farm-support commercial complex at the northeast edge of the Village Mixed Use district. The project design shall emphasize these transitional and agrarian features, which are reflected in the "existing design elements". These features include barn-like building envelopes with gable roofs and horizontal or vertical cladding. As part of their established responsibilities, the Architectural Review Committee (ARC) shall conduct their own, parallel review for consistency with the Guidelines. No building permit for the project shall be issued for the project until the final design has been reviewed and found to be consistent with the Guidelines in accordance with the process described above. Mitigation level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - COD Prior to issuance of a Building Permit 4.5 Geoloav and Soils The project as revised requires less cut and fill compared to the original project: 590 cubic yards (cy) of cut and 2,870 cy of fill for the revised project vs. 1,264 cy of cut and 2,953 cy of fill as originally proposed. Although there is less site disturbance (limited demolition proposed and less grading), the clearing and grading necessary to develop the site as proposed has the potential to cause erosion and sedimentation in local drainages and is therefore subject to mitigation. The site is also located in a seismically active region that necessitates mitigation. Impact: The project site will be subject to severe ground shaking in a strong seismic event, which could cause damage to structures and endanger public safety. This is a Creekside FElR Mitigation Monitoring Program - 19- potentially significant impact that can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level with implementation of the following mitigation measure(s). MM 4.5.1: A project-specific geotechnical report shall be prepared by a registered geotechnical engineer as required by the City's Grading Ordinance, and the recommendations of that report shall be incorporated in the design and construction of the proposed project. Final improvement plahs submitted to the City shall be accompanied by a letter of certification from the geotechnical engineer that the plans are in conformance with the geotechnical report, and the certification shall confirm that the plans include the following: . The project shall be designed to withstand ground shaking associated with a large magnitude earthquake on nearby active faults. . All proposed structures shall be designed to conform to the most recent Uniform Building Code (UBC) Zone 4 guidelines. . The project shall comply with the requirements of the City's Grading Ordinance. . Site-specific specifications regarding clearing, site grading and preparation, footings, foundations, slabs-on-grade, site drainage, and pavements or turf block shall be delineated. Mitigation level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: less-than-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept. Prior to issuance of Grading Permit Impact: The project would potentially result in soil instability impacts (including landslides) that could damage structures and endanger public safety. This is a potentially significant impact that can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level with implementation of the following mitigation measure(s). MM 4.5.2: The geotechnical report shall include the following considerations, at a minimum, to ensure that the impacts related to soil instability and landslides are reduced to a less-than-significant level: . Utilities should be designed with as much flexibility as practical to tolerate potential differential movement without becoming disconnected or broken. . Subgrade or base material shall be replaced or covered with suitable base material. . Retaining wall design shall be prepared by a qualified structural engineer based on the recommendations of a qualified geotechnical engineer and shall comply with the requirements of the City's Grading Ordinance. . Land with slopes greater than 25% shall not be developed, except as indicated in the approved building and grading permits. Mitigation level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Less-than-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept. Creekside FEIR Mitigation Monitoring Program - 20- Timing: Prior to issuance of Grading Permit Impact: The project site will be subject to soil erosion and downstream sedimentation during construction. This is a potentially significant impact that can be'mitigated to a less-than-significant level with implementation of the following mitigation measure(s). MM 4,5.3: Prior to Grading Permit for the project, the applicant shall prepare and submit a grading and erosion control plan in compliance with the City's Grading Ordinance for review and approval by the Public Works Department, and a qualified biologist and geohydrologist. The erosion control plan shall be subject to review and approval, and monitoring during construction, by the on-site biologist, geotechnical engineer, and City staff and shall include the following, at a minimum: . Install and maintain silt basins and fences or straw bales along drainage paths during construction to contain on-site soils until bare slopes are vegetated. Carefully stockpile graded soils away from drainages; . Restrict grading and earthwork during the rainy season (October 15 through April 15) and stabilize all exposed soils and graded areas prior to onset of the rainy season through mulching and reseeding. Permit grading within this period only with installation of adequate sediment and erosion control measures; . Delineate and describe the practices to retain sediment on the site, including sediment basins and traps, and a schedule for their maintenance and upkeep; . Delineate and describe the vegetative practices to be used, including types of seeds and fertilizer and their application rates, the type, location and extent of pre-existing and undisturbed vegetation types, and a schedule for maintenance and upkeep; . Estimate of the cost of implementing and maintaining all erosion and sediment control measures; . Revegetate graded slopes with appropriate native plant species (as specified by a qualified botanist or revegetation specialist) immediately upon completion of grading or prior to extended inactivity in any exposed area; . Comply with all applicable City of Arroyo Grande ordinances including landscaping compatibility for erosion control; . Only clear land that will be actively under construction within 6 to 12 months; . Stabilize disturbed areas except where active construction is taking place. Examples of stabilization techniques include jute netting, hydro-seeding (using native plant composition in consultation with a qualified biologist or re-vegetation specialist), etc. and provide permanent stabilization during finish grade and landscape the site; . Dispose of all construction waste in designated areas, and keep storm water from flowing on or off these areas; Creekside FEIR Mitigation Monitoring Program -21 - . Divert or intercept storm water before it reached Tally Ho Creek, using temporary dikes, swales, or pipe slope drains to provide for settling of suspended solids and prevention of contamination by construction materials; and . Place perimeter controls where runoff enters or leaves the site prior to clearing, grubbing, and rough grading. Perimeter controls may include dikes, swales, temporary storm drains, sand bags or hay bales. Mitigation level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Less-than-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, Public Works Dept.; Consulting biologist and geohydrologist Prior to issuance of Grading Permit Timing: 4.6 Hazardous Materials The project site has been used for agricultural chemical operations for decades. Although remediation occurred in 1986, soil contamination from continued agricultural chemical operations could have occurred, creating unsafe conditions. Because there is no proposed demolition, mitigation measures are not necessary for public safety associated with asbestos and lead paint contained in existing structures. However, naturally occurring asbestos could be present in the soils, requiring precautionary mitigation. Impact: The project site may contain unsafe levels of hazardous materials, which may exceed state action levels and may pose a threat to future construction workers, residents or users at the Creekside Center project site. This is a significant impact that can be reduced to a less-than-significant level with the following mitigation measure(s). MM 4.6.1: Subject to approval by the San Luis Obispo County Environmental Health Department (County Health), the developer shall conduct any necessary soil sampling, risk assessment and remediation, and present evidence to the City of Arroyo Grande that the risk of future exposure of people working, living or using the site is reduced to a level that is acceptable to the relevant resource agencies (County Health, and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, if requested by County Health). The City shall not issue a grading permit until they receive written verification to demonstrate that the level of risk is acceptable to resource agencies and that the levels of hazardous materials are safe for all proposed site activities. In addition, as requested by the Air Pollution Control District (APCD), the applicant shall adhere to the following requirements: . Storage piles of contaminated material shall be covered at all times except when soil is being added or removed; . Covers on storage piles should 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 - nonpermeable barrier such as plastic tarp . No head ~pace should be allowed where vapors could accumulate; Creekside FEIR Mitigation Monitoring Program -22- . Covered piles should be designed in such a way to eliminate erosion due to wind or water; . No openings in the cover are permitted; . During soil excavation, odors should not be evident to such a degree as to cause a public nuisance; and . Clean soils must be segregated from contaminated soil. Mitigation Level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-tha n-sig n ifica nt Developer City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.; County Health; RWQCB; APCD Prior to issuance of Grading Permit MM 4.6.2: Prior to any grading activities at the site, a geologic evaluation will be necessary to determine if naturally occurring asbestos is present. If naturally occurring asbestos is found at the site, the developer must comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos ATCM for construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations. These requirements may include but are not limited to 1) an Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan that must be approved by the APCD before construction occurs, and 2) an Asbestos Health and Safety Program for some projects, if requested by the APCD. Mitigation Level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: . Timing: Less-than-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.; APCD Prior to issuance of Grading Permit 4.7 Hydroloay and Water Quality The project is within the City's adopted Federal Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) and FEMA requirements for floodplain zoning. However, the project site and surrounding lands are subject to inundation during a 100-year flood due to the insufficient capacity of the Branch Street Culvert. Replacement of this culvert would be a costly regional capital improvement that could not legally be imposed on the project developer solely. An analysis should be made, however, to determine whether structures nearby the site would be flooded due to project activities and whether improvements to the culvert would be necessary to increase the capacity to sufficiently handle a 1 OO-year storm upon project development. . Impact: The project would expose people and structures to a potentially significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding of the Tally Ho Creek due to project improvements in combination with insufficiency of the culvert under Branch Street to be able to pass the 1 OO-year flood event. This is a significant impact that can be reduced to a less-than-significant level with the following mitigation measure(s). MM 4.7.1: A qualified civil engineer shall prepare and submit a.project-specific flooding/drainage study to demonstrate that the project has appropriate flood design subject to review and approval by the City prior to approval of a grading permit for the project. The project shall meet these standards at the time of site development, including the following criteria wi~hin the floodplain: Creekside FEIR Mitigation Monitoring Program _ 23- o All new structures shall have finish floors elevated at least one foot over the level of the 1 DO-year flood or the structures must be flood-proofed to a level at least one foot over the level of the 1 DO-year flood; o Structures located within the flood plain must be capable of withstanding the hydrodynamic and hydrostatic loads (including buoyancy) caused by the 1 DO-year flood at the site; . The development must not cause a rise of over one foot in the level of the 1 DO-year flood at any off-site location; . Any new development must be located beyond the riparian setback designated in City Codes; . . Affected structures shall be flood proofed and certified as provided for in Ordinance No. 501; and . Flood proofing at doorway openings should utilize floodgate barriers and flood proof membranes should be integrated into the structural design. Mitigation Level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-significant Developer . City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept. Prior to issuance of Grading Permit Impact: Future construction activities and post-construction uses at the site could result in degradation of water quality in nearby surface and ground water bodies through surface runoff, and infiltration to ground water, and may indirectly cause impacts on the riparian values of the downstream waterbodies and sensitive species. This is a significant impact that can be reduced to a less-than-significant level with the following mitigation measure(s). MM 4.7.2: The developer shall prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and an Erosion Control Plan (as required by MM 4.5.3) and submit them to the City for review and approval Prior to Grading Permit. The SWPPP shall include Best Management Practices for construction and post-construction activities to control runoff volumes and rates, and erosion, and to prevent discharge of pollutants to Tally Ho Creek. When pavement is removed, uncovered site soils shall be further tested for possible contaminants. Specific Best Management Practices to be implemented shall be developed based on site-specific analysis of the optimum pollution control methodology and shall include, at a minimum, the requirements set forth in MM 4.5.3, measures .identified in the Biological Resources section, and the following: . The drainage plan shall demonstrate that existing local and downstream hydrological conditions would not be significantly impacted with implementation of the proposed project such that new bank erosion would result due to project improvements. . The applicant's drainage plan shall demonstrate that after construction has been completed and the site permanently stabilized, the post development average annual total suspended .solids (TSS) loadings from the site are reduced by 80% compared to predevelopment loadings with pollution control measures. Creekside FEIR Mitigation Monitoring Program - 24- . Use one or more of the following best management practices to control urban runoff: infiltration trenches, concrete grid pavement, vegetated filter strips, water quality inlet catch basins with sand filter, or other appropriate practices using guidance from the RWQCB, US EPA, or other agency with water quality regulatory authority. A good source of information on best management practices can be found in "National Management Measures Guidance to Control Nonpoint Source Pollution from Urban Areas: (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, July 2002). . The plans and specifications for the construction contract shall require that best management practices be implemented throughout construction. The City of Arroyo Grande shall inspect the project site during construction and verify that the construction contractor is implementing the proper erosion and water quality protection measures. The applicants shall implement the following water quality control and protection measures during construction: Performing major vehicle maintenance, repair jobs and equipment washing off site; Maintaining all vehicles and heavy equipment and inspecting frequently for leaks; Designating one area of the construction site, well away from streams or storm drain outlets, for auto and equipment parking and routine vehicle and equipment maintenance; Cleaning-up spilled dry materials immediately. Do not "wash them away" with water, or bury them; Using only minimal water for dust control; Cleaning-up liquid spills on paved or impermeable surfaces using "dry" cleanup methods (i.e., absorbent materials, cat letter, and/or rags); Cleaning-up soils on dirt areas by removing and properly disposing of contaminated soil; Reporting significant spills to the appropriate spill response agencies; Storing stockpiled material, wastes, containers and dumpsters under a temporary roof or secured plastic sheeting; Properly storing containers of paints, chemicals, solvents and other hazardous materials in garages or sheds with double containment during rainy periods; Placing dumpsters under roofs or covering them with plastic sheeting at the end of each work day and during rainy weather; Washing out concrete mixers only in designated washout areas where the water will flow into setting ponds or onto stockpiles of aggregate base or sand. Whenever possible, recycling washout by pumping back into mixers for reuse. Never dispose of washout into the street, storm drains, drainage ditches, or streams; Applying concrete, asphalt and seal coat during dry weather. Keeping contaminants from fresh concrete and asphalt out of the storm drains, creeks, by scheduling paving jobs during periods of dry weather, allowing new pavement to cure before storm water flows across it; . . Creekside FEIR Mitigation Monitoring Program - 25- Covering catch basins and manholes when applying seal coat, slurry seal, fog seal, etc.; and . Always parking paving equipment over drip pans or absorbent materials, since they tend to drip continuously. Mitigation Level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-sign ifica nt Developer City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept. Prior to issuance of Grading Permit 4.8 Land Use and Planninq The project is consistent with the policies and standards of Land Use Element of the 2001 General Plan, the Village Mixed Use District Development Code, and Design Guidelines for Historic Districts. There are no significant land use related impacts, and no mitigation measures are necessary. 4.9 Noise Existing ambient noise in the vicinity of the project site is primarily generated by traffic. The project will generate a short-term noise impact with construction activities. Long- term increases in traffic and other operational noise levels are considered less-than- significant impacts and no mitigation measures are necessary. Impact: Existing residences in the project area would be exposed to short-term noise . impacts during construction. This is a significant impact that can be reduced to a less- than-significant level with the following mitigationmeasure(s). MM 4.9.1: Construction activities shall be restricted to the hours of 8:00AM to 5:00 PM Monday through Friday. There shall be no construction activities on Saturday or Sunday. Equipment maintenance and servicing shall be confined to the same hours. MM 4.9.2: All construction equipment utilizing internal combustion engines shall be required to have mufflers that are in good condition. Stationary noise sources shall be located at least 300 feet from occupied dwelling units unless noise reducing engine housing enclosures or noise screens are provided by the contractor. MM 4.9.3: Equipment mobilization areas, water tanks, and equipment storage areas shall be placed in a central location as far from existing residences as feasible. Mitigation Levei: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-sig n ifica nt Developer City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, Public Works Dept. .During construCtion 4.10 Public Services and Utilities Public services and utilities serving the project vicinity include police and fire protection, emergency response, schools and libraries, parks and recreation, utilities and solid waste disposal. ImpaCts to these services resulting from the project are less than significant and no mitigation measures are necessary. Creekside FElR Mitigation Monitoring Program - 26- ... 4.11 Water and Wastewater Wastewater disposal is not considered a significant impact and existing facilities can handle the increased project demand. Cumulative water supply impacts are considered significant but mitigable with implementation of mitigation measures. Impact: Development of the proposed project would require water for both domestic use . and landscape irrigation. Water consumption by this project would further reduce the City's remaining supply of available water; This impact will be minimized by mitigation measures, including using water-conserving designs, fixtures and landscaping. The following mitigation shall be required to reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level. MM 4.11.1: The project shall comply with the City's required water conservation measures including any applicable measures identified in any applicable City Water Conservation Plans. . Mitigation Level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept. Prior to issuance of Building Permit MM 4.11.2: The project shall install best available technology for low-flow toilets, showerheads and hot water recirculation systems. Mitigation Level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande -Building Dept. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy MM 4.11.3: The final landscape plan shall show low-water use/drought resistant species and drip irrigation systems rather than spray irrigation systems. Mitigation Level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Less-than-significant Developer City of Arroyo Grande - Parks, Recreation and Facilities Dept. Prior to issuance of Building Permit MM 4.11.4: The project plans shall include methods for collecting surface run-off from . the site for use on landscaped areas to reduce water use and minimize run-off to the extent feasible. Mitigation Level: Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: .. Timing: Less-than-sign ifica nt Developer City of Arroyo Grande -Public Works Dept. Prior to issuance of Building Permit .' Creekside FElR Mitigation Monitoring Program - 27- RECEIVED l:!T'{ Cf 1',;;:lO'(O :~:' ATTACHMENT 15 August 2, 2006 05 AUG - 2 r.J :: S~' City Council Arroyo Grande City Hall 215 East Branch St Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Re: Proposed Creekside Development Plan Dear City Council: During the June 14,2005 meeting of the City Council, Mayor Pro Tern Costello asked q\lestions of City staff regarding the trees along Crown Terrace and Le Point Street that are going to be destroyed as a result of this development. Ms Heffernan's response was that there were "only a few fIr trees and no oaks." This response was quite surprising since, in reality, there are approximately 60 mature Leyland Cypress along Crown Terrace and Le Point that will be destroyed along with (5) Brisbane Box trees, a very mature Sego palm, an Arroyo Willow, (2) Black Cottonwood trees and a small Coastal Live Oak tree. This is considerably more than "a few." While I assume that a landscaping plan for the development is in place and is being reviewed by the City, the number of years the proposed landscaping will take to mature will be considerable. If the proposed 3 story townhouses along Crown Terrace were scaled back to two stories with ingress/egress for them being on Le Point and East Branch Street (rather than Crown Terrace), none of these trees would need to be destroyed. And, the safety concerns of residents backing out onto Crown Terrace would be eliminated. Thank you for your consideration of these points. Sincerely, '&~tttA& dxuL Barbara Freel 502 Le Point St Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 August 1, 2006 .~ CHAMELEON Fabrics, Furniture & Design 415 E. Branch 51. Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Tel: (605) 461-4104 Fax: (605) 461-4105 I?~cj' ,Ivl'- CI. 4tJr; 0 'D CO:':: 0;:- "l <?O'O'o ~(.Ii\t/;~OYO D~,n. G~ . t:lOp, i\tD~ ~~i\tr City of Arroyo Grande Council Members & Staff RE: Creekside Project at 415 E. BranCh SI. General Concerns about the entire project -Is this the right Fit for the Village?? Dear Council Members and City Staff: We understand that this property someday will be developed. However once again. the same old plans are submitted by the developer. Yes, some of the adjustments have been made in response to the Planning Commission's recommendations. However, the resounding issues, concems and vision for the village that were expressed by the community, the Planning Commission and even City Council Members last June, were ignored. Please do not rush to approve a project that is still not designed with the best interests of the community, commerce or historical significance of this priceless last stand for.the "Historical Village of Arroyo Grande", In short, this project, though impressive, is not right for this piece of property to be developed in the Village Commercial Core area for the following reasons: Concern Density of the homes Traffic Flow Commercial Structure View shed destroyed Architectural Styling For Commercial Structure Description We cannot require state mandated quotas for housing developments to be forced on the part of the city where there is already overburdened traffic concems, small streets, dead-end streets, blocked off streets - basicall no 10 ical traffic flow. In the event of an emergency (fire, earthquake, Lopez Dam etc.) 24 units with 2 cars each (48) would still converge at 415 E. Branch along with all residents of Crown Hill - not acce table The structure next to the Bam will tower over the barn - completely hide the green Victorian Home on Crown Terrace Creating these driveways on Le Point are ridiculous from a traffic point of view but' will also remove all the The current proposed commercial building looks lack-luster, mundane and cheap and does not enhance the commercial aspect of the project.... ~ - Chameleon Solution . Reduce the number of housing units . Add another commercial building . Increase parking area Consider opening Le Pointe Bridge as an enhancement for the traffic flow in the future but plan for it now. Reduce structure to 2 floors Keep only the one parking garage driveway exiting on Crown Terrace. Keep trees on Le Pointe and Crown Terrace to hide "}lucky" (for lack of a better word a artment buildin. ., Refer to the new JJ's Market commercial complex on the Mesa. It looks like an old westem town that has always been there! ~ CHAMELEON Fabrics, Furniture & Design 415 E. Branch 51. Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Tel: (805) 481-4104 Fax: (805) 481-4105 August 1, 2006 RECEIVED City of Arroyo Grande Council Members & Staff AUG 0 12006 RE: Creekside Project at 415 E. Branch St Business Preservation Concems CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Dear Council Members and City Staff: As the above mentioned project comes up again for review .Chameleon" wants to express the following concerns to both the City Council and Staff regarding the actual construction and implementation details. Driveway Access to Chameleon We request that the City ensure in writing the condition with the developer that this primary access to the property remain open and accessible for business traffic, parking, deliveries etc., with no disruption to business during the entire construction process. We will do everything possible to work with the developers to make this achievable. Dust Control A dust control program during construction must be ensured on the site. This is for the safety of the customers and the tenants. Because of ventilation circumstances at the barn and the existence of only two doors on the north-east side of the building where most of the construction will occur, it is imperative especially during dry weather that the area be watered down at regular intervals during the day to prevent dust and keep excessive dirt off the driveway. Waterline Crossing We have been informed by the Building Department that it is the Developer's responsibility to ensure uninterrupted water service to 415 E. Branch ("The Barn"). The waterline which existed before the property was sub-divided, crosses the developer's parcel and will require possible re-routing or relocating to ensure continuous service. Again, Chameleon will do whatever necessary. to provide the developer . with hours and! or a schedule that the water service will not interrupt business. Thank you so much for your consideration. Sincerely, ~~L4l-l ~p (J~ Camay Ara6 and Winton E. Tullis Chameleon ~c1~ Arroyo Grande Planning Commission 214 E. Branch St. Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 March 7; 2005 Members of the -. '" 8 . . I Q h-Y CtJ//Hall.-. This letter is in reference to the project proposed for the Loomis property. My main concern is safety along Crown Terrace. I live on May Street with my wife and two young daughters, and we walk along Crown Terrace at least twice a day on our way to and from downtown. As such, we are very familiar with how narrow that street is. and how dangerous it can be. The combination of more traffic and the proposed driveways entering onto Crown Terrace is a reCipe for disaster. The road is very narrow (27 feet according to a neighbor) and bas a blind corner onto Lepoint around which cars often travel at very high speed. WIth cars b""lring out onto Crown Terrace, it is only a matter of time before there is an accident. It seems like it would be far safer to route the exits from the homes either onto Branch Street as is currently the case, or else onto lower Lepoint. Regardless of what happens, if this project is approved the city should require that the developer either put a sidewalk along Crown Teqace, or else pro.vide a route through the development that residents on LePoint and May Street can use to safely avoid Crown Terrace. We are also concerned about light pollution. If this project is to be mixed use, we hope that the businesses will be required to consider the residential areas nearby and install low in,tensity lighting. Thank you for taking the time to read these comments. Sincerely, .tv.~ Derek Mitchem and family 513 May Street Arroyo Grande 473-8719 RECEIVED /.tAR 0 8 2005 CllY OF AA~QVO GRANOE COMMU~!f1 PEVElOPMENT 17$/t;,k .5 - dl..S Re: Creekside Center Development . r - G--1-rY U#t!A I~ To: J _I' J - __'_or:;. We are very concerned about the development of this property. l=Too big for our Village. 2=Traffic, Extremely dangerous, even under current Conditions. 3';'Will ruin our trying to get _0 street with more noise, traffic, and onto t~e street. Sinc;;~ o~ .~~ -5 /.S 4 ~,/~./ aJ.jo" ~p ~/'~ & cr..7 -:fT..,L t? -,; g-- ..z .?' RECEIVED ,"~.,~ ("~ 7005 CITY OF ARIo/OYO GRANDE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT . ,March 8. 2005 "~"'.r ~_. 1;0:, PLAN;.(tt!~ (" (2iJNlJ'hSS/D/ From: Le Point Committee f Subject: Update on proposed Creekside (Loomis) project Attached is a copy of official record from the Courity of San Luis Obispo showing legal subdivision for the subject project site. that Is in effect as of today. The proposed site consists of 6 parcels. and based on records. aU owned by DB&M propanles. LLC. Note that the dashad lines within the parcel are primarily land locked blocks and can not be developed without access. However. the 6 parcels appear to have access as follows: EJ Parcel No. 11 has access from E. Branch c Parcel No. 12 has access from E. BranCh Q Parcel No. 1 has access from Crown Hill c Parcel No. 3 has aecess from E. Sranch c Parcel No. 13 including all of Its Imaginary lots. also appears to be land locked beceuse of environmental Issues at Tally He. and dead end of La Point. However. since all . parcels are owned by same entity. access may be poaslble through parcels 11 and 12 leading to E. Branch. of course subject to City approval. . In brief it appears that the entire property has no right nor feaslbla access to La Point or Crown Terrace. Their proposal. as it is submitted to the City. seems far beyond the capacity of the site. Furthermore. the proposed plan seems to overlook available access points that would warrant .A.much smaller SCilla Drolact. but Dursue access from where it does not belong. _ - Submitted by Xc: 07Y~.Jk/l-- IAvd,,;;" REeE/Vi 4UG fI _ fD C CIl'y OJ:: ~ ?006 04141U",i~~OYo l'y DJ:I~ G~N. '''l:lOp~. 'D( '0'/("', Spokesperson for ~ La Point Committee ~7 /" Attachment: As noted (il) - I I . . ) ! ,- ( ii) - ~- '? 0" ;~ ..& ..r5 r!& C.!! ...., I .. III .. o >& II. ail PI 0", (\0' ~) ~ ~ III L~ \ 31 ~ ot . . .... eI) z ~ (.) o. '''/. ~, ,,,,'Ii ?~_., . ~~.., ' ~'''.. / "i .-, ...~ ~ ~ l J. oj 10 I ~ ... o~ zz ~g CoD U~ 00- ,..6.2 Ocn@ ~-l&. G: 8- ~ CI) ;; ~ - t; o::t ,....1 t::~ ufft ~~~t . . . ~~~~ . . . }- -CD <- ~.~~~ . ~:i .~ . ::I. a:cicio liil ~jI) n ~ ~II.W : Q! Q: jI) ~~ i ~~ ~t -~ .. (~) a.. ~ ~ _ ~c .---.c@ a: ~ ."''IS ~ <C "* l 8 ~ o ~ l!1ll"1(- UJ7Y Q"JU It-.- Arroyo Grande ~ . 217 . ~. 214 East Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 . 437 Le Point Arroyo Grande, Ca February 14,2005 RECEIVED t-d:l 1 4 2005 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENi Concerning the proposed Planned Unit Development Case No. 04-001 (415 East Branch Street): Dear Planning Commissioners: The proposal has completely ignored the established neighborhood that exists adjacent.to the Crown Terrace and Le Point intersection. These people have owned their homes for up to twenty years and more. We appreCiate the desirability of "The Village" location, but apove that, we have maintained and improved our properties, developed our friendships and enjoy the privileges ofliving in this lovely area. We have only learned in the last month about this project that has apparently been successfully proceeding through planning stages for years. This proposal ignores the fact that the streets in and out of this area now Carry large trucks, school buses, large numbers of automobiles and considemble pedestrian . traffic-culminating at bottlenecks at two streets that intersect Crown Hill-- Crown Terrace and East BmnchlHighway 227. In addition, where Crown Terrace becomes Le Point Street, an extremely dangerous blind curve with absolutely NO traffic control guarantees danger for anyone attempting to enter Le Point Street or -Crown Terrace at that point. What considemtion does this proposal give to the approximately 24 new household drivers and countless commercial customers who will enter this community at this location? This proposal is a determined effort by the owner to get his investment out of the red Understood However, the location and the plan almost preclude the new owners from becoming a part of the existing community, although the resultant traffic will certainly have to be incorpomted somehow. As the owner of the 100- year- old house on- Le Point and Crown Terrace, having lived there since 1986, I am resigned to the fact that change is inevitable; but before the city hands the devtiloper the keys, I make the following suggestio~: 1. That all improvements OIi"the property under considemtionbe made ON the property, itself. This should include fire lanes, sidewalks, city services including wiring, cable boxes, meters, etc. Remember the people who have taken pride in improving landscape and those who value peace and privacy and WHO LIVE HERE NOW. 2. That lower Le Point be designated a one-way street for entrance of the residents, and that a one-way exit through the commercial portion of this property be incorporated at a point ofuer ilian fue location of fue Crown Hilll Branch/227 Highway stop sign fuat is already bottlenecked at least twice a day for several minutes at a time. The locked gate should not be included. .3. The developer should be mindful iliat fue neighborhood around his proposed development is the selling point Buyers here will want fue same consideration for traffic patterns, safety concerns, housing density and the community ambience, which we who have long lived here expect Anyfuing less will kill fue golden goose for everybody. Signs are iliat already we may be overwhelming our . ability to remain unique among American small towns. To fuis developer, and particularly to fue city planners, please listen to and consider fuose who live here NOW. You have only fuis opportunity to ge~ it right Sincerely, . ~4L. .. Carol Fulmer . ~. JOHN CLEMO 535 I.,epoint SL An"O)'O Gmnde, CA 93420 jclemo721@ao1.com Phone: (80S) 489-2889 eel: (805) 80 1-9644 REC"EIVED March 3, 2005 . O-,rv ()~ cJ#(L Arroyo Grande rr . II 81 . L ~ 214 E. Bl'lUlCh St. Arrc1yo GralI.de CA 93420 MAR 0 4 200S CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE coMMuNITY DEVElOPMENT To ~ phmnlrlg Co.,lIniftlon: . I am a p'v~ty OWJllll' OD LepoiDt Street, quite near fO the area that has been ~1y tapped iQr a ~ I [j'f.gtiA1lCOft...__ project. I eaco1ll'llp you to look Joag IiDd . hard at thiS proposal, IiDd to reject it. ToP1K it simply. I bought this p.ro.-tybe-'1S'" ofthc ~~o()oihood. the lowtraflic wlume, aod with thC: sease that it was One of the ~ safeit Jieigbborhoods in the ci1y. . So, what I'm o~ ;..g to would be the nOise of c:on*uctioD; the increased traffic wlUnx: in a ueigbborhood ofmiildle school cbiJdrm IiDd beloved pets. 8Dd What I believe to"be the . owmIl'lil1. -1II of the project in question. . FiDaIly, I AM for growth in the city of Arroyo Grande. But I am "8I'mct growth for it's . own sake. When we have eooup _.. in the monstrosity cu..eotly on the west end of the village (SDd I do beJjm, that they IltiIlhave ~ even after almost S)'e8tS of existence) then we could actuaDy thiDk about bPildlrlg mote co~~ pl'Ot-ta J:.lre, But, UIItil thea, pleUe stop. TIuIIIk you fur your coDSideratioD in this watIlec. ~/(. bJ NdT~ ~~.5 l),A/ ~AC^ ""'r' ~ . . C:=J-tu,t.-- J February 11, 2005 mmunity De\>' ent Dept. ___ PI . g 'ssion ~/. 214 ranch St. / J de, Ca 93420 Ci /'1 n~c: .'L- My husband and I have lived at the comer ofLe Point and Crown Terrace for 2 1/2 years. This has been a quiet lovely neighborhood except for the speeding short-cut traffic using Crown Terrace and Le Point St, There is a blind spot at the corner ofLe point and Crown Terrace when traveling from Branch St. The proposal to permit access to. Le Point St. from the Loomis area will definitely cause additional traffic at that intersection. The cars travel too fast, there is no traffic control and the traffic study done last'year was inconclusive. It is a very dangerous situation in just attempting to back your car out of our driveway. There are many neighborhOod ohildren who ride bikes and skateboard at this said intersection. There are also many senior citizens and disabled perSons frequenting this intersection with some using walkers and wheel chairs. .Of course they move very cautiously and slowly. They also complain of difficulty backing out of their . driveway due to speeding traffic. There are also a number of children from Paulding Jr. High School who walk: by this same intersection morning and afternoon due to the. closure of Crown Hill as it meets Hwy. 227. In light of the above I feel it is not safe to add additional traffic and poteJ1tial problems to this intersection. The Planned Unit Development Case No ~l would Create more traffic and congestion. The side walks planned for Crown Terrace, (24 ft wide) is definitely not safe for pedestrians or school children. The January 18, 2005 meeting was to start at 7:00pm as posted on the fence in front of Loomis property. This was inaccurate as it started at 6:00pm. Some of the neighbors missed the meeting due to this error. I am also cOncerned that so much plannirig has been done without the neighborhood's awareness. Please note the Signatures of the neighbors on the back of this letter who agree with these comments and disapprove access to Le Point of this project. ~S~cerelY' ~ e geman 05 Le Point St. . Arroyo Grande, Ca. 93420 RECE/'VED AU6 02 C/ly 0 . <OOS COM 'F A.RRo 'MUNrr'f 'fo GR/vv. DEVElOPA. 'DE ,viENr The undersigned agree with comments of this letter which object to accesS to LePoint ",' , Street from the Loomis property development 1rq tt-!bf//)r, J"1'T,v\tt e ~ I'!H' ~~. ~,'c vJavJ "SO~,,' "~, sf-. t.2~ v-e '" VJ 0 oP.f " ,,"" ,',,' ' , 1/e'V\ w~lt, ' " , . . . " \. ~ '. ))4 ,,',~,~fs ,v,'1Sr:', ' A .,;; .~' 4'd ,...if 190 , , , i 'l?\ ~ t--\~\{ s'"' . A.l1- ~w ~~tt>flf.J" " , ~ Vtd.~, ~ . .. ' -'I" .. . . :"- . ~ . , ' '.. ., ':~ to" .; .. .. : ., 5J3 11. ~'.A,C. ,~ ", '5211 '.~'~, /9(".',', " , I"" , . i :' P,441;:. ) JI.F" ~ ~: CI-rYO{)vi/t:)~' ;V/~~Ifr ""My hUllhmd IIDll I haw liwdat the ~ ofLe PoiDl: IIDll Crown T~ for 2 '1/2 years. This has been a quiet kwely nei~ except,for die ...,m"ll iIIort-Cut traffic usiDs Crown Terrace IIDll LePoiDt St.,' , iu bIiIId spot at the c:omcr of~point IIDll Crown Terrace wbeD traveliDg from St. The propusal to permit 1C(~s.i.:!o Le Point St. ,'fromthel-Horeawill cause~~attbat~_ Tbecan trawl 100 fast, there is 110 traftic 1 and the trafIic IAu4y doae last year _ ' ~lusi~. his a wry M"l' OIlS situation injust attempti1lg to '**,our.. out of our driveway. Tbere are maay . ehi1dnm whO ride bikes IIDlllllllfetloerc1 A this l!&idiate.~ There are alsO maay geDior citiZeIIs,aoddisableclJlll11!l>tlS frequenting this u.,...;....Lon with some using w8Ikcm aDd ~'cbaiJs. ' at Course 1bey move wry eautiously and slowly. They also c:onIpIAin of difticulty wlnqg out oftbeir driveway due to IJl t a II;", traffic. 'I'heR are also a m-her of c:hiktnm from PauldiDg lr. High School who walk by this same ~~ moming and afteluOuu due to tbe closure of Crown Bill as it meds Hwy: '127. ~:light of tile above I feel it is DOt safe to add additional1laflic and ~p1'Oblems to this intersection: ThePl....-t Unit Developmmt Case No 04-00J would create more " - traffic IIDll c:oogestion. The side walks p1-.-t for Crown Terrace, (24 fhride) is definitelymt safe for pedestriaos or school children. The JIIIIU8IY 18, 200S meeting VilIS to start at 7:OOpn as posted oii the fimc:e in from of Loomis piUpeny. This was irieoourate 81 it lIIBrtedat 6:00pm.. Some of the nei8hbon mi"""'CJ the m-""ll due to this error. I am also concerned that 80 much plAntI;"lI bas been doue without the neigbborbood'$ awareDCS$. , PAa~~, Please note 1he Sigoatunls of the ueigbbors OIl V \ 'of this letter who agree with these commeIIts IIDll dU.a~-"ll eecess to IA Point of this project., ' Sincerely, ~ ~mAn ~ ~, "'..-/ (~Le~St.v :Anoyo OtaDde, Ca. 93420 ' " RfCEI'VED AUGO CITY 22006 . OF COM^1UN:~:~ GRANDe , . LOPMEN . T "'j'" PA~~ 1- &F Z-- The undersigned agree with comments of this letter which object to access to Le Point Street from the Loomis property development. ' JAt-kL,iJ ~,J1jJliLL~ (f 8" ('6"Ir) 'pD 8 U jJb".]r'- -:,~ ~ > .lJ ':"' ,l t4-. c.. f~ Y,;lc L/~ ~~ ~ 07 ~ VI N N /c. /f'A.I";-i1Il..c..a.:r to-. .,~- I ~ () -.. +~ ~. h11te-sQ~Ie. (.... 5wu-r~ Ij~{-' 'l;.ttJ. " " ,5'I~.' ./-f P()I.Pr 'bT /W...i; ,..c.// ~''A. . . . . A (J.. 'qlJ"IJ.o . '..~ '/ ,K-Vi flu V"~. '.' . ': /l CI1.' If. /11 'D.A"'-~ ,-,,::rrlfll!.ttW.u W/55'; ....~," ~,b.L . rs-a I NfJJ/I1tfi .. 6-" f 4. r;;;;;:!I' ,'" lltrtfjt1tJl'l/lf!/. {fa ~d'fZ~.. .t:J.4' . ,1ft f--- 0-075 . . . y~~ -r:qb~V\. ClR1Y\\:> I.{~-~~,' """ . 535 Le ~o if\+ '-1;". I ~.I?J I, ~'1DG\Ct{\.~ ~ ~:s~).o. ~/f11..!~ .... .. eJ{tJf?/>~~ ~;o0,L,,~.t~'-1Ul1 .Q~.4~f-rP ^1 . ~71.J-e.~f~ . . . Afit<ryo ~~~a.- ~ I 1 'j f tV..... ---- . ) '. . /W-e. ;. ;1,"ke S C'lJif 50'0 -Le Po/'n! S-Ir. ~?cf.G ~r' _ _ ___ _ ___ i ... A. /f tJ- T~ ~ ,e!.;7/L ~E.5 4# ~c/\ Feb1"UllIjll,2oo5 ..... .--:-- 8tiN~ :~ ()6' ent Dept. r e;ll . . My husband and I have lived at the comer ofLe Point and Crown Terrace for 2 1/2 years. .This has been a quiet lovely neighborhood except for the speeding short-cut traffic using Crown Terrace and Le Point St., There is a blind spOt at the corner ofLe point and Crown Terrace when traveling from Branch St. The proposal to permit access to Le Point St. from the Loomis area will definitely cause additional traffic at that intersection. The cars travel too fast, there:: is no traffic control and the traffic study done last year was mconchisive. It is' a very dangerous situation injust attempting to back your car oui of our driveway. There are many neighborhood children who ride bikes and skateboard at this said intersection. There are also many senior citizens and disabled persons frequenting this intersection with some using walkers and wheel chairs. Of course they move very cautiously and slowly. They also complain of difficulty backing {)utoftheir driveway due to sp-fing traffic. There are also a number of children from Paulding Jr. High School who walk by this same intersection ID,l,lrning and afternoon due to the closure of Crown Hill as it meets Hwy. 227. ,. ..;' . . In light of the above I feel it is not Safe to add additional~c and potential problems to this intersection. The Planned Unit D.evelopment Case No 04-001 would create more' . traffic and congestion. The side waiks planned for Crown Terrace, (24 ft wide) is definitely not safe for pedestrians or school children. The January 18, 2005 meeting was to start at 7:00pm as posted on the fence in front of Loomis property. This was inaccurate as it started at 6:00pm. Some of the neighbors mi~sed the meeting due to this error. I am also concemed that so much planning has been done without the neighborhood's awareness. Please note the Signatures of the neighbors on the back of this letter who agree with these comments and disapprove access to Le Pomt of this project. RECEIVED 4U60 CITY 0 2 Z006 COM. 'PARR 'MUtYllY Oyo G . Df'V(Lo~ND( . 'MEN, . e Balgeman 505 Le Point St. Arroyo Grande, Ca. 93420 It Ie / .0 9' ".? L{>;g /# r yf '7 - 2 Sse . The undersigned ~ with comments of this letter which object to accesS to Le'Point . Street from th~ LooInlS property development . M~/l.a~dtJdh.e. .~, I ~.~U~..) . ~,p (!;I?tvIt Te,fu.. Tkz:-Jj' t+:{J~Ji. /lN7(1 &J'~~ 61, 91'11..D . ~"'-::r~ 5' !'rfv()(7.J)-r-f?ftlIl {lMffe:lN ... t1Itl~?,,~ ?;'l( .' C~I,,~'12?2IzJf1;& . " '," "w~f/lf!oLh- .. Ytt;, C4-rJl(2& ..' .62Lf LE fOiWT , .... 4-~I-lf72L}' .6W~ n~ .... ~t:), ~'- '-=-'"'t\- q3't~" . J . ~ J ~~$;:'~d~ . A;~~'~~ ea. ,?-5-'Y;z.,d .. ~~~ . ~'? j'~?,"~' ' ;;. " '" . ;1 " ." .'" ~V--::. . . .. .. ~\.:::h.. ) 5'2.\ \~xo,~.,"%. '.,'," ~o '{::~rGr<k(.\ c:a... ., ' '" ,.'. .C\~~~O- .' ~bua.. fi.e.e..\ CL . . 0oJ.. Le- 'Vcn~r ~-r.- .' f\-. Ce. q?> q..:z..D , .. .' " , .' . ~ ." ;~ I.. , 'j -_: . . ,......1 t,^~vjQ.,la . ..' lJ'l" Ct ' . 2-n rowV\ \i{, . '. " D. \/V... "" r;:: v. 1t\J\ ,\ (),~A q~ 4w . G1'Cy O~U~~) 0 I live right behindthr former Loomis property, so I will feel the impact of any project the deepest. Of course I would like the smallest impact on the neighborhood as possible. However, the size and nature of the proposed plan is way out of scale. There are too many driveways and not enough thought about safety issues. Namely, kids going to and from school. Even as it is, I have to be very careful entering the intersection. !:>rivers speed around the hairpin turn at Le Point and Crown Terrace. There is no place for people to walk safely and this proposal will make it a certainty that someone will be maimed or killed. The plan needs to be changed to something that fits the neighborhood! When I bought my home, I was told somethiJig like a permanent farmers market waS being considered. That would be perfect, maybe impractical, but would still be worth DJoving toward. - The plans I saw call for Pasadena style condos to tower over the street. I have lived in Pasadena and that style has come to fit there, but would look ridiculous here. Please save our neighborhood! RECEIVED .' THANK YOU; ~~es Norby 419 Le Point MAR 0 3 2005 CITY OF AAROYO GRANDE . COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT RECEIVED f-EB 2 8 2005 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Arroyo Grande JIlr-'..g 9J. <..(.'Wt Arroyo Grande, CA Olry OodlC/1- February 14, 2005 ~or_ , ;-~. Q-. ~~ ~OI.~...' ~ 1Jt. Wa~ . 1U~ , . /~~tf~ JP~~ " ~-~~~ Dear Commissioners, As a resident of Arroyo Grande, I have enjoyed the charm and convenience of the village for many years. One of the main attractions of the area is ability to get to know the merchants and have a personal relationship with them which is so unusual in this modem world. Also as a horse owner it was my pleasure to shop at the old Loomis barn for hay, feed and pick up local eggs and that delicious ollalie berry jam for myself. Yes, I am reminiscing, however; I do have a deep concem for the future of our village. I would hate to see another contemporary designed stucco building built adjacent to the LoOmis barn. I have certainly no objection to the rights of the current owner to make use of the property, but please, let's be particularly careful to preserve the unique , . character of the area and insUre its development is cpnsistent with the rest of our village. Iih~ &~ Since~;~, ,'. ~u-t! . ~~ 25 April, 2005 Dear Mayor and Council Members, Our neighborhood (CroWn TerraceILe Point St.) has been concerned about the Loomis Development project and we strongly object to the many (twelve) entrances and back-out traffic from this development. This will add traffic to the already overloaded traffic on Crown Terrace!Le Point roadways as a ctrt-off route from one area ofHwy 227 ( in front ofthe Loomis store) and the other entrance to Hwy227 ( western end ofLe Point St.). We are very concerned about the cut-offtraffic. Recently, we learned a traffic measurement was made of the number of cats using Crown Terrace and Le Point St as a cut-off for another project. The information suggested this measurement was made during 2003. A reCent SANDAG traffic study of the Loomis Development Project did not consider the cut-off traffic in their analysis. Some of my neighbors have indicated some reluctance of the city to give them the results of the traffic measurements on Crown TerraceILe Point. Please arrange for the results of this traffic study on Crown TerracelLe Point St. be made available to us. This will be shared with others on Le Point Street concerned about the cut-off traffic and the added traffic due to the Loomis Property Development. 489-9433 REeE/v. 4UG ~D C Clry Of: 022006 OMMU,.-:WROy.o .ilry Gb. D~'vE:l 'Vj^,D~ OPMF "Nr 29 March, 2005 ~:CfIVfD CiTy 0220a coJt1, Of: .<lR~ . /6 n , ) 'II.1UAiITy Oyo Lf~tJ JI c;, J L D~Vc/;~AiD~ 'fAir Community Development Depaftlnent F'-- . glRg-~ir"'fR1 <"';1~ 214 East Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Dear Commissioners; After a number of discussions with neighbors in the area, the style of the buildings of the current plans for the Loomis Development are not suitable for the desired motif of our Village. The style of the buildings both residential and commercial should be more compatible with the style of the Loomis house and barn and other buildings along the Village main street. It is very easy to identify the buildings which have been built in recent years and are not companble with the majority of the Village architecture. Also, the project is described as being zoned a mixed-use development The' project is . divided into two areas. A commercial area and a residential area. It is not a mixed commercial/residential area. << Earle B~geman 505 Le point St Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Community Development ~ent () . . ....~1rQC' .~. U- Prf C& vi c. J L- 214 East Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Dear Commissioners, This is written to strongly object to thee;xit ofP1anned Unit Development Case No. 04- 001 (415 East Branch Street) onto Le Point Street Le Point Street currently canies too much speMi'1g traffic due to the use of that street as a short-cut between 2 locations of Hwy 227 as it circles Crown Hill. The improvement ofLe Point St (North of Development) to a 40 ft. width and sidewalk will encroach on the home oWlllmllawns. The home OWlllml are very concerned about the changes in Le Point St due to the access from the development. MaJIy have only recently been informed of the access OCthe development to Le Point St Pedestrian access to the ploperty from Crown Temce should be denied due to the narrow width (24 ft.) of that street. Possibly the pedestrian access from Crown Terrace is for school childmIleaving and ~""ing to the poperty. This is an unsafe choice. The development of the Loomis property should only consider access from Crown Hill street or East Branch Street and not include a gate to sepande the commercial and residential portions. The access to the Loomis property from Crown Hill Street or East Branch Street was SIItisfiIcWIy for 9S years and there is DO good te8SOD to a1~ that and many reasons to not grant access to Le Point Street and improve that portion ofLe Point Street. Thank you for your consideration. Earle Balgeman... 505 Le Point St Arroyo Onmdc; CA 93420 ~::~/V~D C6ly Op -'l 2<'006 lt14?u", RRon "Illy DOG 'CVclo~tvDE '41Etvr Community Development ~ent (J / / pi .. B €2l1t1l'lisll>en ~ I ~./ ' .A"\ /; ./~ { 214 East Branch Street / '/ v vA' ~ / L-- Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Dear Commissioners, This is written to strongly object to the exit of Planned Unit Development Case No. 04- 001 (415 EastBrancb StR:et) onto Le Point Street Le Point Street cunently carries too much speeding traffic due to the use of that street as a short-cut between 2 locations of Hwy 227 as it circles Crown Hill. The impro\Iement ofLe Point St (North of Development) to a 40 ft. width an sidewalk will encroach on the home owners lawns. TIle home owners are very concerned about the l".....nr in Le Point St due to the access from the development. Many have only recimtly been informed of the access of the development to Le Point St. Pedestrian access to the property 110m Crown Terrace sbould be denied due to the narrow width (24 ft.) of that street. Possibly the pedestrian access 110m Crown Terrace is for school children leaving and returning to the property. This is an Unsafe choice. fl1l/ #a Earle Balgeman . 505 Le Point 8t. Anoyo Grande, CA 93420 ~.r ~~c~ 4 '/Vft',~\ CITy (;60 'V Co~ 0,<- ~~ .2<'000 ~Ui\rTy :{>OYo D~lho G.o. '(:lO~\.<j/'vDt:' it1~J\i .. . . .. "" '8 ,;~', r:' _,8: '~ "fj XUj'~' 'j;:':,; ::t', . '<~:;;:.~ 4':* ',a = .. " . U) -: ... ... comm, unity Development Department /) ,,QI~~ ~r-- C-/-ry l:OtJ5C/L- 214 East Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 p We~ftSomethi8g'Out ~ '~ ~ ,5 ~I .. >"1 +-1 z. ,.:J.l 2- 21 "01' '0. ,~ " ..,',. ".1 .~rl ,5 .. ,OJ r-J . .~l ot If ~ EqjoyedYO\J!'!irtiC:tt.'OJI'Stteelas ilSbQrt-cut between tIie"Loomls Hearmg PosI- two psrlS 'ofHwy 2XI Which poned".Howeva-,yoodidDOl circle the Crown Hill irea. meotkin an issue wbicbls of About15 years ago dK>east- primary concern IOtbe Le eOIead of Cruwn Hill street Point SlJtet.~_..:',.".".!....block~1I>'^',1bose. -"" ...."."" ':= ",,,,.., """""'lW'. . ,," '"";"ai~ .1!:.:, '. .'. " ." ';i'~ret~~:: consideIed tile access of,~j;'~-aloog Crown Ifi!l ./ project onto IlK> ~,I!/li"stteet.Since then motOrists improYed portion Of~~""',lIaveused Crown~ on,d street. ,,' ',,: "" ' LePointstJeelasashorl.wt This issue,i~!:~:r between Hwy 2XI in front of opposecl by tbe:.~tifoj the Loomis store and Hwy LePoinl S~ }t'bis. un- 227 al the east eud of Le improYed~~t..ePoini Point StreCLThe comer of SlreelwmJ:iol'~~MtollK> Crown ~..Point 40 6,':\'Vi!\lb.cif.tbecurrcnt Street is a bilaY.ibddallger- tw,..,)~~,1iOn ofLe PoIntDllS~Theclty JefUses.' .:.s~~= =:,,~r.ijn~, meJ\twlll encroach ootbe.,"""'ullK>shorl- .~~~~~ intllearticle~t6.~ LePoinISlreel'~.~' to cIeve1ClpQ11011l~!\!lY;I!ind..tbe~'l_)~ of 11Io n<lt~;jbeie I" an IIK>lanuary 18. 2005..-1ng objecIIon.lOlI!!YiIlWd ~-._ hl of tbel'laoDing r.m,...;...on. of tb~~i...p1'operty as1bd'ywfor'Your COl1- long as jh10es 001 access on' . Le Point Stnlet. ,,''<' , Le. Point Slreeljsil' . stteetllue to the ~:~;~ ~.. ~. ':"",~ . ",..,. " .,RECEIVSD AUG 022006 CITY OF COMM ARROYO Gl'>. UNITY OEVEL fV\NOE OPMENT 0 .. II< ... .. :E " Z , ~ .. :I . " ... I I ~ ATTACHMENT 7 S~~-7~ 22211te1:;{ltluj S~ - ~ fj"alteU (3A 93420 1JMce: (KOSI 473-69K7 4 March 2005 RECEIVED - Arroyo Grande)l" _V_g"~ Q I ",.--{ 214 E. Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 CJ MAR 0 R 2005 o ull elL. - CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE COMMUNITY DEVEI!':>PME~ Ref: - Creekside Center Development Gentlemen: My husband and I strongly oppose the development project as proposed. Not only will it increase-traffic on both Le Point and Crown Terrace, but having residents backing out of their driveway onto Crown Terrace is dangerous and completely unacceptable. I cannot imagine 1hat your Commission would permit such a plan to go into effect. Additionally, we feel the aesthetics of the Village shouldlemain intact-- especially after seeing what was built at the West end of it - those atrocious, completely out-of-character buildings should never have been allowed. We ask that you reconsider the project as a whole. Thank you. Sincerely, Sheila Taylor ATTACHMENT 6 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission 214 E. Branch St. Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 March 7; 2005 . -'-~: CrryGtJA/'CrL Members of the iUa:L>.':'t!~;u? This letter is in reference to the project proposed for the Loomis property. My main concern is safety along Crown Terrace. I live on May Street with my wife and two young daughters, and we walk along Crown Terrace at least twice a day on our way to and from downtown. As such. we are very familiar with how narrow that street is, and how dangerous it can be. The combination of more traffic and the proposed driV!lways entering onto Crown Terrace is a recipe for disaster. The road is very narrow (27 feet according to a neighbor) and has a blind comer onto Lepoint around which cars often travel at very high speed. Wrth cars backing out onto Crown Terrace, it is only a matter of time before there is an accident. It seems Jike it woUld be fur safer to route the exits from the homes either onto Branch Street as is currently the case. or else onto lower Lepoint. Regardless of what happens, if this project is approved the city shoUld require that the developer either put a sidewalk along Crown Terrace, or else provide a route through the development that residents on LePoint and May Street can use to safely avoid CroWn Terrace. We are alsO concerned about light pollution. If this project is to be mixed use, we hope that the businesses will be required to consider the residential areas nearby and install low . intensity lighting. Thank you for taking the time to read these comments. Sincerely, ~~ Derek Mitchem and firmily 513 May Street Arroyo Grande 473-8719 RECEIVED MAR 0 8 2005 CItY OF AR~pYO GRANOE COMMU~'Tf pEVElOPMENT , K.Jj~ ~/L ' Rt.CEN~Q;ITYOF ARROYO GRANDE~~~~ ~UG0'22GGG SPEAKER SLIP 0'10 '3RANDE C\1'l OF f\R'R ~ OP'MEN1 COMMUN\1'/ Dt.'JEIJ The Planning Commission and staff appreciate your partjcjpation at this public meeting. ATTACHMENT 13 SPEAKING TO PLANNING COMMISSION ~ Please complete this form if you wish to address the Planning Commission on any subject. ~ If you wish to speak regarding an item NOT on the agenda, your name will _be called during the oral communications period. ~- If you wish to speak regarding a Public Hearing or Business item, proceed to the speaker's stand upon- recognition from the Planning Commission Chair. When vou step UP to the microphone: ~ Please speak directly into the microphone. ~ Please clearly state your name and address for the record. PI~as:e1lTti,f(<''-goHrwn-i1rkS':tC;~tfiF~Ei':(S~)'"'mjhUt~sWimr;a$s~1lirtne1' WT{~ - i~"':farit~CiWi'if-riil:'pl'~'r;'rlirt.CcWnn1i~16~'cfi-ai rf>'-'----~ - __ ,_ - .9----- _..___,y~___.__~_______ ----,g.- - -----. -- .._-, -.-,..-.------- ~ ~ All remarks must be addressed to the Planning Commission as a whole and not to any Member individu~i1Iy. _ Meetin~ Date: -2/.....- r;/ 6 -.r--- 'Itf7 -t: J~ ;jl- Name: ~J,.,. ~ /<::: ::~ ;U,- ~;.0 ~,e:,~ Address: 5"08 Le- ~Cl /" --J~ A - c;, .. Agenda Item: {.(~n// f!or/dl/lJ'T fjJ4- C~~ &,aJAi M-- (The signing of this slip !s voluntary) C::/G-. :. ~c:~y:. h - "/tbl e~ ~ PLEASE GIVE THIS SLIP TO THE CLERK. r - :?:3"'" ~cFd0 ~/..3>> :S ~Ln,u{l~ ~d~~ 4~ w.>/a~~./L ./?---L? '7Z.....,n_~~ CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ATTACHMENT 14 . & ".- '. , SPEAKER SLIP '. . . The Planning Commission and staff appreciate your participation at this public meeting. SPEAKING TO PLANNING COMMISSION . . ~ Please complete this form if you wish to address the Planning Commission on any subject. ~ If you wish to speak regarding an item NOT on the agenda, your name will be.caiJed during the oral communications period. . ~ If you wish to speak regarding a Public Hearing or Business item, proceed to the speaker's stand upon recognition from the .Planning Ccirpmission Chair. When yOU step UP to th'e microphone: ~ Please speak directly into the microphone. ~ . . Please clearly state your name and address' for the record. pi ea'si?ff hl'ie ,c'6Lir 'i1;ml:lrks":to.;th~re1'Y3YihiTtl\IH~s'''\fiIiI~~'''i;fO'dh:et t:'" ""'. ,.- ,"'., ',', i:Ya 'b' '...th....p} ";Co',,, ;<";";&6 ""1""'",,,,,,,;?;,,ch".,;.-;"';j-"-"'~'~-"" .lm~I$:gr:aJ! e. _Y. ..e, .?nnmg~..(>.J!LrT.!!~_!?!Q.rl~.~~.I.r:.j ~ ~ All remarks must be addressed to the Planning Commission as a whole and not to any Member individually. . Meetin~ Date: / ~ ~ .h S- // ./ ~ . Name:.....~ .J~,eL/;J . / "1f.777I~c:LLJ Address: :5"i?;? L" ~ 76/:V / ,,/}. ~ . Agenda Item: L~(I./#;.5 //~/~ ~Df'T:!tJ;P.Gj)) (The signing of this slip is voluntary) /Z c:-: b~/'JC:7e. / ~%".J . ' /~/fe6 { Z. c- {II)/, ;V,/ PLEASE GIVE THIS SLIP TO THE CLERK.. "D~p 'V??G'u/~ ~-G:-A/.l /c.5'/oc:::A5?7 /J-t" (J ;D6A/S' . /.IS . -"0 -.- .--: ........ ----. - A -'"~~1J:. ?P.44//:.";' , 1S'7 p/r: ,. - d9-".y/~ e./U.7 uS ,/ . 7S'~~C2> -:;;;z::-.,o7c..eS-z.::t:ZV/~ ..u.. /L~~ / d- ;Ov~ ~C::S;:,-..-2>cd. "de-c'r;: . =:r /Va"T;- /".ytE;~ 7o/c~/?7 .?J / . ,?O C':: ?Ohio c./ / L A -r- ~/YJ c;. 4tJ >-4 ~/S . As ~ ~c::: . ~/ ~A/2:S..[ t== ~ ~ /' :;;U. (!~;I .. ~.~ / L?~/U~/,2)~~AJ N' _'J . ~~~~..D, r O{j{/L;d7./d~ ;/ ~c= /,2'~.-,.~ 2>~.YT./JL /l ...~r1? . ~/ .;v (i) ~-czr/72/~"P&/c, s=m,,/~E/2 L)~C,,"/$/N'J - - .=-.--.,.- .JPi5'O.y #/ C-L. 4/f/Y tU/7U/rT7aYv' ~ L ~ .5~ ~ ~7- ~ .=:;c:-/ ~.... .~~. .' .+ f[;) ~ -I-LAu.e. . J/VL.c. ~ , . . . -, '. , '. '. ttJ/ ~ '. . ,. \. ~ ---t::A. <<:.-, ~ . ....... .' .,~ '. . - , ed-t,Lt/~ ~s 7- c;- ~ t/t:"~LY- ~ 'lVr I "., .., " .' , " ."., , . - "," ...... . cf7......... . (J - DRAFT ATTACHMENT 16 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE CONSIDERING AN ADDENDUM TO THE PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE PROJECT, ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM, INSTRUCTING THE DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES TO FILE A NOTICE OF DETERMINATION, AND APPROVING VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP CASE NO. 04-004 AND PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CASE NO. 04-001, LOCATED AT 415 EAST BRANCH STREET, APPLIED FOR BY DB & M PROPERTY, LLC WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande adopted Resolution No. 3710 on September 23, 2003 certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the Creekside Center project (Vesting Tentative Tract Map 01-002 and Conditional Use Permit 01-001); and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered Vesting Tentative Tract Map 04-004 and Planned Unit Development 04-001, filed by DB & M Property, LLC, to reconfigure 23 existing parcels into 13 parcels, and construct a mixed-use development consisting of 12 duplexes, a 12,000 square foot commercial/office building, and retention of existing structures; and WHEREAS, the City Council has held a duly-noticed public hearing on these applications in accordance with the Development Code of the City of Arroyo Grande; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the information and public testimony presented at the public hearing, staff report, and all other information and documents that are part of the public record; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the proposed project is consistent with the Design Guidelines and Standards for Historic Districts. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande as follows: 1. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the implementation of the project may have a significant effect on the environment. 2. The City Council hereby finds with respect to the adverse environmental impacts detailed in the Final EIR: a. That, based on information set forth in the Final Program EIR for the 2001 General Plan Update (FPEIR) and the Final EIR and Addendum for the Creekside Center (FEIR), water conservation mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project that will avoid or RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 2 substantially lessen the adverse environmental impact on water supply identified in the FPEIR and FEIR; and b. that no additional adverse impacts will have a significant effect or result in a substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in the environment as a result of project approval; and c. that all significant environmental effects identified in the FEIR have been reduced to an acceptable level in that all significant environmental effects that can feasibly be avoided have been eliminated or substantially reduced as determined through the findings set forth in this Resolution; and . 3. The City Council authorizes and directs that the Director of Administrative Services file a Notice of Determination with respect to the Final EIR and Addendum for the project, specifically referencing therein that mitigation measures have been made a condition of project approval and findings have been made pursuant to Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande hereby approves Vesting Tentative Map 04-004 and Planned Unit Development 04-001 based on the following findings: Tentative Tract Map Findings: 1. The proposed tentative tract map is consistent with the goals, objectives, policies, plans, programs, intent, and requirements of the General Plan map and text and the requirements of the Development Code. 3. The site, as shown on the tentative tract map, is physically suitable for the proposed residential density commercial development and because all necessary easements, parking, open space, and setbacks can be provided. 4. The design of the tentative tract map or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial damage to the natural environment, including fish, wildlife or their habitat. 5. The design of the subdivision or proposed improvements is not likely to cause public health problems. 6. The design of the tentative tract map or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through, or use of, property within the proposed tentative tract map or that alternate easements for access or for use will be provided, and that these alternative easements will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 3 7. The discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into an existing community sewer system will not result in violation of existing requirements a prescribed in Division 7 (commencing with Section 13000) of the California Water Code. 8. Adequate public services and facilities exist or will be provided as the result of the proposed tentative tract map to support project development. Planned Unit Development Permit Findings: 1. The proposed development is consistent with the goals, objectives, and programs of the Arroyo Grande General Plan. 2. The site for the proposed development is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use and all yards, open spaces, setbacks, walls and fences, parking areas, landscaping, and other features required by the Development Code. 3. The site for the proposed development has adequate access, meaning that the site design and development plan conditions consider the limitations of existing streets and highways. 4. Adequate public services exist, or will be provided in accordance with the conditions of the development plan approval, to serve the proposed development; and that the approval of the proposed development will not result in a reduction of public services to properties in the vicinity so as to be a detriment to public health, safety, and welfare. 5. The proposed development, as conditioned, will not have a substantial adverse effect on surrounding property, or the permitted use thereof, and will be compatible with the existing multiple-family and single-family residential uses in the surrounding area. 6. The improvements required, and the manner of development, adequately address all natural and man-made hazards associated with the proposed development of the project site, including, but not limited to, flood, seismic, fire and slope hazards. 7. The proposed development carrie,s out the intent of the Planned Unit Development Provisions by providing a more efficient use of the land and an excellence of design greater than that which could be achieved through the application of conventional development standards. 8. The proposed development complies with all applicable performance standards listed in Development Code Section 16.32.050. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 4 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande hereby considers an Addendum to the certified Final Environmental Impact Report for the Creekside Center project, instructs the Director of Administrative Services to file a Notice of Determination, and approves Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 04-004 and Planned Unit Development 04-001, with the above findings and subject to the conditions as set forth in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. On motion by Council Member and by the following roll call vote to wit: , seconded by Council Member AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing Resolution was adopted this day of 2006. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 5 TONY FERRARA, MAYOR ATTEST: KELLY WETMORE, DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICESI CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 6 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 04-004 and PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 04-001 DB & M Property, LLC 415 East Branch Street COMMUNITY DEVELOPMFNT nFPARTMENT GENFRAI CONI1ITIONS This approval authorizes the reconfiguration of twenty-three (23) existing lots into thirteen (13) lots for a 2.78-acre property, and construction of a mixed-use development consisting of 12 duplexes, a 12,000 square foot commercial/office building, and retention of existing structures. 1. The applicant shall ascertain and comply with all Federal, State, County and City requirements as are applicable to this project. 2. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of approval for Vesting Tentative Tract Map 04-004 and Planned Unit Development 04-001. 3. This tentative map and PUD approval shall automatically expire on unless the final map is recorded or an extension is granted pursuant to Section 16.12.140 of the Development Code. 4. Development shall occur in substantial conformance with the plans presented to the City Council at the meeting of and marked Exhibits 81-810 (on file in the Community Development Department), except as modified by these conditions of approval. 5. The applicant shall, as a condition of approval of this tentative map application, defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Arroyo Grande, its present or former agents, officers and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City, its past or present agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul City's approval of this subdivision, which action is brought within the time period provided for by law. This condition is subject to the provisions of Government Code Section 66474.9, which are incorporated by reference herein as though set forth in full. SPFCIAI CONI1ITIONS 6. Consistent with MM 4.3.30, an open space agreement and twenty-five foot (25' ) creek easement measured from top of bank shall be recorded on the property. No development shall occur within 25' creek setback area. A trail easement shall also be recorded within the creek setback area. A homeowners association shall be responsible for maintaining the creek easement area. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 7 7. The applicant shall provide two (2) on-site affordably restricted housing units to be sold to moderate-income qualified families. Prior to recording the final map the applicant shall enter into an agreement, in a form approved by the City Attorney, whereby the applicant agrees on behalf of itself and its successors in interest to maintain the affordability of the units for thirty (30) years or longer, as well as other terms and conditions determined to be necessary to implement this condition. 8. There shall be a "look back" provision to reassess whether a gate is necessary between the commercial and residential uses after one year. Adequate space shall be left if it is determined that a gate is necessary at a later date. 9. The two (2) Coast live oak trees and the Canary Island date palm shall be transplanted at a suitable location on or off-site, as recommended by the arborist report prepared by Carolyn Leach dated September 1, 2006. 10. Storage cabinets within the garages shall be elevated to reduce the risk of damage during a flood event. NOISF 11. Construction activities shall be restricted to the hours of 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM Monday through Friday. There shall be no construction activities on Saturday or Sunday. OFVFI OPMFNT CO OF 12. Development shall conform to the Village Mixed Use (VMU) zoning requirements except as otherwise approved. 13. All fences and/or walls shall not exceed six feet (6') in height unless otherwise approved with a Minor Exception or Variance application. 14. The developer shall comply with Development Code Chapter 16.20, "Land Divisions". 15. The developer shall comply with Development Code Chapter 16.64, "Dedications, Fees and Reservations." PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMIT 16. All walls, including screening and retaining walls, shall be compatible with the approved architecture and Development Code Standards, and shall be no more than 3 feet in height in the front setback area, subject to the review and approval of the Community Development Director. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 8 PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT 17. The Architectural Review Committee (ARC) and Planning Commission shall review and approve the final architectural drawings, including exterior building colors and materials, final landscape plan, and Crown Terrace guardrail design placed on top of required retaining walls. 18. The applicant shall obtain approval for a Planned Sign Program consistent with the Development Code and the Design Guidelines and Standards for Historic Districts. PRIOR TO RECORDING THE FINAL MAP 19. A landscaping and irrigation plan shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect subject to review and approval by the Community Development and Parks and Recreation Departments. The landscaping plan shall include the following for all public street frontages and common landscaped areas: a. Tree staking, soil preparation and planting detail; b. The use of landscaping to screen ground-mounted utility and mechanical equipment; c. The required landscaping and improvements. This includes: (1) Deep root planters shall be included in areas where trees are within five feet (5') of asphalt or concrete surfaces and curbs; (2) Water conservation practices including the use of low flow heads, drip irrigation, mulch, gravel, drought tolerant plants and mulches shall be incorporated into the landscaping plan; and (3) All slopes 2:1 or greater shall have jute mesh, nylon mesh or equivalent material. (4) An automated irrigation system. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY 20. All fencing shall be installed. 21. The applicant shall submit final Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) that are administered by a subdivision homeowners' association and formed by the applicant for common areas within the subdivision. The CC&Rs shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney and recorded with the final map. PARKS AND RFCREATION DEPARTMFNT CONDITIONS 22. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Ordinance 521 C.S., the Community Tree Ordinance. 23. Linear root barriers shall be used at the front of the project to protect sidewalks. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 9 24. All street front trees shall be 24-inch box and shall be located a minimum of one (1) tree for every seventy-five feet (75') of street frontage. BUILDING AND FIRE nFPARTMENT CONnlTIONS 25. The project shall comply with the most recent editions of the California State Fire and Building Codes and the Uniform Building and Fire Codes as adopted by the City of Arroyo Grande. 26. The project shall comply with State and Federal disabled access requirements at public areas. 27. The applicant shall show all setback areas for each lot on the tentative tract map prior to map recordation. ' FIRF I ANFS 28. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, all fire lanes must be posted and enforced, per Police Department and Fire Department guidelines. FIRF FI OW/FIRF HVnRANTS 29~ Project shall have a minimum fire flow of 1,500 gallons per minute for a duration of 2 hours. 30. Prior to bringing combustibles on site, fire hydrants shall be installed 300 feet apart, per Fire Department and Public Works Department standards. Locations shall be approved by the Fire Chief. 31. Prior to occupancy, the applicant must provide an approved "security key vault", per Building and Fire Department guidelines. FIRE SPRINKI FR 32. Prior to occupancy, all buildings must be fully sprinklered per Building and Fire Department guidelines. OPTICOM nFVICE 33. An opticom traffic signal pre-emption device shall be installed that meets Building and Fire Department requirements at East Branch Street and the Highway 101 intersection. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 10 ARANDONMFNT/NON-CONFORMING 34. Prior to issuance of a grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall show proof of properly abandoning all non-conforming items such as septic tanks, wells, underground piping and other undesirable conditions. OTHFR APPROVALS 35. Prior to issuance of a building permit, County Health Department approval is required for well abandonment if applicable. 36. Project must comply with Federal and local flood management policies. PURl IC WORKS DEPARTMFNT CONDITIONS All Public Works Department conditions of approval as listed below are to be complied with prior to recording the map or finalizing the permit, unless specifically noted otherwise. 37. Fees - The applicant shall pay all applicable City fees at the time they are due. (For your information, the "Procedure for Protesting Fees, Dedications, Reservations or Exactions" is provided below). 38. Fees to be paid prior to plan approval: a. Map check fee. b. Plan check for grading plans based on an approved earthwork estimate. c. Plan check for improvement plans based on an approved construction cost estimate. d. Permit Fee for grading plans based on an approved earthwork estimate. e. Inspection fee of subdivision or public works construction plans based on an approved construction cost estimate. PROCEDURE FOR PROTESTING FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR EXACTIONS: (A) Any party may protest the imposition of any fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions imposed on a development project, for the purpose of defraying all or a portion of the cost of public facilities related'to the development project by meeting both of the following requirements: (1) Tendering any required payment in full or providing satisfactory evidence of arrangements to pay the fee when due or ensure performance of the conditions necessary to meet the requirements of the imposition. (2) Serving written notice on the City Council, which notice shall contain all of the following information: RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 11 (a) A statement that the required payment is tendered or will be tendered when due, or that any conditions which have been imposed are provided for or satisfied, under protest. (b) A statement informing the City Council of the factual elements of the dispute and the legal theory forming the basis for the protest. (B) A protest filed pursuant to subdivision (A) shall be filed at the time of the approval or conditional approval of the development or within 90 days after the date of the imposition of the fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions to be imposed on a development project. (C) Any party who files a protest pursuant to subdivision (A) may file an action to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the imposition of the fees, dedications reservations, or other exactions imposed on a development project by a local agency within 180 days after the delivery of the notice. (D) Approval or conditional approval of a development occurs, for the purposes of this section, when the tentative map, tentative parcel map, or parcel map is approved or conditionally approved or when the parcel map is recorded if a tentative map or tentative parcel map is not required. (E) The imposition of fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions occurs, for the purposes of this section, when they are imposed or levied on a specific development. c.FNFRAI IMPROVEMENT RFOIJlRFMFNTS 39. Clean all streets, curbs, gutters and sidewalks at the end of the day's operations or as directed by the Director of Community Development or the Director of Public Works. 40. Perform construction activities requiring City inspection during normal business hours (Monday through Friday, 8 A.M. to 5 P.M. excluding City holidays) The developer or contractor shall refrain from performing any work other than site maintenance outside of these hours as allowed by local ordinance, unless an emergency arises or approved by the Director of Public Works. The City may hold the developer or contractor responsible for any expenses incurred by the City due to work outside of these hours. 41. Prior to placing the final map on the City Council Agenda, the following items shall be submitted and approved: o Final map signed. o Improvement Securities. o Fees paid. o Inspection agreement signed. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 12 o Subdivision improvement agreement signed. o Tax certificate. o Project CC&Rs or maintenance agreements. IMPROVEMENT PI ANS 42. All project improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the City of Arroyo Grande Standard Drawings and Specifications. 43. Submit four (4) full-size paper copies and one (1) full-size mylar copy of approved improvement plans for inspection purposes during construction. 44. Submit as-built plans at the completion of the project or improvements as directed by the Director of Public Works. One (1) set of mylar prints and an electronic version on CD in AutoCAD format shall be required. 45. The following Improvement plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Public Works Department: o Grading, drainage and erosion control. o Street paving, curb, gutter and sidewalk. o Public utilities. o Water and sewer. o Landscaping and irrigation. o Any other improvements as required by the Director of Public Works. 46. The site plan shall include the following: o The location and size of all existing and proposed water, sewer, and storm drainage facilities within the project site and abutting streets or alleys. o The location, quantity and size of all existing and proposed sewer laterals. o The location, size and orientation of all trash enclosures. o All existing and proposed parcel lines and easements crossing the property. o The location and dimension of all existing and proposed paved areas. o The location of all existing and proposed public or private utilities. 47. Improvement plans shall include plan and profile of existing and proposed streets, utilities and retaining walls. 48. Any landscape and irrigation within the public right of way require plans that shall be approved by the Public Works, Community Development and Parks and Recreation Departments. WATER 49. Whenever possible, all water mains shall be looped to prevent dead ends. The Director of Public Works must grant permission to dead end water mains. 50. Construction water is available at the corporate yard. The City of Arroyo Grande does not allow the use of hydrant meters. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 13 51. Each parcel shall have separate water meters. Duplex service lines shall be used if feasible. 52. Lots using fire sprinklers shall have individual service connections. If the units are to be fire sprinkled, a fire sprinkler engineer shall determine the size of the water meters. 53. Existing water services to be abandoned shall be properly abandoned and capped at the main per the requirements of the Director of Public Works. 54. The applicant shall complete measures to neutralize the estimated increase in water demand created by the project by either: a Implement an individual water program consisting of retrofitting existing high-flow plumbing fixtures with low flow devices. The calculations shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for review and approval. The proposed individual water program shall be submitted to the City Council for approval prior to implementation; OR, a The applicant may pay an in lieu fee of $2,200 for each new residential unit. 55. Install fire hydrants to Public Works and Building and Fire Department requirements. 56. Replace the existing 4" water main underneath Crown Terrace with an 8" main. 57. Replace the short section of 4" main underneath Le Point Street to connect to the 6" main underneath the northern section of Crown Terrace. 58. Replace the section of 4" main underneath Le Point Street between Corbett Canyon/Highway 227 and McKinley Street. 59. Extend an 8" main through the site to connect to the main underneath Le Point and Crown Hill. SEWER 60. Each parcel shall be provided a separate sewer lateral. 61. All sewer laterals must connect to City sewer mains. 62. All new sewer mains must be a minimum diameter of 8". 63. All sewer laterals within the public right of way must have a minimum slope of 2%. 64. All sewer mains or laterals crossing or parallel to public water facilities shall be constructed in accordance with California State Health Agency standards. 65. Existing sewer laterals to be abandoned shall be properly abandoned and capped at the main per the requirements of the Director of Public Works. 66. Sewer laterals must connect to City sewer mains. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 14 67. Obtain approval from the South County Sanitation District for the development's impact to District facilities. 68. The applicant shall make all necessary welded connections to the steel main and slip line the main and welded stub laterals. PUBLIC UTILITIES 69. Underground all new public utilities in accordance with Section 16.68.050 of the Development Code. 70. Under ground all existing overhead public utilities on-site and in the street in accordance with Section 16.68.050 of the Development Code. 71. Underground improvements shall be installed prior to street paving. 72. Submit all improvement plans to the public utility companies for approval and comment. Utility comments shall be forwarded to the Director of Public Works for approval. 73. Submit the Final Map shall to the public utility companies for review and comment. Utility comments shall be forwarded to the Director of Public Works for approval. 74. Prior to approving any building permit within the project for occupancy, all public utilities shall be operational. 75. All public utility plans shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for review and comments. 76. Install decorative streetlights along Crown Hill, Crown Terrace, and Le Point to match existing in the village along East Branch Street. 77. Underground all existing overhead utilities, more specifically the following poles and associated overhead lines, shown graphically in Exhibit A 1: o Pole 2197, near the dead end of Le Point Street. o Pole 440, at the corner of Le Point and Crown Terrace. o Pole 524, at the corner of Crown Hill and Crown Terrace. o Pole 139, along Crown Terrace. o Unknown Pole Number, along Crown Terrace. STREETS 78. Obtain approval from the Director of Public Works prior to excavating in any street recently over-laid or slurry sealed. The Director of Public Works shall approve the method of repair of any such trenches, but shall not be limited to an overlay, slurry seal, or fog seal. 79. All trenching in City streets shall utilize saw cutting. Any over cuts shall be cleaned and filled with epoxy. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 15 80. All street repairs shall be constructed to City standards. 81. Street structural sections shall be determined by an R-Value soil test and a TI of 6.5, but shall not be less than 3" of asphalt and 6" of Class II AB. 82. Overlay, slurry seal, or fog seal any roads dedicated to the City prior to acceptance by the City may be required as directed by the Director of Public Works. 83. Construct Le Point Street adjacent to the northern project boundary to the following design standards: . 40 feet street width from curb to curb. . 6 feet wide concrete sidewalks with concrete curb and gutter on both sides of the street. . 25 mile per hour design speed. 84. Construct Crown Terrace adjacent to the eastern project boundary to the following design standards: . 24 feet street width from curb to curb. . 6 feet wide concrete sidewalks with concrete curb and gutter on the west side of the street. . "No Parking" both sides of the street. . 25 mile per hour design speed. 85. Remove and replace any broken curb, gutter and sidewalk along Crown Hill and East Branch. 86. Install a pedestrian ramp at the corner of Crown Hill and East Branch. 87. Overlay Crown Terrace with 1 Y2" asphalt concrete. Grind the perimeter of the overlay to facilitate matching to existing grades. 88. Complete the half of the cross gutter and spandrel at the northwest corner of Le Point and Crown Terrace. 89. Install cross walks across the northern leg of Crown Terrace and the western leg of Le Point Street. 90. Install a four-way stop control at the intersection of Crown Terrace and Le Point Street. The applicant shall install an island on the southeast corner of Crown Terrace and Le Point Street to make Crown Terrace intersect Le Point Street at a 90 degree angle. Low growing landscape material shall be included within the island. 91. Install a designated left turn pocket into the project site at Crown Hill to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. The curbs on both sides of Crown Hill shall be painted red for no parking from the East Branch Street intersection to the Crown Terrace intersection. 92. The residential portion of the project shall have primary access from Le Point Street. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 16 ClIRB, GUTTER, ANn SlnFWAI K 93. Install new concrete curb, gutter, and sidewalk as directed by the Director of Public Works. 94. Utilize saw cuts for all repairs made in curb, gutter, and sidewalk. 95. Install ADA compliant facilities where necessary. 96. Install tree wells for all trees planted adjacent to curb, gutter and sidewalk to prevent damage due to root growth. 97. Install curb, gutter and sidewalk along western edge of Crown Terrace. 98. Install curb, gutter and sidewalk along Le Point Street. 99. Remove and replace any broken curb, gutter and sidewalk along Crown Hill and East Branch. 100. Install a pedestrian ramp at the corner of Crown Hill and East Branch Street. GRADING 101. Perform all grading in conformance with the City Grading Ordinance. 102. Submit a preliminary soils report prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and supported by adequate test borings. All earthwork design and grading shall be performed in accordance with the approved soils report. 103. Submit all retaining wall calculations for review and approval by the Director of Public Works for walls not constructed per City standards. nRAINAGF 104. All drainage facilities shall be designed to accommodate a 1 OO-year storm flow. 105. All drainage facilities shall be in accordance with the Drainage Master Plan. 106. The project is in Drainage Zone "B" and will require runoff directed to the creek. 107. Upgrade the storm drain system along Le Point to City Standards, complete with fossil filters. 108. Remove and replace the drop inlet along the property frontage of Crown Hill with a new City standard drop inlet. 109. Project site drainage shall drain directly to the creek. Site drainage shall pass through fossil filters prior to entering the creek. 110. Submit detailed drainage calculations for review and approval by the Director of Public Works. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 17 DEDICATIONS ANn FASFMFNTS 111. 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. 112. Abandonment of public streets and public easements shall be listed on the final map of parcel map, in accordance with Section 66499.20 of the Subdivision Map Act. 113. Street tree planting and maintenance easements shall be dedicated adjacent to all street right of ways. Street tree easements shall be a minimum of 10 feet beyond the right of way, except that street tree easements shall exclude the area covered by public utility easements. 114. A Public Utility Easement (PUE) shall be dedicated a minimum 6 feet wide adjacent to all street right of ways. The PUE shall be wider where necessary for the installation or maintenance of the public utility vaults, pads, or similar facilities. 115. A Public Utility Easement (PUE) shall be dedicated over the private driveway for the residential portion. 116. Easements shall be dedicated to the public on the map, or other separate document approved by the City, for the following: . Sewer easement over the existing sewer main. The existing easement is to the County of San Luis Obispo, but the City owns a portion of the main. The easement shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide. . Water easements where shown on the tentative map. The easements shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide. 117. Private easements shall be reserved on the map, or other separate document approved by the City, for private sewer and water service. PFRMITS 118. Obtain an encroachment permit prior to performing any of the following: o Performing work in the City right of way. o Staging work in the City right of way. o Stockpiling material in the City right of way. o Storing equipment in the City right of way. 119. Obtain a grading permit prior to start of any grading operations on site. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 18 AGREEMENTS 120. Inspection Agreement: Prior to approval of an improvement plan, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City for inspection of the required improvements. 121. Subdivision Improvement Agreement: The subdivider shall enter into a subdivision agreement for the completion and guarantee of improvements required. The subdivision agreement shall be on a form acceptable to the City. 122. Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions to outline the maintenance of the common facilities. These shall be subject to the review and approval of the Director of Public Works and the City Attorney. IMPROVEMENT SECURITIES 123. All improvement securities shall be of a form as set forth in Development Code Section 16.68.090, Improvement Securities. 124. Submit an engineer's estimate of quantities for public improvements for review by the Director of Public Works. 125. Provide financial security for the following, to be based upon a construction cost estimate approved by the Director of Public Works: o Faithful Performance: 100% of the approved estimated cost of all subdivision improvements. o labor and Materials: 50% of the approved estimated cost of all subdivision improvements. o One Year Guarantee: 10% of the approved estimated cost of all subdivision improvements. This bond is required prior to acceptance of the subdivision improvements. o Monumentation: 100% of the estimated cost of setting survey monuments. This financial security may be waived if the developer's surveyor submits to the Director of Public Works a letter assuring that all monumentation has been set. OTHFR nOCIIMFNTATION 126. Tax Certificate: The applicant shall furnish a certificate from the tax collector's office indicating that there are no unpaid taxes or special assessments against the property. The applicant may be required to bond for any unpaid taxes or liens against the property. This shall be submitted prior to placing the map on the City Council Agenda for approval. 127. Preliminary Title Report: A current preliminary title report shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works prior to checking the map. 128. Subdivision Guarantee: A current subdivision guarantee shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works with the final submittal of the Map. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 19 Prior to isslling a hllilding permit 129. The Final Map shall be recorded with all pertinent conditions of approval satisfied. Prior to isslling a certificate of occllpancy 130. All utilities shall be operational. 131. All essential project improvements shall be constructed prior to occupancy. Non- essential improvements, guaranteed by an agreement and financial securities, may be constructed after occupancy as directed by the Director of Public Works. 132. Prior to the final 10% of occupancies for the project are issued; all improvements shall be fully constructed and accepted by the City. MITIGATION MEASURES SEE MITIGA TION MONITORING PROGRAM. S:ICommunity DevelopmenllPROJECTSITIMICreekside TIM 23461CC TIM & PUD Reso.doc t ATTACHMENT 17 October 18, 2006 RECEIVEf.J / CITY 8F AR~OYO SHf\;.;OE City of Arroyo Grande 214 East Branch Street Arroyo Grande, Ca 06 OCT 19 PN 2: 22 Re: CITY COUNCIL HEARING ON REVISED CREEKSIDE PROJECT Dear Honorable Council Members: Weare the owners of the warehouse at 415 East Branch Street. We have and currendy support the proposed project surrounding our property. DB& M Properties has been " trying for a very long time to satisfy the city and we think that they have more than paid their dues in trying to satisfy your requests. We feel that some of the other neighbors have made too many negative comments and that it is unfair to give them so much sway in the process. It is a good project and will enhance the entire village as well as preserve the barn as you always wanted. We have seen the revised office building architecture and believe that fits very well with the project as a whole. Further, we would like to emphasize that Ms. Camay Arad and her husband do not represent our views whatsoever and have very often made comments and suggestions for revisions that we completely disagree with. We like the project without any more additional changes. Please put our rights as landowners in perspective as you grant your approval Tuesday night. Very truly yours, / /. ./' t:;~~~ ~~~ Adair and Trudy Brown 9.b. CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE CIT COUNCIL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING On TUESDAY, OCTOBER 24, 2006, the Arroyo Grande City Council will conduct a public hearing at 7:00 P.M. in the COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 215 E. BRANCH STREET to consider the following item: CASE #: Amended Conditional Use Permit 06-002. .;, The Council will consider a request by the applicant for design changes "tothe previously approved' project: Proposed revisions include'relocating the building footprint approximately 10 feet to the east, relocation of an Oak tree(s), increase in final building height (3 to 4 feet) and a modified landscape plan. .", PROPOSAL: LOCATION: 1400 W. Branch Street APPLICANT: American Properties Management (Gary White/Stephen Cool) STAFF CONTACT: Kelly Heffemon, Associate Planner The Council may also discuss other hearings or business items before or after the item listed above. If you challenge the proposed action in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing ,described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. Failure of any person to receive the notice shall. not constitute grounds for any court to invalidate the action. of the legislative body for which the notice was given. Information relating to these items is available by contacting the Arroyo Grande Community Development Department at 473-5420. The Council meeting will be televised live on Charter Cable Channel 20. ~/UL- ity Clerk - Publish n, The Tribune, Friday, October 13, 2006 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: CITY COUNCIL ROB STRONG, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR~ SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF AMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 06-002; HAMPTON INN AND SUITES PROJECT LOCATED AT 1400 W. BRANCH STREET OCTOBER 24, 2006 DATE: RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council: 1) adopt attached Resolution approving Amended Conditional Use Permit Case No. 06-002 modifying condition of approval number 23 for the Hampton Inn and Suites Hotel, including relocation of one additional existing mature oak and an amended landscape plan as requested; and 2) authorize the Mayor to execute a revenue sharing agreement to provide a reimbursement of $250,000 over a five year period in transient occupancy tax revenue generated from the project. FUNDING: It has been estimated that the Hotel could generate $200,000 to $250,000 in annual transient occupancy tax revenue to the City upon completion based on its projected occupancy. In order to increase economic feasibility of the project, it is recommended that the City enter into a revenue sharing agreement with the applicant, which would provide a reimbursement of $50,000 per year for five years from the transient occupancy tax revenue generated from the project. DISCUSSION: Backqround On August 14, 2006, the Architectural Review Committee (ARC) recommended approval of final grading and landscape plans, which included shifting the Hotel building approximately ten (10') feet west (toward Grand Estates) to accommodate three mature oaks near the front entry (Trees 9,10 and 11) on the original site plan (Attachment 1). Additionally, oak trees #1 and #2 in the center of the parking lot and in front of the restaurant were to be protected in place. Oaks #7 and #8 within the Hotel building footprint were determined appropriate and feasible for transplanting and five oaks. Trees #3, #4, #5, #6 and #12, also in the building footprint and the latter in an essential driveway, were determined infeasible and inappropriate for relocation. Based on the field review by City and consulting arborists as well as the Directors or Parks, Recreation and Facilities and the Community Development Director, it is recommended that these five trees (#3, #4, #5, #6 and #12) be required to be mitigated with 36" and 48" box replacement oak trees to be integrated into the landscape plan. CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF AMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 04-009 HAMPTON INN AND SUITES PROJECT LOCATED AT 1400 W. BRANCH STREET OCTOBER 24, 2006 PAGE 2 On October 2, 2006, the ARC was requested to review revised site and landscape plans for the project after it was determined that the building relocation to the west would cause major additional retaining walls along the western property line and substantially increase costs. It was also determined by the project applicants that the size and number of specimen trees and other plantings included in the ARC approved landscape plan made the project economically infeasible, as well as unnecessary slope bank walls which could otherwise be matted and landscaped for erosion control for improved aesthetics and cost reduction. However, returning the building to its original approved location requires the relocation of at least one of the three oak trees (#9) adjoining the Hotel entry walk and near the porte-cochere. The proposed location would maintain the three tree cluster by placement of #9 in front of #10 and #11, about 45 feet to the southeast. While the ARC continued to be supportive of the project, they neither approved nor denied the revisions. Instead, they reinforced their earlier recommendations and suggested these changes be considered by the City Council since they are based more on economic policy considerations rather than design issues (Attachment 2). An alternative site plan preferred by the applicant would have required all three trees (#9, #10 and #11) to be relocated or removed to enable the front entry porte-cochere to be centered and replacement oaks to be distributed into the yards and parking lot planting areas. Additionally, the revised plans and the alternative architectural plan were not sufficiently detailed for comparison of design alternatives. Further study of Hotel basement and entry modifications were suggested to avoid transplant of the oak tree or increases to building height, but the cost savings of proposed changes might be offset by additional grading and/or reengineering time delays. Without more information, the ARC wanted Council decision on the "structural necessity" of the requested changes. Subsequent discussions between staff, the property owner and the project architect have resolved that relocation of oak tree #9 to allow the building placement as originally approved is the least substantial change providing the same design concept, but reduced costs (due to avoidance of additional retaining walls). After further study, the architect does not believe that changing the building elevation would provide significant cost savings from reduCed excavation because it would also require additional site grading and time to reengineer the plans. The revised and more economical landscape plan is also in substantial conformity to the preliminary Planned Development approval, despite reduction in the sizes and numbers of shrubs and trees proposed. Staff will present a comparison of the approved and revised landscape plans at the meeting to indicate the changes outlined in the following table: CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF AMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 04-009 HAMPTON INN AND SUITES PROJECT LOCATED AT 1400 W. BRANCH STREET OCTOBER 24, 2006 PAGE 3 Common Name Size Quantitv Gain or Loss Bougainvillea 5 gallon - 104 Rosemary 1 gallon +3 Rosemary 1 gallon +975 square feet Coast Rosemary 5 qallon -21 Strawberry Tree 24" box -8 European Olive 24" box -2 European Olive 36" box -3 European Olive 48" box -3 Coast Live Oak 24" box -16 Coast Live Oak 36" box +4 Coast Live Oak 48" box +6 Coast Live Oak 60" box -2 Coast Live Oak 72" box -1 Staff believes that the revised landscape plan, although reduced, is adequate and will provide an attractive setting for this major landmark building. The relocation of oak tree #9 appears unavoidable considering its configuration and the need for access between the porte-cochere and front entry, as well as providing for the concept of screening the large building with the three-tree cluster. The revised plan complies with oak tree mitigation for the five removed and includes relocation of three large oaks to parking lot planters or yard areas adjoining the Hotel. The only clarifications or changes to the City Council approved Resolution No. 3867 (Attachment 3) involve the table following condition number 23. In that table, tree #6 was proposed for "transplant" despite its "poor" condition and arborist recommendation to remove it; tree #8 was proposed for "removal" despite its "good" condition and arborist recommendation to save it; and tree #9 was proposed to be saved despite its "poor" vigor and condition and arborist recommendation for possible removal. It is apparent that trees #6 and #8 were incorrectly identified but that the intent was to transplant the good tree #8 and remove the poor tree #6. Tree #9 is one of the poorest vigor and condition trees, but was part of the three-tree cluster in front of the entry. If the Council is willing to consider a large specimen oak tree replacement rather than transplanting this marginal existing mature multi-trunk oak, an appropriate configuration with better shape, size and health could be an aesthetically and economically equivalent alternative. The City Council minutes of July 26, 2005 indicate that the Council directed that trees #5a, #6, #7, #7a, and #12 be transplanted if feasible. However, subsequent surveys by the consulting arborist conclude that transplant of tree #12 is not feasible. In addition, tree #7a was determined to be exempt due to its small size. CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF AMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 04-009 HAMPTON INN AND SUITES PROJECT LOCATED AT 1400 W. BRANCH STREET OCTOBER 24, 2006 PAGE 4 Therefore, the table in condition number 23 is now recommended to provide as follows and as itemized in the attached Exhibit 'A': Trees #1, #2, #10 and #11 - Save in place. Trees #3, #4, #5, #6 and #12 - Remove with 3:1 mitigation with 36" and 48" box. Tree #7a - Remove without mitigation (exempt due to small size). Trees #5a, #7, #8 and #9 - Transplant (or #9 replace with select specimen oak). These table clarifications are the only apparent amendment to existing conditions of approval of Conditional Use Permit Case No. 04-009, per the attached resolution. None of the conditions of approval (other than as outlined above) would be altered by the revised landscape and grading plans. Therefore, staff recommends that these proposed modifications should be approved if the City Council concurs. In response to concerns identified by the. applicant regarding the current economic feasibility of the project, staff requested a copy of the project's pro forma, which was reviewed by the City's redevelopment consultant. Based on his preliminary analysis, it was confirmed that the proposed economic assistance is justified to increase the feasibility of the project when combined with cost reductions from the proposed changes. According to the City's redevelopment legal firm, a recent legal case determined that financial assistance does not trigger prevailing wage requirements on a project if the assistance is minimal. The funding assistance recommended for this project is within the same range of percentage of total costs as the project that was the subject of the court case. Therefore, staff believes this action can be taken without triggering prevailing wage requirements for the construction pf this project. ALTERNATIVES: 1) Adopt attached Resolution approving Amended Conditional Use Permit Case No. 06-002 modifying condition of approval number 23 for the Hampton Inn and Suites Hotel, including relocation of one additional existing mature oak and an amended landscape plan as requested, and authorize the Mayor to execute a revenue sharing agreement providing for $250,000 in transient occupancy tax revenue over a 5-year period. 2) Approve amendment to the conditions of approval, but do not approve funding assistance. 3) Approve funding assistance, but not the amendment to conditions of approval. 4) Provide comments and direction to staff from the City Council and refer other alternatives or proposed changes back to the ARC or Planning Commission for further recommendations. 5) Deny the proposed revisions without prejudice and request that the applicant pursue the project proposals as originally approved or provide more detailed information on the structural necessity and cost implications of these design alternatives. CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF AMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 04-009 HAMPTON INN AND SUITES PROJECT LOCATED AT 1400 W. BRANCH STREET OCTOBER 24, 2006 PAGE 5 Attachments: 1) ARC notes dated August 14, 2006. 2) ARC notes dated October 2, 2006. 3) City Council minutes of July 26. 2005 and Resolution No. 3867 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING AMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 06-002 TO MODIFY CONDITION OF APPROVAL NUMBER 23 OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP CASE NO. 05-003 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN) CASE NO. 04-009 ALLOWING THE CONSTRUCTION OF A HOTEL AND RESTAURANT; LOCATED AT 1400 WEST BRANCH STREET, AS APPLIED FOR BY STEPHEN COOL AND GARY WHITE WHEREAS, on July 26, 2005, the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande adopted Resolution No. 3867 approving Tentative Parcel Map Case No. 05-003 and Conditional Use Permit Case No. 04-009 to construct a hotel and restaurant; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande has considered Amended Conditional Use Permit Case No. 06-002 filed by Stephen Cool and Gary White, to modify Condition of Approval Number 23; and WHEREAS, the City Council has held a duly noticed public hearing in accordance with the Development Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed and considered the information and public testimony presented at the public hearing, staff report, and all other information and documents that are part of the public record. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande hereby approves Amended Conditional Use Permit Case No. 06-002 modifying condition of approval number 23 of Conditional Use Permit (Specific Development Plan) Case No. 04-009, related to the construction of a hotel and restaurant; located at 1400 West Branch Street, applied for by Stephen Cool and Gary White, as shown in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all other conditions of approval outlined in Resolution No. 3867 remain in full force and effect. On motion by Council Member , seconded by Council Member and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 24th day of October 2006. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 2 TONY FERRARA, MAYOR ATTEST: KELLY WETMORE, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 3 EXHIBIT "A" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 23. The applicant shall supply a landscape/tree preservation plan, subject to approval by the Director of Parks, Recreation and Facilities and the Community Development Director. Proposed removal and mitigation of Oak trees shall be consistent with the following table: Irefl TRUNK HEIGHT CANOPY VIGOR CONDITION ARBORIST PROJECT t1 DIAMETER DENSITY RECOMMENDATION PROPOSAL 1 14.7" 20'-25' 75% Fair Good Save Save 2 38.-2" 50'+ 25%-30% Good Poor Remove Save 3 24.2" 20'-25' 80% Good Good Save Remove* 4 32.0" 20'+ 75% Fair Poor Remove Remove* 5 23.5" 15'-18' 15% Poor Poor Remove Remove* 5a** 5.2" at 18" 8' 100% Good Good No Transplant*** above Recommendation arade 6 4.0",5.2", 15' 90%-95% Good Poor Remove Remove* 6.0" 8.4" 7 11.2" 16'-18' 90%-95% Good Good Save T ransolant*** 7a** 1.2" at 18" 4' 15% Poor to Poor to fair No Remove above fair Recommendation without arade mitination**** 8 15.4" 20' 75%+ Fair Good Save Transolant*** 9 10.5",10.8", 20' 60% Poor Poor Possibly Remove Transplant"* 13.0" 10 14.4" 14.5" 25'+ 75% Good Good Save Save 11 11.0" 20' 80% Good Good Save Save 12 4.4",4.9", 10' 100% Good Good Save Remove* 5.8" 6.0" SUMMARY OF PROJECT TREE CONDITIONS * Mitigation at 3:1 with specimen trees per City selection; Replacement trees shall be a minimum of 36-inch box, 50% of trees to be replaced shall be 48-inch box. * * A sapling in the initial arborist report, now considered a tree in the addendum. * * * Transplant to locations shown on revised landscape plan * * * * Remove without mitigation: small size exempt from mitigation requirements ARC NOTES AUGUST 14, 2006 PAGE 3 ATTACHMENT J . The Tuscany style is not compatible with the Village Design Guidelines, including the columns and arches. It might be okay for Grand Avenue. . Ms. Barneich noted she did not care for the purple color on the new sign proposal. . Mr. Peachey added that the individual lettering didn't fit the Village - most stores have some sort of signboard as a background. . Keeping the building intact (instead of demolishing a portion for parking) is okay. Mr. Frassica responded that he was disappointed the committee didn't like it, since he tried so hard to create a nice building. He apologized for not returning with architectural changes, noting this is his first experience with a commercial building and he thought when the project manager spoke with Mr. Strong regarding the building configuration and parking alternatives that all of the architectural, material and color changes would be okay without the need to return to ARC. . Chair Hoag responded that in his opinion the building color is okay, but not the arches above the windows nor the columns at the entryway. . Mr. Severance gave a heartwarming character reference on behalf of Mr. Frassica, requesting project approval and noting the unapproved changes were unintentional. . Mr. Strong described the changes that he approved administratively - retaining the entire building and accepting in-lieu parking fees. He saw the square rather than rectangular windows, but didn't note any entry columns, arches or color changes. He didn't recall any other progression of different drawings, but offered that if the ARC requires revision in design, color or materials, they could be phased in over time to help with financial challenges. . Kristen Barneich moved and Michael Peachey seconded recommendation of denial to the Community Development Director for ASP 06-016 with the following comments: . The applicant can take the above comments about using a signboard and return with a new proposal, or use the originally approved sign plans. Motion approved: 3/0 voice vote; Gary Scherquist abstained. Kristen Barneich moved and Michael Peachey seconded that the architectural changes from the approved plans are not acceptable and the former design is preferred as it's more in keeping with the Design Guidelines. . Discussion: Mr. Strong asked for clarification if the items he approved administratively still stand, particularly the smaller square rather than rectangular windows and not doing the proposed building demolition. Consensus was that those administratively approved plans are acceptable (as shown on t.he building plans). The arches, faux painted columns, entry features and Tuscan style aren't approved. The applicant is welcome to return with a redesign. Motion approved: 3/0 voice vote; Gary Scherquist abstained. B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 04-009, DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT CASE NO. 05-008, AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP CASE NO. 05-003; APPLICANT - GARY WHITE; REPRESENTATIVE - KEVIN HOBBS, TUTTLE ARCHITECTS; LOCATION -1400 W. BRANCH STREET. Rob Strong presented the staff report. In response to Chair Hoag's request for clarification on what ARC's focus should be, Mr. Strong replied it's mostly the planting plan in terms of oak relocation and removal, and grading and retaining wall site preparation. ARC NOTES AUGUST 14, 2006 PAGE 4 Kevin Hobbs, Robert Tuttle's architect/project manager, explained they need landscaping approval in order to start grading operations before the rainy season. Dale Hatfield, landscape architect, responded to prior comments by changing several plants and using drip irrigation at tops and bottoms of walls and around oak trees. Traditional irrigation was used in higher traffic areas (where the irrigation might be vandalized) for easier maintenance. Dave Ori, structural engineer, was present to answer questions. Bill McKenzie, civil engineer, discussed grading challenges, including parking (addressed by terracing), driveways and circulation. Jonna Otto, GeoSolutions engineer, designed the cuts and slopes, and checked grading stability. The walls are proposed to be cladding or erosion control matting over weathered sandstone to help stabilize the cut slope (to the north). The plantings on the wall will help prevent erosion. In response to Mr. Scherquist's request, Mr. Hobbs described the building architecture as a point of reference for the surrounding landscaping. He shared a colored rendering and four elevations, showing walls, grading, parking and ADA path of travel into the building. He also discussed the 3D model and changes from the Council project approval presentation. Michel Deffense, Slope Block company principal, described the wall system details, shared a cross section of the wall, shared photos of similar wall projects, and stated they won't even know it's there once plants have matured. It was noted the blocks would be laid out in an "alternating" (one block closed/one block open) pattern, which is easier for construction and adds more stability to the wall. The time for landscaping to fill in depends on several factors (number of plants, irrigation, etc.) He shared an example of the tan block. It's not as smooth as machine block, but not as rough as split face and they're spaced about 3 - 4.5" apart. . Mr. Hatfield noted the bottom vines should grow at least halfway up the wall in at least two years and the top plants cascade over. If they plant the middle, they'll need to irrigate, but the lower vines can cover the entire wall, rooting in the pockets. They plan to plant a grove of trees in the northeast corner for additional screening. . In response to Mr. Strong, Ms. Otto noted the wall or other erosion control would need to continue all the way up. (It couldn't stop halfway, then start again.) It's more stable to plant the entire slope. Also, there's a drainage area with gravel behind the wall, which may make the upper drainage swale unnecessary. . In response to Mr. Peachey, Mr. McKenzie noted there wasn't enough room to tilt the slope up and terrace it. . After discussion, ARC consensus was that it would be better to locate the a proposed bus turn-out somewhere else, due to slope constraints and aesthetics adjacent to the restaurant slope bank. . In regards to erosion control, Chair Hoag noted he would like zero fugitive sediment, to avoid sediment runoff into creeks as has happened with other projects. ARC NOTES AUGUST 14, 2006 PAGES . How close is the drip irrigation to the base of the oak trees? Plans just show the tubing at this point, and there will be emitters for each plant. . Why won't tree #12 be transplanted? Mr. Strong replied it's a multi-trunk and not judged to have healthy branches. It's a definite conflict where it is. Several more attractive box oaks could be purchased for the price of transplanting. o Mr. Hatfield further described the planting plan in detail, including oak placement, oak canopies, and plant species. . Mr. Scherquist expressed concern that rosemary draping over the drainage swalel "V ditch" might be cut off due to maintenance concerns. Mr. McKenzie noted that since there's a gravel course behind the wall and almost no area above, they might not even need it. Mr. Deffense noted it's a standard part of their plans, but not always required. Gary Scherquist moved and Kristen Barneich seconded to continue the meeting past 5:00 p.m. Motion approved: 4/0 voice vote. ARC questions and comments (continued): . Consensus was to eliminate the V ditch. . Is the Pink Winter Currant shrub meant to screen headlights? No, it's just for interest to break up the monotony of the slope planting. . Where is the Fire Department connection? Mr. Hatfield has a note on the plans that they will be screened. . In regards to the upper parking area, it needs additional landscaping. Mr. Hatfield noted that it was engineered that way, so he didn't have room to work with. Mr. Strong noted they couldn't eliminate spaces. Mr. White agreed that the restaurants interested in that pad have all dropped interest after finding insufficient parking per their individual chain standards. . Consensus was that trees should be added along the base of the north slope wall if possible. There's not enough room with the cantilevered footings. Mr. Hatfield did suggest some additional trees in the available areas to work with. . It's important that the correct plants be verified and planted according to the plans (for instance the more mildew-resistant varieties). . The parking lot wall should be planted with something that does well in shade. . Mr. Scherquist suggested adding a vine with color to the north slope wall for variation, such as red trumpet vine. That gets long vines that blow in the wind, but bougainvillea would work because it sends out roots to tack it in place. . Mr. Scherquist's biggest concern is the height of the north slope wall. Mr. Hatfield felt it wouldn't be seen until you're in that parking lot, since the trees will grow to screen it from the street. . It was appreciated that the building was moved west and a stem wall used to maintain existing landscaping. . Whereas Ms. Barneich was concerned with parking lot landscaping for aesthetics, Mr. Peachey was concerned with offsetting the heat island effect. . The planting palette is fine. . After further discussion, it was felt that the elimination of the V ditch would probably provide enough room to allow some trees (Canary Island Pines) to be planted at the ARC NOTES AUGUST 14, 2006 PAGE 6 base of the north slope wall. Mr. Hatfield added that any tree within 5' of concrete would have a root barrier. . It's important to maintain the health of existing trees, particularly not to over-water the oaks. . Mr. Scherquist suggested additional rosemary planted further down from the top of the north slope wall. Gary Scherquist moved and Michael Peachey seconded recommendation of approval to the Community Development Director for Hampton Inn final grading and essential landscape plans with the following conditions: . The design team shall study moving the north slope wall to allow for additional trees to be planted on the north side of the upper parking lot. . Add another course of rosemary (with irrigation) to be planted on the north slope wall partway down from the top (at the Landscape Architect's decision as to how far down to go). . The 10' parking lot wall (that slopes at the interior corner of the building) shall have vines that grow well in the shade included on the landscape plan. These shall continue all the way down the wall toward the restaurant. . Add two more 24" box oak trees - one at the pool end and one in between the pines at the north side of the upper parking lot. . Explore eliminating or relocating the V ditch at the top of the north slope wall. . ARC feels the bus turnout is inappropriate at this location and supports relocation to a more appropriate location. There is too much of a grading problem here and it would have significant visual impacts on the project. Motion approved: 3/0 voice vote. Consensus on the block wall color and material was that it was acceptable as is. III. DISCUSSION ITEM: . RE: Robasciotti buildinQ at Traffic Way and East Branch: Chair Hoag noted he likes the way it's turning out. Gary Scherquist agreed. o Michael Peachey noted that the windows facing Lemos aren't symmetrical. The smaller right-hand window is positioned slightly higher than the longer left-hand window. . RE: Billboard on E. Branch Street: Consensus for the record is that ARC does not like the billboard. IV. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 6:25 p.m. ,) ;.~ ATTACHMENT 2 NOTES CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE MEETING OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ARC) MONDAY, OCTOBER 2,2006 I l, I i ) ..--- The meeting of the City of Arroyo Grande Architectural Review ~ittee was called to order at 2:30 P.M. by CommitteeVice Chair Scherquist. / ROLL CALL: Present were Committee Members Kristen Barneich, Michael Peachey, and Gary Scherquist. Chair Hoag arrived shortly after the first item started. Amy Miltenberger was absent. Her resignation was-a'nnounced effective November 2006. / APPROVAL OF NOTES: SeptembeF'11, 2006 . Pg. 1, under Roll Call, ctra'nge to, "Amy Miltenberger was absent and Gary Scherquist 1;"rrived late." Kristen Barneich mo a and Michael Peachey seconded approval of minutes. Motion approved: 3/0 vo' vote I. PUBLI OMMENT: Rob C . ,Neighborhood Services Coordinator, discussed the sign code and requested tha omplaints be directed to John King or himself to track and follow-up on. II. PROJECTS: A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 06-002, DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT CASE NO. 05-008, AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP CASE NO. 05- 003; APPLICANT - GARY WHITE; REPRESENTATIVE - ROBERT TUTTLE, ARCHITECT; LOCATION -1400 W. BRANCH ST. Associate Planner Jim Bergman presented the staff report. This project was originally approved by and will return to Council, but it was felt they would want ARC's feedback. Gary White spoke in support of the project, noting costs have increased dramatically and lenders won't fund it. Final plans will be ready by the Council meeting. ARC had the following comments and questions: . ARC discussed the changes, noting they would have liked to have: 1) more detailed sets of landscape plans; 2) renderings that show the building moved 10' over, and 3) site sections to show the height increase. . In regards to landscaping, o Oak tree #9 may need to be removed and/or relocated. o Mr. White shared tree photos taken earlier today. o Which oaks are staying where they are? Three or four trees. o ARC would like to retain the look of the oak tree cluster at the entrance. o ARC was concerned about reviewing the design and not overstepping their position by getting involved with the economic aspect of the project. ARC DRAFT NOTES SEPTEMBER 11, 2006 PAGE 2 o While it was felt this is a project that Council wants, at the same time they referred to Council minutes noting concern over tree loss. o Before going to City Council, applicants should consider redesigning the rear area around oak tree #9 with some minor modifications. o Some relocated oaks might not thrive once transplanted. If it's a cost issue, it might be better to get trees that grow taller faster. . How will the grading change save money? The savings isn't so much on the grading itself, but the fill on the slope and engineered retaining walls. The height change is a grading quantity and export issue. Warren Hoag moved and Kristen Barneich seconded deferral of a new recommendation on the requested changes, retaining the previous ARC recommendation until additional information is presented on the economic realities of what landscaping can be saved (or not) and until City Council makes a policy decision on tree removal and building height. Discussion: Instead of "economics", use the term "structural necessity". ARC is looking for City Council to confirm that the changes are necessary as part of the City's overall economic development strategy, since economics isn't ARC's purview. Warren Hoag revised the motion and Kristen Barneich agreed to defer a new recommendation on the requested changes, retaining the previous ARC recommendation until additional information is presented on the structural necessity of what landscaping can be saved or not and until City Council makes a policy decision on tree removal and building height. Motion approved: 4/0 voice vote. B. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 06-007, and ADMINISTRAT SIGN PERMIT CASE NO. 06-021; APPLICANT - STELLA CASA; REPR TATIVE - LAN GEORGE; LOCATION -130 E. BRANCH STREET. Assistant Planner Jim Bergman presented the staff report. Lan George (owner), Tom Nielsen (contractor), and Signs) described and spoke in support of the projec Beauchamp (Southpaw ARC had the following comments and ques' s: . Siqnaqe: It shouldn't be backlit. Iiere shouldn't be individual letters attached to the fac;:ade. It should be on Ignboard. It's too modern as proposed. The font should be more historic. ;;. e current sign isn't historic per staff. . Facade: / o Where will too dimensional foam be used? To outline the top and define the buildiflf1 as separate from next door. o Are )'YmdOWS being tinted for glare? It's so product won't fade in the sun. o ARC members preferred removing the top projection instead of stucco, but ~ue to Ms. George's concerns about cost, agreed it could be readdressed after one year in business, to allow her to recoup opening costs. ATTACHMENT 3 CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES JULY 26, 2005 PAGE 4 ./ Mayor Ferrara opened the public hearing and invited comments from those in the.J.Udience who wished to be heard on the matter. No public com ments were received and t~ayor closed the public hearing. /' J Mayor Pro Tem Costello moved to introduce an Ordinance as .farrows: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDf;-AMENDING CHAPTER 15.04 OF TITLE 15 OF THE ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAvcODE ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THOSE CERTAIN CODES KNOWN AND DESIGNATED AS THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING STANDARDS CODE, INCLUDING THE 9AUFORNIA BUILDING CODE, CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE, CALIFORNIA PLl!D/IBING CODE, CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE, THE 1997 EDITIONS OF THE UN!pO'RM HOUSING CODE, UNIFORM CODE FOR THE ABATEMENT OF DANGEROUS.ptlfLDINGS, AND THE UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, WHICH SHALL ALSO INCJ..UDE THE APPENDICES TO THE 1997 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM BUILDING COpE AND THE 2000 EDITIONS OF THE UNIFORM PLUMBING AND MECHANICAL COD!;.s:" AND SUCH CODES, AS AMENDED, SHALL BE THE UNIFORM BUILDING LAWS THE CITY". Council Member Arnold seconded, and the motion carried on the following ro all vote: Costello, Arnold, Guthrie, Dickens, Ferrara None None *9.C. Consideration of Development Code Amendment 05-008; Tentative Parcel Map 05- 003 and Conditional Use Permit (Specific Development Plan) No. 04-009; Application - Gary White; Location -1400 W. Branch Street. Assistant Planner Bergman presented the staff report and recommended the Council adopt a mitigated Negative Declaration and introduce an Ordinance amending the zoning map to designate the subject property as Planned Development (PD1.1), and adopt a Resolution approving Tentative Parcel Map 05-003 and Conditional Use Permit (Specific Development Plan) Case No. 04-009, allowing the construction of a hotel and restaurant. Staff responded to questions from Council concerning trees proposed to be removed; clarification that the project would go back to the Architectural Review Committee for final approval of colors and materials (Condition of Approval #16); whether the City could require larger street trees and whether there were provisions to require the developer to provide a bond for landscaping; proposed mitigation measures relating to water conservation; and comparative water usage between a hotel use and the previously approved office use. Mayor Ferrara opened the public hearing and invited comments from those in the audience who wished to be heard on the matter. Bob Tuttle, project architect, noted that this was the third presentation of the project to the City Council and the project had been revised to address a number of issues which had previously been raised. He displayed renderings of the proposed project and reviewed revisions that had been made to the project. Steve Ross, member of the Board of Directors of the Arroyo Grande Chamber of Commerce, stated that this project represents an excellent opportunity for the City as it would provide additional revenue to the City through transient occupancy tax and it would provide an excellent hotel and restaurant in the community. CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES JULY 26, 2005 PAGE 5 PeQQY Harlan, Arroyo Grande resident, inquired what the traffic impacts would be on W. Branch Street and how the City was going to mitigate those impacts. She commented that she was glad the City was addressing the water issue. She also inquired what the impact would be to the adjoining motel. No further public comments were received and Mayor Ferrara closed the public hearing. Council Member Dickens responded to public comments concerning traffic impacts, noting that traffic mitigation measures had been addressed at a previous meeting, and that a traffic signal would be required at W. Branch Street and Camino Mercado. With regard to the impact to the existing motel, he commented that from an economic standpoint, locating hotels next to each other was good. He agreed with the Chamber of Commerce's position that a hotel is a good use for this site. He expressed concerns; however, with the proposed size, scale, and intensity of use of the proposed project and. stated he could not support the three-story hotel as designed. He noted that a two-story hotel at this location would be more appropriate and that if the number of units were reduced,it would help to address the water issue. He felt that the proposed negative declaration does not adequately address additional water mitigation measures for a project that would generate such a large amount of water usage. He also suggested that the project could be reconfigured and redesigned around all of the existing trees. He concluded by stating that traffic impacts would also be reduced if the size of the hotel were reduced. Council Member Arnold supported the project as proposed. He commented on a number of win- win scenarios such as the generation of additional transient occupancy tax for the City and a hotel that would benefit other businesses in the City. He stated that the proposed hotel is in an area where there are other large buildings, such as the Levitz Furniture store and the Five Cities Center. He commented that the applicant had done a good job of mitigating the loss of oak trees by moving the building, and that existing trees and proposed landscaping would help to screen the mass of the hotel. Council Member Guthrie commented on the comparisons between the previously approved office project versus the proposed hotel project as it related to size and scale and traffic impacts; supported the access from Camino Mercado instead of W. Branch Street; expressed skepticism regarding the amount projected for transient occupancy tax revenue; however, he agreed that a hotel use would be a good addition to the City's tourism program. He commented that the pluses of the project outweighed the minuses; that moving the building back from W. Branch Street has improved some of the scale issues; commented on the water availability issue; and also stated that the project will pay impact fees for traffic that could be applied to the Brisco interchange project. He stated he could support moving forward with the project. Following additional questions regarding trees on the site, and also the timing of required traffic signalization, Mayor Pro Tem Costello stated that this site was a perfect place for a hotel and he did not find its size to be a problem. He expressed concerns about water and stated he was willing to approve this project if conditions are included requiring adequate water availability. He acknowledged that the traffic signal would improve traffic circulation; supported tree mitigation replacement measures at a 3:1 ratio; and concluded that he could support the project based on the condition of water availability and tree replacements provided at the appropriate ratio with large trees. CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES JULY 26, 2005 PAGE 6 Mayor Ferrara agreed with Mayor Pro Tem Costello with regard to adding a condition of approval regarding the acquisition of an additional water source. He commented that he was not comfortable with relying on water conservation as a mitigation measure. He spoke about the need to consider water impacts as a whole, citywide; not on a project-by-project basis. He spoke about cumulative impacts as it relates to consumption. He suggested that prior to building permits being issued, the City should have confirmation from Oceano Community Services District regarding the purchase of additional water. He agreed that traffic impacts had been discussed at length; spoke about the restoration of Proposition 42 funds for future capital improvements; and acknowledged that traffic signalization at Camino Mercado would be required prior to building permits being issued. He commented that while economics are important, it is not the sole factor for approving a project. He stated that the services a particular project can provide for the community should be considered and the City needs lodging and meeting facilities. He stated he had mixed feelings about the size and scale of the project. He suggested that additional window treatments be utilized on the fiat pane windows. He suggested that a condition of approval be added that architectural treatment, fac;:ade, or shadow box be required on flat plane windows to add more dimension. He referred to the soil type on the site as it relates to landscaping and noted that landscaping and irrigation should be monitored closely. He noted that this was a difficult site with its changes in elevation and stated it would be important to monitor this project closely to ensure the project is built as presented. He stated with additional conditions, he could supp ort the proj ect. Council Member Arnold moved to adopt a Resolution as follows: "A RESOLUTION' OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 05-003 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN) CASE NO. 04-009, ALLOWING THE CONSTRUCTION OF A HOTEL AND RESTAURANT; LOCATED AT 1400 WEST BRANCH STREET, AS APPLIED FOR BY STEPHEN COOL AND GARY WHITE", as amended to include the following conditions of approval: 1) that additional adequate water is available prior to issuance of building permits and conditioned by the approval by the City Council of a contract for Well No. 10 and an Agreement signed with Oceano Community Services District for the purchase of water; 2) that trees Sa, 6, 7, and 12 are transplanted and that mitigated trees are a minimum of 36" box with a minimum 50% of them 48" or larger; 3) that a 2 year landscape monitoring bond (after final of the project) is provided; and 4) that the south elevation has additional window and wall treatments. Mayor Pro Tem Costello seconded the motion. In order to clarify the motion with regard to the conditions of approval, City Attorney Carmel noted the following modifications to the Resolution: Condition of Approval #120 would be modified to add the following text: "Two Year LandscapelTree Replacement Guarantee: 100% of the estimated cost of all landscaping improvements, including but not limited to mitigation replacement and relocated trees as determined by the Parks, Recreation and Facilities Director." Condition of Approval #124 would be added to state: "Prior to issuance of building permits, a contract for the construction of City Well NO.1 0 shall be fully approved by the City and an agreement with the Oceano Community Services District for additional water supply shall be approved by the City." CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES JULY 26, 2005 PAGE 7 Condition #23 and 25 shall be modified to state that mitigation trees shall be a minimum of 36" boxed and 50% of those shall be 48" boxed. The motion carried on th e following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Arnold, Costello, Guthrie, Ferrara Dickens None Council Member Arnold moved to introduce an Ordinance as follows: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE AMENDING THE ZONING MAP .TO DESIGNATE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 1.1 - (PD-1.1); DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 05-008, INITIATED BY THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1400 WEST BRANCH STREET". Mayor Pro Tem Costello seconded, and the motion carried on the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Arnold, Costello, Guthrie, Ferrara Dickens None Mayor Ferrara called for a recess at 9:40 p.m. The Council reconvened at 9:50 p.m. 9.d. Continued Public Hearing - Consideration of Specific Plan Amendme'1t~01; Applicant - S & S Homes; Location - Southwest Corner of Courtlan -'Street and East Grand A venue. Mayor Ferrara declared a conflict of interest due to ownership of real pro ty located within 500 feet of the subject location, and stepped down from the dais. Mayor P. Tem Costello took over as Presiding Officer. Assistant Planner Foster presented the staff report and ommended the Council adopt a Resolution amending the Berry Gardens Specific Pia 0 allow mixed-use development of Subareas 3 and 4. Staff responded to questions f. Council relating to issues concerning reciprocal access and easements between Subar 3 and 4; development standards for mixed use projects relating to maximum b~i~~~~' ts; zoning; water use and cumulative water impacts; and traffic circulation and pro?:' .provements. Mayor Pro Tem Costello opened ttle public hearing and invited comments from those in the audience who wished to be heard d1i the matter. Ruth Matsumoto Dea. ow ~ubarea 3, stated she was not opposed to the concept of the Specific Plan. She add sed concerns with issues affecting her property related to costs she would have to incu or Subarea 4 to proceed with their development. She stated she had questions regard' access to utilities. She stated that there was access to utilities from her property and $Is ed if she could access those utilities without tearing up E. Grand Avenue. She comment~(hat she does not intend to develop her property now and asked if the Council would allow yerto come back with a development proposal. She asked if a Farmer's Market would be ary-allowed use on her property (staff responded that it would be an allowed use with a .conditional Use Permit). In response to another question, staff responded that there would be no RESOLUTION NO. 3867 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP OS.Q03 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (SPECIFIC DEVE!-OPMENT PLAN) CASE NO. 04-009, ALLOWING THE CONSTRUCTION OF A HOTEL AND RESTAURANT; LOCATED AT 1400 WEST BRANCH STREET, AS APPLIED FOR BY , STEPHEN COOL AND GARY WHITE WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande has considered Tentative Parcel Map Case No. 05-003 and Conditional Use Permit (Specific Development Plan) Case No. 04-009 filed by Stephen Cool and Gary White, to create two parcels and construct a 103 room hotel consisting of 61,366 square feet and a 6,000 square foot restaurant on a 2.68 acre site; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Arroyo Grande reviewed the proposed Tentative Parcel Map and Specific Development Plan / Conditional Use Permit, at a duly noticed public hearing on May 17, 2005, in accordance with the Development Code of the City of Arroyo Grande at which time all ,interested persons were given the' opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission ,reviewed and considered the information and public testimony presented at the public hearing, staff report, and all other information and documents that are part of the public record and adopted a Resolution recommending the City Council approve Tentative Parcel Map 05-003 and Conditional Use Permit 04-009 ; and , WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed and considered the information and public testimony presented at. the public hearing, staff report, and all other information and documents that are part of the public record; and . ! WHEREAS, the City Councii 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 based on the initial study and findings has determined that a Mitigated Negative Declaration can be adopted; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds, after due study, deliberation and public hearing, the following circumstances exist: FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL Tentative Parcel Map: 1.' The proposed tentative parcel map is consistent with goals, objectives, policies, plans, programs, intent and requirements of the Arroyo Grande General Plan, as well as any applicable Speci~c Plan, and the requirements of Title 16. 2. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed due to the . property being 2.68 acres in size and consists of moderately sloping topography. RESOLUTION NO. 3867 PAGE 2 3. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development due to the . size of the property and the character of surrounding development and existing and planned infrastructure. 4. The design of the tentative parcel map or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat as documented in the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration. 5. The design of the hotel and restaurant is not likely to cause serious public health problems due to the project's compliance with all applicable design standards of the Municipal Code. 6. The design of the tentative parcel mal? will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through. or use of, property within the proposed tentative parcel map or that altemate easements for access or for use will be provided, and that these alternative easements will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. 7. The discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into an existing community sewer system will not result in violation of existing requirements as prescribed by . Division 7 (commencing with Section 13000)" of the California Water Code. 8. Adequate public services and facilities exist or will be provided as the result of the proposed tentative parcel map to support project development and have been documented in the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration and associated engineering and traffic study. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL Conditional Use Permit Findings: 1. The proposed use is permitted within the Planned Development PD-1.1 districts pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.16.050 of the Municipal Code, and will. through conditions of approval, comply with all applicable provisions of the Municipal Code, the goals and objectives of the Arroyo Grande General Plan, and the development policies and standards of the City. 2. The proposed use will not impair the integrity and character of the district in which it is to be established or located because the proposed hotel and restaurant is similar to and compatible with surrounding uses. 3. The site is suitable for the type and intensity of use or development that is proposed because all the necessary easements, circulation, parking and setbacks . would be provided. . 4. There are adequate provIsions for water, sanitation; and public utilities and services to ensure the public health and safety as documented in the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration and associated engineering and traffic study. 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 because the RESOLUTION NO. 3867 PAGE 3 proposed project would hot create adverse environmental impacts as determined through the development and implementation of the Mitigated Negative Declaration. . Required CEQA'Findings: 1. The City of Arroyo Grande has prepared an initial study pursuant to Section 15063 of the Guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), for Specific Development Plan I Conditional Use Permit (Specific Development Plan) No. 04- 009. 2. Based on the initial study, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for public review. A copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and related materials is located at City Hall in the Community Development Department. 3. After holding a public hearing pursuant to State and City Codes, and considering . the record as a whole, the Planning Commission recommends and the City Council adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and' finds that there is no substantial evidence of any significant adverse effect, either individually or cumulatively on wildlife resources as defined by Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code or on the habitat upon which the wildlife depends as a result of development of this project. Further, the City Council finds that said Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the City's independent judgment and analysis. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande hereby adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approves Tentative Parcel Map 05-003, to create two parcels; and approves Conditional Use Permit (Specific Development Plan) Case No. 04-009, allowing the construction of a hotel and restaurant; located at 1400 West Branch Street, applied for by Stephen Cool and Gary White with the above findings and subject to the conditions as set forth in' Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Be it further resolved, that this Resolution shall become effective on the effective date of Ordinance No. 568 (Development Code Amendment 05-008). On motion by Council Member Arnold, seconded by Council Member Costello, and by the following roll call vote, to wit:. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Council Members Arnold, Costello, Guthrie, and Mayor Ferrara Council Member Dickens None the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 26111 day of July 2005. . RESOLUTION NO. 3867 PAGE 4 TONY~ER~N --- ATTEST: /~ APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: ~~ ST 6fMs, CIT ANA~ER APPROVED AS TO FORM: / ~ RESOLUTION NO. 3867 PAGE 5 EXHIBIT "A" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 05-008; TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 05-003 AND SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN / CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 04'-009 1400 WEST BRANCH STREET . STEPHEN COOL AND GARYWHITE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT nFPARTMENT GFNFRAI CONDITIONS This approval authorizes the construction of a 103-room hotel consisting of 60,323 square feet and a 6,000 square foot restaurant of which 3,000 square feet is accessible by the public. 1. The applicant shall ascertain and comply with all Federal, State, County and City requirements as are applicable to this project. 2. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of approval for Specific Development Plan / Conditional Use Permit No. 04-009. 3. This application shall automatically expire on July 26, 2007 unless a building permit is issued. Thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the approval, the applicant may apply for an extension of one (1) year from the original date of expiration. 4. Development shall occur .in substantial conformance with the plans presented to the City Council at the meeting of July 26, 2005. 5. A. With regard to the Conditional Use Permit (Specific Development Plan), the applicant shall agree to 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 anyway 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 fee's 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. B. As a condition of approval of. this tentative or final map application, defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Arroyo Grande, its present or former agents, officers and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City, its past or present agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul City's approval of. this subdivision, which action is brought . within the time period provided for by law. This condition is subject to the provisions of Government Code Section 66474.9, which are incorporated by reference herein as though set forth in full. RESOLUTION NO. 3867 PAGE 6 DFVFI OPMFNT CODE Q. Development shall conform to the PD-1.1 zoning requirements except' as otherwise approved. 7. Signage shall be subject to the requirements of Development Code Chapter 16.60. 8. Setbacks, lot coverage, and floor area ratios shall be as shown on the development plans except as specifically modified by these conditions. NOISF 9. Construction shall be limited to between the hours of 7 a.m. and 5 p,m. Monday through Friday for noise and inspection' purposes. liGHTING 10. All lighting for the site shall be downward directed and shall not create spill or glare to adjacent properties or nearby residences. WATFR 11. All new construction' shall utilize fixtures and designs that minimize water usage: Such fixtures shall include, but are not limited to, low flow shower heads, water saving toilets, instant water heaters and hot water recirculating systems. Water conserving designs and fixtures shall be installed p~or to occupancy. ROI In W ARTF 12. . 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). PRlqR TO ISSUING A BUILDING PERMIT: 13. Final design of trash' enclosures shall be reviewed by the Architectural Review Committee and approved by the Community Development Director. 14. A landscaping and irrigation plan shall be prepared by a ,licensed landscape architect subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department and the Parks; Recreation & Facilities Department. The landscaping, plan shall include the following: a. Tree staking, soil preparation and planting detail; b. The use of landscaping to screen ground-mounted utility and mechanical equipment; c. The required landscaping and improvements. This includes: (1) Deep root planters shall be included in areas where trees are within five RESOLUTIC?N NO. 3867 PAGE 7 feet (5') of asphalt or concrete surfaces and curbs; . (2) Water conservation practices including the use of low flow heads, drip irrigation, mulch, gravel, drought tolerant plants and mulches shall be incorporated into the landscaping plan; and (3) An automated irrigation system. (4) The selection of groundcover plant species shall include native plants. (5) Linear planters shall be provided in the parking area. PRIOR TO ISSUING THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY: 15. Development shall comply with Development Code Sections 16.48.070, "Fences, Walls and Hedges"; 16.48.090, "Lighting"; 16.48.120, "Performance Standards"; and 16.48.130 "Screening Requirements". ARCHITFCTlIRAI REVIFW COMMITTFI= (ARC) 16. Final building colors, details. materials and landscaping plan shall be revi~wed by the Architectural Review Committee and approved by the Community Development Director. This approval is for mass, scale and site layout only. 17. 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 or Building and Fire Department to verify that colors are consistent with the approved color board. A 48-hour notice is required for this inspection. 18. All electrical panel boxes shall be installed inside the building. 19. All ducts, meters, air conditioning equipment, and other mechanical equipment, whether on the ground, on the structure or elsewhere, shall be screened from public view behind the parapets, or with materials architecturally compatible with the main structure. 20. . All parking spaces shall be paved and striped per City st~mdards. 21. All landscaping must be installed. PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS GENERAL CONDITIONS 22. The applicant shall comply with the. provisions of Ordinance No. 431, the Community Tree Ordinance. 23. - The applicant shall supply a landscape/tree preservation plan, subject to approval by the Director of Parks, Recreation and Facilities and the Community Development Director. Proposed removal and mitigation of Oak trees shall be RESOLUTION NO. 3867 PAGE 8 consistent with the following table: Tree TRUNK HEIGHT 'CANOPY VIGOR CONDITION ARBORIST PROJECT 11 DIAMETER DENSITY RECOMMENDATION PROPOSAL 1 14.7" 20' -25' 75% Fair Good Save Save 2 38.2" SO'+ 2S%-30% Good Poor Remove Save 3 24.2" 20'-2S' 80% Good Good Save Remove' "4 32.0" 20'+ 75% Fair Poor Remove Remove' 5 23.5" 1S'-18' 15% Poor Poor Remove Remove' 5a*' 5.2" at 18" . 8' 100% Good Good No Transplant'" above Recommendation arade 6 4.0",5.2", 15' 90%-95% Good Poor Remove Transplant'" 6.0" 8.4" 7 11.2" 16'-18' 90%-9S% Good Good Save Transolant'" 7a" 1.2" at 18" 4' 15% Poor to Poor to fair No Transplant'" above fair Recommendation orade 8 15.4" 20' 75%+ Fair Good Save Remove' 9 10.5",10.8", 20' 60% Poor . Poor Possibly Remove Save 13.0" 10 14.4" 14.5" 25'+ 75% Good Good Save .Save 11 11.0" 20' 80% Good Good Save Save 12 4.4",4.9", 10' 100% Good Good Save Transplant'" S.8" 6.0" SUMMARY OF PROJECT TREE CONDITIONS * Mitigation at 3: 1 with specimen trees per City selection; Replacement trees shall be a minimum of 36-inch box, 50% of trees to be replaced shall be 48-inch box ** A sapling in the initial arborist report, now considered a tree in the addendum. *** Transplant to locations shown on final ARC approved landscape plans PRIOR TO ISSUING THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY: 24. Linear root barriers shall be used at the front. of the project to protect the sidewalks: 25. All street front trees shall be 24-inch box. POLlCF nFPARTMENT PRIOR TO ISSUING A BUILDING PERMIT: 26. The applicant shall submit an exterior lighting plan for Police Department approval. RESOLUTION NO. 3867 PAGE 9 . PRIOR TO ISSUING THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY: 27. The applicant shall install a security system per Police Department guidelines, and . pay the Police Department alarm permit application fee. 28. The applicant shall post handicapped parking, per Police Department requirements. RlIn DING AND FIRE DEPARTMENT GENERAL CONDITIONS 29. The project shall comply with the most recent editions of the Califomia State Fire and Building Codes and the Uniform Building and Fire Codes as adopted by the City of Arroyo Grande. 30. The project shall provide complete compliance with State and Federal disabled access requirements to the public right-of-way. 31. The project shall have a fire flow of 1,700 gallons per minute for a duration of four (4) hours. 32. . Any review costs generated by outside consultants shall be paid by the applicant. PRIOR TO ISSUING A BUILDING PERMIT: 33. The applicant shall show proof of properly abandoning all non-conforming items such as septic tanks, wells, underground piping and other Lmdesirable conditions. 34. County Health Department approval is required for food service occupancies. 35. The applicant shall pay water meter, service main, distribution. and availability fees, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time bf building permit issuance. 36. The applicant shall pay the Water Neutralization fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 37. The applicant shall pay the Traffic Impact fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 38. The applicant shall pay the Traffic Signalization fee, to be based on codes and . rates in effect at the time of building- 'permit issuance, offset by the cost of signalization improvement plans prepared for Camino Mercado and West Branch Street. RESOLUTION NO. 3867 PAGE 10 39. The applicant shall pay the Sewer hook-up & facility Permit fees, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 40. The applicant shall pay the Building Permit fees, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 41. The applicant shall pay the Strong Motion Instrumentation Program (SMIP) fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance in accordance with State mandate. .42. The applicant shall pay the Fire Protection fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 43. The applicant shall pay the Police Facilities fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance. PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY: 44. All fire lanes must be posted and enforced, per Police Department and Fire Department guidelines. 45. Prior to occupancy, all buildings must be fully sprinklered per Building and Fire Department guidelines. 46: An opticom traffic signal pre-emption device shall be installed that meets Building . and Fire Department requirements at the new signal at Camino Mercado and West Branch Street. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT All Public Works Department conditions of approval as listed below are to be complied with prior to recording the map, unless specifically noted otherwise. GENERAL CONDITIONS 47. Clean all streets, curbs, gutters and sidewalks at the end of the day's operations or as directed by the Director of Community Development or the Director of Public Works. 48. Perfotn:! construction . activities during normal business hours (Monday through Friday, 7 A.M. to 5 P.M., except City ~olidays) for noise and inspection purposes. The developer or contractor shall refrain from performing any work other than site maintenance outside of these hours, unless an emergency arises or approved by the Director qf Public Works. The City may hold the developer or' contractor responsible for any expenses incurred by the City due to work outside of these hours requiring City inspection." IMPROVEMENT PLANS 49. All project improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the City of Arroyo Grande Standard Drawings and Specifications. RESOLUTION NO. 3867 PAGE 11 50. Submit four (4) full-size paper copies and one (1) full-size mylar copy of approved improvement plans for inspection purposes during construction. 51. Submit as-built plans at the completion of the p~oject or improvements as directed by the Director of Public Works. One (1) set of myli'lr prints and an electronic version on CD in AutoCAD format shall be required. 52. The following Improvement plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil . Engineer and approved by the Public Works Department . Grading, drainage and erosion control, . Street paving, curb, gutter and sidewalk, . Public utilities, . Water and,sewer, . Landscaping and irrigation, . Any other improvements as required by the Director of Public Works, 53. The site plan shall include the f?"owing: . The location and size of all existing and proposed water, sewer, and storm drainage facilities within the project site and abutting streets or alleys. . The location, quantity and size of all existing and proposed sewer laterals. . The location, size and orientation of all trash enclosures. . All existing and proposed parcel lines and easements crossing the property. . The location and dimension of all existing and proposed paved areas. . The location of all existing and proposed public or private utilities. 54. Improvement plans shall include plan and profile of existing and proposed streets, utilities and retaining walls. 55. Landscape and irrigation plans are required for landscaping within the public right of way, and shall be approved by the Community Development and Parks and Recreation Departments. In addition, The Director of Public Works shall approve any landscaping or irrigation within a public right of way or otherwise to be maintained by the City. WATER 56. The applicant shall loop a water main through the site and connect to the water main underneath West Branch Street and the water main underneath Camino Mercado, 57. All on-site water mains and fire hydrants shall be public. The applicant shall dedicate the appropriate easements to the City. The easement shall be a minimum 15' wide, 58. The applicant shall install fire hydrants along Camino Mercado, West Branch, and on site to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works and the Fire Chief, 59. The applicant shall install a double detector check valve with fire department connection to serve the fire sprinkler system. The location shall be subject to the approval of the Fire Chief, RESOLUTION NO. 3867 PAGE 12 60. Construction water is available at.the corporate yard. The City of Arroyo Grande does not allow the use of hydrant meters. , 61. The hotel and restaurant buildings shall have separate water meters. 62. Existing water services to be abandoned shall be properly abandoned and capped at the main per the requirements of the Director of Public Works. 63. The applicant shall. complete measures to neutralize the estimated increase in water demand created by the project by either: . Implement an individual water program consisting of retrofitting existing high-flow plumbing fixtures with low flow devices. The calculations shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for review and approval. The proposed individual water program shall be submitted to the City Council for approval prior to implementation; OR, . . The applicant may pay an in lieu fee of $2,200 for each new residential unit equivalent. SEWER 64. Each parcel shall be provided a separate sewer lateral. 65. All sewer mains shall be a minimum 8" in diameter with a minimum slope of .5%, 66. . All sewer laterals within the public right of way must have a minimum slope of .2%. 67. All sewer mains or laterals crossing or parallel to pUblic water facilities shall be constructed in accordance with California State Health Agency standards. 68. Existing sewer laterals to be abandoned shall be properly abandoned and capped at the main per the requirements of the Director of Public Works. 69. Obtain approval from the South County Sanitation District for the development's impact to District facilities prior to final recordation of the map. 70. The applicant shall extend a public sewer main on-site from the sewer main underneath Camino Mercado. This sewer main shall connect at a manhole. 71. The applicant shall dedicate the appropriate easements' to the City. The easements shall be a minimum 15' wide. 72. The applicant shall obtain a will serve letter from the South San Luis Obispo . County Sanitation District prior to applying for a building or grading permit. SOUTH SAN I IllS ORISPO r.OlINTY SANITATION nISTRIr.T r.ONnITIONS OF APPROVAl 73. . The developer shall be required to mitigate the impacts on the trunk sewer line by 'contributing the project's fair share to tlie installation of a new trunk replacement line or providing a relief line. PUBLIC UTILITIES 74. Underground all new public utilities in accordance with Section 16.68.050 of the Development Code. RESOLUTION NO. 3867 PAGE 13 75. Underground improvements shall be installed prior to street paving. . ' 76. The applicant shall have obtained all utility company signatures on the . improvement plans prior to the final submittal, 77. Submit all improvement plans to the public utility companies for approval and comment. Utility comments shall be forwarded to the Director of Public Works for approval. 78. Prior to approving any building permit within the project for occupancy, all public utilities shall be operational. STREETS 79. The applicant shall overlay West Branch Street from gutter to gutter across the project frontage, . 80. The applicant shall overlay Camino Mercado from gutter to gutter across the project frontage, 81. All trenching in City streets shall utilize saw cutting. Any over cuts shall be cleaned and filled with epoxy. 82. All street repairs shall be constructed to City standard~_ 83. Street structural sections shall be determined by an R-Value soil test, but shall not be less than 3" of asphalt and 6" of Class II AB. CURB; GUTTER. AND SIDEWALK , 84. Utilize saw cuts for all repairs made in curb, gutter, and sidewalk. 85. The driveways shall adhere to all applicable City standards, 86. Install tree wells for all trees planted adjacent to curb, gutter and sidewalk to prevent damage due to root growth. 87. The applicant shall remove and replace any cracked or.broken curb, gutter and sidewalk along the Camino Mercado frontage, 88. The applicant shall remove and replace any cracked or broken curb and gutter along the West Branch frontage, 89. The applicant shall install sidewalk along the West Branch frontage, 90. The applicant shall install a wheelchair ramp at the northeast comer of Camino Mercado and West Branch, 91. The applicant shall remove and replace the spandrel at the northeast corner of Camino Mercado and West Branch, GRADING 92. . Perform all grading in conformance with. the City Grading Ordinance. 93. Submit an updated preliminary soils report to the soils report prepared for the previous project. All earthwork design and grading shall be performed in accordance with the approved soils report. RESOLUTION NO. 3867 PAGE 14 94. Submit all retaining wall calculations for review and approval by the Director of Public Works for walls not constructed per City standards. 95. The improvement plans shall be subject to the review of the Coastal San. Luis Resource Conservation District. The applicant shall reimburse the City for the review by the Coastal San Luis Resource Conservation District. 96. The applicant shall obtain a WDID No. from the Regional Water Quality Control Board prior to issuance of a grading permit, EROSION CONTROL 97. The applicant shall prepare an erosion control plan for review and approval prior to issuance of a grading permit, 98. The applicant shall obtain a WDID No: from the Regional Water Quality Control Board prior to issuance of a grading permit, DRAINAGE 99. All drainage facilities shall be designed to accommodate a 1 OO-year storm flow. 100. All drainage facilities shall be in accordance with the Drainage Master Plan. 101. . The project is in Drainage Zone "C" and may drain to the creek through city facilities. 102. The applicant shall pr9vide detailed drainage' calculations indicating. that increas.ed run-.off can be accommodated by existing facilities and/or provide on- site retention basins, to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 103. All storm water drainage will be filtered prior to entering City facilities. 104. All storm water drainage will be conveyed through pipes to the City storm drain system. 105. The applicant shall replace both drop inlets along the project frontage with Camino Mercado with new City standard drop inlets. 106. The applicant shall remove the existing standpipe drain on-site. 107. All storm water drainage facilities will either: . Connect to the storm drainage facilities underneath Camina Mercado, or DEDICATIONS AND EASEMENTS 108. All easements, abandanments, .or similar dacuments to be recarded as a separate document, shall be prepared by the applicant an 8 1/2 x 11 City "standard forms, and. shall include legal descriptians, sketches, closure calculatians, and a current preliminary title report. The applicant shall be respansible far all required fees, including any additional required City processing. 109. A Public Utility Easement (PUE) shall be dedicated a minimum 6 feet wide adjacent to all street right .of ways. The PUE shall be wider where necessary for the installati.on .or maintenance .of the public utility vaults, pads, .or similar facilities. RESOLUTION NO. 3867 PAGE 15 110. Easements shall be dedicated to the public by separate document approved by the City, for the following: , . 15' sewer easement for the extension of the sewer main onto the site, . 15' water easement for the water main to be looped through the site. The easement shall entail anyon-site fire hydrants, PERMITS 111. Obtain an encroachment permit prior to performing any of the following: . Performing work in the City right of way, . Staging work in the City right of way, . Stockpiling material in the City right of way, . Storing equipment in the City right of way. 112. Obtain a grading permit prior to ,commencement of any grading operations on site. FEES 113.. Pay all required City fees at the time they are due. 114. Fees to be paid prior to plan approval: . Plan check for grading plans based on an approved earthwork estimate, · . Pial'] check for improvement plans based on an approved construction cost estimate, . Permit Fee forgrading plans based on an approved earthwork estimate, . Inspection fee of the improvements based on an approved construction cost estimate, 115. The applicant shall reimburse the City for the plan check fees for the previous project approved for the site, AGREEMENTS 116. Inspection Agreement: Prior to approval of an improvement plan, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City for inspection of the required . improvements. 117. Improvement Agreement: The applicant shall enter into an improvement agreement for the completion and guarantee of improvements required. The improvement agreement shall be on aforin acceptable to the City. IMPROVEMENT SECURITIES 118. All improvement securities shall be of a form as set forth in Development Code Section 16.68.090, Improvement Securities. 119. Submit an engineer's estimate of quantities for improvements for review by the Director of Public Works. 120. Provide financial security for the followi~g, to be based upon a construction cost estimate approved by the Director of Public Works: · Faithful Performance: 100% of the approved estimated cost of all required improvements. . Labor and Materials: 50% of the approved estimated cost of all required RESOLUTION NO. 3867 PAGE 16 improvements, · . One Year Guarantee: 10D/~ ofthe approved estimated cost of all required improvements. This security is required prior to acceptance of the improvements. . Two Year LandscapelTree Replacement Guarantee: 100% of the estimated cost of all landscaping and trees as determined by the Parks, Recreation, and Facilities Director. PRIOR TO ISSUING A BUILDING PERMIT 121. The improvement plans shall be approved with all pertinent conditions of approval satisfied.' PRIOR TO ISSUING A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY 122. All utilities shall. be operational. 123. All improvements shall be fully constructed and accepted by the City. 124. Prior to issuance of building permits, a contract for the construction of City Well No. 10 shall be fully approved by the City and an agreement with the Oceano Community Services District for additional water supply shall be approved by the City. MITIGATION MEASURES: A negative declaration with mitigation measures has been adopted for this project. The following mitigation measures shall be implemented as conditions of approval and shall be monitored by the appropriate City department or responsible agency. The applicant shall be responsible for verification in writing by the monitoring department or agency that the mitigation measures have been implemented. MITIGATION MFARIIRFR 1. The applicant shall complete measures to neutralize the estimated increase in water demand created by the project by either: Implementing an individual water program that utilizes fixtures and designs that minimize water usage. The calculations shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for review and approval., The proposed individual water program shall be submitted to the City for approval prior to implementation; or, Payment of an in lieu fee. Monitoring: Review of individual water program lOr payment of the in lieu fee Public Works Department Prior to issuance of building permit Responsible Department: Timeframe: RESOLUTION NO. 3867 PAGE 17 2. All new construction shall utilize fixtures and designs that minimize water usage. Such fixtures shall include, but are not limited to, water saving toilets, low flow showerheads, instant water heaters and hot water recirculating systems. Water conserving designs and fixtures shall be installed prior to final occupancy. Monitoring: Responsible Department:. Timeframe: Review of building plans Building and Fire Department Prior to issuance of building permit 3. The hotel shall participate in the "Project Planet Linens and Towels Reuse Program" or a similar program in scope and conservation.of water and energy. Monitoring: Responsible Department: Timeframe: Review of individual water program Community Development Department Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy 4. All landscaping shall be consistent with water conservation practices including the use of drought tolerant landscaping, drip irrigation, and mulch. To the greatest.extent possible, lawn .areas and areas requiring spray irrigation shall be minimized. Monitoring: Responsible Department: Timeframe: Review of landscaping and irrigation plans Parks and Recreation Department Prior to issuance of building permit 5. The applicant shall provide detailed drainage calculations indicating that increased run-off can be accommodated by existing facilities and/or provide on-site retention basins to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. Monitoring: Responsible Department: Timeframe: Review of grading plans Public Works Department Prior to issuance of a grading permit 6. During construction, water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used to keep all areas .of vehicle movement damp .enough to prevent dust from leaving. the site. At a minimum, this would include wetting down such areas in the later morning and after work is completed for the day and whenever wind exceeds 15 miles per hour. RESOLUTION NO. 3867 PAGE 18 7. Soil stockpiled for/ more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation. 8. Permanent dust control measures identified in the revegetation and landscape plans should be implemented as soon as possible following completion of any soil disturbing activities. 9. Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading should" be sown with fast-germinating native grass seed and watered until vegetation is established. 10. All vehicles hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance. between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with CVC Section 23114. (This measure has the potential to reduce PM 1 0 emissions from this source by 7-. 14%). 11 . Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site. (This measure has the potential to reduce PM 10 emissions from this source by 40~ 70%). ,12. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent. paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water should be used where feasible. (This measure has the potential to reduce PM'Q emissions from this source by 25- 60%). For Mitigation Measures No.6 - 12: Monitoring: Review of grading and building plans and site inspections Responsible Department: The Public Works and Building and Fire Departments shall inspect plans and spot check in the field Timeframe: Prior to issuance of grading permit and during construction 13. . Occupancy of the project will not be allowed until installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Camino Mercado and West Branch Street Monitoring: Responsible Department: Timeframe: Monitor installation of the traffic signal Public Works Department Prior to issuance of Certificate of RESOLUTION NO. 3867 PAGE 19 .occupancy 14. The applicant shall pay the City's Transportation Facilities Impact fee prior to issuance of building permit. Monitoring: Responsible Department: Timeframe: The applicant shall pay the fees Building & Fire Department Prior to issuance of building permit 15. The applicant shall retain an arborist during the grading and construction phases of the project to ensure tree protection measures are implemented. The recommendations outlined in the arborist report prepared for the project shall be followed. Monitoring: Responsible Department: Field inspection Parks & Recreation, Community Development Departments During grading and construction Timeframe: 16. Protective fencing shall be installed around each tree to remain at the dripline, or as directed in the field by the arborist. The fencing shall be installed prior to any site clearing or grading activities, and shall remain in place until. construction is complete, including landscaping. The fence shall be a minimum of 4' tall and supported by stakes at least every 10' on center. Weatherproof signs' shall be permanently posted on the fences. stating the following: Tree Protection Zone No personnel. eQuipment. materials. or vehicles are allowed Do Not move or remove this fence [Name of arborist or consultant) [Name and phone number of developer or general contractor) The Arborist of Record shall inspect the site prior to the start of any construction activities to determine that adequate tree protection measures have been implemented. Monitoring: Responsible Department: ,Field inspection Parks & Recreation, Community Development Departments Prior to issuance of grading permit Timeframe: RESOLUTION NO. 3867 PAGE 20 17. The arborist shall mark all trees to be removed with either colored ribbon or paint. Transplant trees per arborist's direction prior to site grading. Monitoring: . Field inspection Responsible Department: Parks & Recreation, Community Development Departments Timeframe: Prior to issuance of grading permit 18. The applicant shall submit written reports prepared and signed by the arborist stating that all tree protection measures have been met per the International Society of Arboriculture (lSA) Guidelines. Monitoring: Review of reports Responsible Department: Parks & Recreation, Community Development Departments Timeframe: Reports filed on a monthly basis commenCing after issuance of grading. permit 19. Removal of the oak trees shall be replaced in-kind or to City selection at a 3:1 ratio with a minimum size of a 24" box planted on-site. Monitoring: Review landscape plans/Field inspection Parks & Recreation Department Prior to occupancy Responsible Department: Timeframe: ' 20. The applicant shall pay the proportionate share of the impacts to the EI Camino Real Sewer upgrade and Walnut Street Sewer Upgrade. Monitoring: Responsible Department: Timeframe: The applicant shall-. pay the fees . . Public Works Department Prior to issuance of grading permit 21 . The following note shall be placed on the grading and improvement plans for the project: "In the event that during grading, construction or development of the project, and archeological resources are uncovered, all work shall ,be halted until the City has reviewed the resources for their significance. If human remains (burials) are encountered, the County Coroner (781-4513) shall be contacted immediately. The applicant may' be required to provide. archaeological studies and/or mitigation measures." RESOLUTION NO. 3867 PAGE 21 Monitoring: Construction plans shall be reviewed prior to issuance of a grading permit to ensure the note is in place. Public Works Department Prior to issuance of grading permit Responsible Department: Timeframe: . Additional Conditions 1. Prior to Certificate of Occupancy the applicants shall develop a parking, access, and maintenance agreement acceptable to the Director of Community Development and the Director of Public Works. . 2. The applicant shall install a City benchmark monument at the northwest corner of Camino Mercado and West Branch in accordance wi.th City standards. RESOLUTION NO. 3867 OFFICIAL CERTIFICA nON I, KELLY WETMORE, City Clerk of the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California. do hereby tertifyunder penalty of pe~ury, that Resolution No. 3867 is a true. full, and correct copy of said Resolution passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande on the 26th day of July 2005. WITNESS my hand and the Seal of the City of Arroyo Grande affixed this 28th day of July 2005. . l ,: il(J. "'(,'Ll?IL~ RE, CITY CLERK ,. 10.a. MEMORANDUM FROM: CITY COUNCIL ROB STRONG, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR AND -Rs DAN HERNANDEZ, DIRECTOR OF PARKS, RECREATION AND FACILITIES TO: SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF TRAFFIC WAY STREETSCAPE PLAN DATE: OCTOBER 24, 2006 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council consider the draft Traffic Way Streetscape Plan (TWSP), including street tree planting program by the Tree Guild and street restriping and future improvement plans prepared by Public Works and Community Development Departments for approval and implementation as recommended by the Parks and Recreation Commission and Traffic Commission. ( FUNDING: The costs of acquiring 20 new street trees is partially being funded py the Tree Guild through a $2,000 Urban Forestry grant, but City expenses such as excavation, deep root planters, sidewalk or parkway repairs and future irrigation and tree maintenance are not estimated at this time. Additionally, the costs of resurfacing or removal of existing striping and new striping and future curb, gutter, sidewalk, street pavement, crosswalks or other improvements are not yet determined. It is proposed that the TWSP proposals be considered, that the City Council preferred proposals be refined by staff, and a phased implementation program with cost estimates be returned to City Council for authorization of priority and follow-up improvements. DISCUSSION: Backaround The Parks and Recreation Commission initially discussed the TWSP at its February 8, 2006 meeting (Attachment 1). At that time, the recommendation was to recommend to the City Council approval of Phase 1 of the plan and to table other aspects of the plan pending meetings with concerned business owners who would be impacted along Traffic Way. The City Council supported the recommendation of the Commission in May of 2006 by authorizing a "Phase One street tree planting program" by the volunteer Tree Guild, including assistance from City Parks and Public Works staff to install ten (10) new street trees along Traffic Way and Station Way. These trees were installed in June of 2006. Due to concems from impacted businesses, the City Council postponed consideration of Phases Two and Three. The City Council requested that a draft Traffic Way Streetscape Plan be prepared to coordinate street tree planting, street restriping, and future improvement plans, and that this plan be presented to affected business and property owners along Traffic Way as well as the Parks and Recreation and Traffic Commissions for recommendations and possible refinements. Community Development CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF TRAFFIC WAY STREETSCAPE PLAN OCTOBER 24, 2006 PAGE 2 staff as well as members of the Tree Guild met with some, but not all of the business and property owners, along the affected street frontages and also conferred with Parks and Recreation, Public Works, Village Association and Traffic Commission. Due to concerns voiced by some of the business owners, the plans have been revised slightly. A memo highlighting their meetings, comments and concerns is attached (Attachment 2). On October 11, 2006, the Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed Phase 2 of the plan and recommended adoption of Phase Two implementation without adopting a timeline for implementation. Implementation of Phase 2 of the tree planting plan was discussed at this meeting and was agreed that since Parks staff currently lacks the resources to adequately maintain additional trees, planting is to be delayed until possible funding and additional resources can be discussed during the FY2006/07 budget process. Grant funding acquired by the Tree Guild requires installation of trees by October of 2007, thereby giving the City time to address maintenance concerns. Separately, City Council approved Public Works Department recommendations for restriping and reconfiguration of travel lanes on Traffic Way between Branch Street and Station Way to create adequate sight distance and better bike and pedestrian safety on the bridge. The TWSP modifies the recommendations previously approved. On October 16, the Traffic Commission also reviewed and unanimously supported the TWSP with a few added refinements to the recommended street restriping and improvement proposals. While the best traffic safety design would apparently be intersection signalization, it is not currently part of the Capital Improvement Program and would probably not be as high a priority project as the Traffic Way and Fair Oaks intersection. The less expensive TWSP improvements, such as restriping and reconfiguration with appropriate safety sign age and improved traffic safety design features, are immediate and interim alternatives. Proposals Generally, the TWSP proposes that Traffic Way and the northern portion of Station Way be restriped to include three rather than two or four lanes. This would enable on-street parking on both sides of Traffic Way, bike lanes on both sides, an adequate travel lane in each direction, and a two-way left turn painted median or dedicated left turn lane at each public street intersection. Specifically, this would improve bike and pedestrian safety across Traffic Way bridge and also enable better sight distance for the southbound traffic approaching the Station Way intersection. The restriping would maintain two travel lanes northbound and increase the width of all lanes, as well as provide minimum width bike lanes across the bridge to "buffer" the four-foot wide sidewalks. This reconfiguration also enables the stop bar at Station Way to move easterly and two painted right turn islands to be added to the new intersection to improve sight distance and safety channelization. The three lane configuration would enable more on-street parking and a recommended relocation of a vehicle drop box lane for supplemental post office use to serve northbound Traffic Way traffic. The new drop box lane would be located on the east side of the Traffic Way right of way between Station Way and Nelson Street. The TWSP also proposes future relocation of the crosswalk from Nelson Street to the Station Way intersection when the creek pathway along Arroyo Grande Creek is improved for Village Area pedestrian access to the new Post Office. The same three lane configuration would extend between Nelson and Poole Streets adjoining Firemen's Memorial Park and providing two-way left turn lane for numerous CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF TRAFFIC WAY STREETSCAPE PLAN OCTOBER 24, 2006 PAGE 3 private driveways as well as a left hand turn and median merge at the angled Bridge Street intersection mid-block. The current Post Office drop box island is proposed for relocation and the curb projections can be enlarged to a more substantial tree and landscaped area at the Bridge/TrafficlPoole junction where Traffic Way would transition to the existing four lane configuration. Between Poole Street and Allen Street the existing four lane configuration is needed for the Fair Oaks Avenue intersection capacity with the existing three way stops. With future signalization, it may be feasible to restripe this two block segment, as well as Fair Oaks Avenue between Traffic Way and Station Way or the freeway 101 off-ramp to a three-lane configuration with bike lanes on both sides. It is proposed that the TWSP be referred to Omni-Means for traffic engineering and traffic model analysis to review the safety and capacity of these design proposals. In either configuration, on-street parking on Fair Oaks Avenue is inappropriate. A short portion of Fair Oaks Avenue has been widened to an extent that could accommodate on-street parking, but this is undesirable due to friction with travel lanes and infeasibility of widening other segments approaching the freeway bridge. Thus, some reconstruction of the northeast comer of Station Way and Fair Oaks could allow for expansion of car sales display, while enforcing removal of vehicles from intended. sidewalk or parkway areas to the north and east adjoining Mullahey Ford. Future street trees could be a part of this future enhancement of Fair Oaks and Station Way, perhaps concurrent with signalization of Traffic Way and Fair Oaks Avenue intersection and possible future restriping to three lanes with bike lanes. In the block of Traffic Way between Allen Street and East Cherry Avenue, the existing four lane configuration should again transition to a new three lane section with a dedicated left turn lane at Cherry Avenue. As soon as possible, an additional lane of pavement is proposed to be added to the south edge of Cherry Avenue within the existing right of way, eliminating illegal shoulder parking. This additional lane would accommodate a right and a left turn lane westbound on Cherry Avenue, as well as"a new eastbound through lane. The new pavement would transition back to the restricted two lanes with no parking on either side east of the swim club parking lot driveway nearest Traffic Way. South of East Cherry Avenue, Traffic Way would be restriped to three lanes with the two way left turn painted median extended to the South Traffic Way intersection and the freeway 101 on and off-ramps. South Traffic Way would be reconfigured to provide a short left turn pocket, as well as right turn lane at Traffic Way intersection and the Freeway 101 on and off-ramps. The three lane configuration on Traffic Way would tend to slow northbound off-ramp traffic into a single travel lane and includes a new landscaped bulb-out and monument entry sign in front of the Mobil station between driveways. Another optional proposal of the TWSP is future reconstruction of the short segment of East Cherry Avenue between Traffic Way and Bedlow Lane from a dead end conventional street configuration into an employee parking area with a central two way aisle and diagonal parking spaces on both sides. Bedlow Lane is actually an alley, which does not have adequate width for parking or loading within the right of way, but does provide access to private parking or loading and connects to East Cherry and Fair Oaks Avenue. CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF TRAFFIC WAY STREETSCAPE PLAN OCTOBER 24, 2006 PAGE 4 While the TWSP would create significant enhancements to the Traffic Way corridor, implementation of all phases is recommended to be delayed pending allocation of funding for installation of new trees, as well as funding and manpower associated with the maintenance of additional trees. The Parks Division staff is currently lacking adequate resources to maintain additional trees proposed along Traffic Way. Staff will be proposing funding for increased maintenance for Traffic Way and Village trees during the 2007-08 budget hearings to begin in May. Grant funds awarded to the Tree Guild to assist in tree purchases stipulate that we have until October of 2007 to expend funds. Staff is recommending implementation of additional tree planting be delayed until after budget approval expected in June 2007. Street restriping across the Traffic Way bridge including Station Way, Nelson Street, Bridge Street and Poole Street intersections would be implemented as soon as possible following Omni Means review and funding for estimated restriping costs. ALTERNATIVES: 1) It is recommended that the City Council consider the Traffic Way Streetscape Plan (TWSP), including street tree planting program, for approval and implementation as recommended by the Parks and Recreation Commission and Traffic Commission; 2) Provide direction to staff. Attachments: 1. Parks and Recreation Committee meeting minutes from February 8, 2006 2. Memo from Community Development 3. Revised site plan .-------_.._._.._~..,........: . MINUTES CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 2006, 6:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 215 E. BRANCH STREET ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA 1. CALL TO ORDER AND FLAG SALUTE: The Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Commission met in regular session. Chairperson lanneo presided and led those present In the Flag Salute. . 2. ROLL CALL: Commissioner Scott. Harrison, Commissioner Philip Lozano, Vice Chairperson Ron Addison, and Chairperson Pamela lanneo were present. Commissioner Donna Wefald was absent. Attending staff included Parks, Recreation and Facilities Director Daniel Hernandez, and Administrative Secretary Kitty Norton. 3. MONTHLY REPORT/ITEMS OF INTEREST: Reports of January 12 and January 26, 2006, were reviewed without comment. , . , Director Hernandez advised the Commission that the Soto Sports Complex received the Park Operations and Maintenance Award for outstanding sports facility from District 8, which encompasses San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara and Ventura counties. He stated one of the reasons the complex was recognized was due to its use of well and recycled water. ' Director Hernandez also stated the complex had been seiected by Little League to host the district championships, which 'Will mean 500 children at the complex for one week in July. Chairperson lanneo asked Director Hernandez to congratulate the field maintenance crew for a job well done. 4. MINUTES OF JANUARY 11. 2006: Chairperson lann'eo called for a motion to approve the minutes of January 11, 2006. Commissioner Lozano identified a typographical error at the top of page 3, the word "submitted.". . Upon molion/second by Commissioners Lozano/Harrison the minutes of the January 11, 2006, Parks and Recreation Commission meeting were approved with the correction on page 4. The motion passed unanimously. 5. CITIZENS' INPUT, COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS: Cynthia Eklund, 1040 Fair Oaks Avenue, spoke about the benefits of a dog park. She spoke about being cited for leash law violation and felt she and her friends were being driven out of a park in Grover Beach called Costa Bella Park. Ms. Eklund distributed information about dog parks in California to the Commission: Commissioner Lozano asked Director Hernandez if there was a dog park in Grover Beach. Director Hernandez stated Ms., Eklund had mentioned the Grover Beach park called Costa Bella Park, which was co~sidered an unofficial dog park. Commissioner Lozano stated he felt several of the Commissioners had an interest in locating some property where a dog park could exist and suggested the walking area behind the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital. Director Hernandez stated that a proposal had been made to develop that area. He did not think there was any land dedication except for the creek easement, which would not be very usable. Director Hernandez stated there were other proposals coming forward but none with any useful areas for a dog park. Commissioner Lozano confirmed that any area used would need to be fenced. Director Hernandez stated that was preferabie. Commissioner Lozano asked if there ATTACHMENT 1 , I-'ARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES FEBRUARY 8. 2006 PAGE 2 6. .e.UBlIC HEARING ITEM: w" '" ~, '" A~", Gro,"" '" "'," '" ..., ." , '" ,,. 0'""", H',""",,, '."" 0, m" ... M, """' '" '"'"''' ""~ ,~ '_"" ", "'"' ", ." 0" '~""d", "''''' " ., "", ,"0,", "",,"~. H, ,."" , ~, """"'" ''''''' '" ''"'' 00,,,,,,,, ~, , '"''''' "'" .." " ., S,,, ","" 0","". '"'" ~, '''''''' '"'' ., '" '"' "" - -,,, '""'" m", "~,,, 0,,,,,,,, H,m,,",,, - .,,, ~'" 'ow """" " "" "'" ." m" 0", ""' ."'",",,,. '" .,,, "'" Wo,' "" " '"'''''' _ '" " " '"'' '" ". 000 &'''''' A~", Gro,"". ~''''' " ',oW" , ~" ,,,,,.,, " """ " ""''''Y "'""m" "", Woo" '" "'''''''' ". ., '"", ",,, " '''''k ""'" '" ""''''', """',,. H, ,."" 0' '-, ..., ... """'" Ow,,, _", " Aom", G""" '"" '"",,, '''''' "" '''''M,., """ """., "''' ., soo. OW,,, U''''k 0'""" H'"""" ,"," ." Woo" h", " b, "", " .,. ., 0,,,,, M,. S_, ",,,, '" "~'" , '" "". ""'"' " ... '''''' 0' _., ''"' ,,, i'" "'" A. ConSideration of a Tree Master Plan for Traffic Way 0'.."" H',"",",,, "" , ""', ,"''''ow " ,.. "'" ."'.. H, .."" , .., " '" ''''~'' 'm,,,,, '" "~,, ''''- b, 0, b, _".""" ''''' G"" D.""" H,,~~~ ." "'"m,," Oum ''''''. ~"' '" , '" b",,_~ M 'mm, Way. He intrOduced members of the Tree GUild. '"''' 0_,. 'eo s"", ""'. ,""" h, w~, m~."" '''' '''' G"" '"' w~ ''''' , .""~,,, ,,,.,,,,,. H, ,."" h, ""' hO, "''''roo", " """~,, """"W. " "" ". '''''''''M " lli, ""'" '- """" "". H, .M',. O''''~ H'''i,,",~ ,,, .W" "m, . m"" h;. 0, '''' G.". M, D_, _, h; """"., '00, ",,',' ." Wo'" ""'," "" '00_ m"" ""~, ,. "" W." H, """"" '0", , "., """" '" "" , ...." ""'''.'M ."'Wh;, ,", ''''' With the enhancement. "'mm'",,,,,~ C"",~ ""'Om,,, 0" ,", "''' M "" _""""" .. ""' W"', "" " 0, '" "'~,. M,. D_, '""" ,,,. 0_"",,, C,,~~ ~''" , ., ..." '" ,",", '" GO,", C,", No."'Y ~ro "" " eo_ ,. M,. 0_, '."" '''. M' "'" Currently there Was no funding for Phase 2 trees. 0'",,,,, H'mM'~ "" 0, '''' '''''"'''' h; '''''' , Wo,,, '" ""''''''" '" 0, '., G"" H, """ ,",.~. ~ .'""'~ ".""hO" ,,, eo"",,,, '"'' "'_ Was no current funding Or staff to maintain them. GO,", """,.",... ", '"'' H" ""'. '"''"''''' 0, .". '.'''' "'" ~, "'"'" · .. .." ",,""' " "",,, " "",,, - bo"",,,. S.. ,_ '''',' ., ""'.. benefits that trees prOVide as Well. O""m,,,,_ C,,~~ '"'' " ,", '" '" '''' , "",, " "" ."',_ . '''-'", how 0", """"''''' Woo" .. "'''''' b, ., _.. D.""" H'm".~ ,... ," 0, "",h;,,~,. ~ .., ~ """'" _., """, "'. '''C "'. ""', """ ",," H'''"", ~"', ''''. 0, '""'''''' " 0, 'm;"" '""""' ".., place. Moo,,,, H",,". ,"." W" '"'''''' -". '""""" ., ,", '"' """'''"' "'m '- .. -"'''' ", ., "," "'"' "''''". ''''. , 0000, "'m ~ , ''''.'' '"'m. ,.. "'" '"'" Wo,,, ., '''' """. "'" ""'_". '" ." 0,", , "'," moo "" " Wo,,, 0, ,," """ " .. "''''Ok, & ~'"'''. '" ,"" "'W "' w"', " W;"' Or storms. &. GO",,,,,,,, """',,",,, ,,_, "" ',"" W". 'W ,'" '","'. '" ." H, """ '""'''' '" """" "" "' ,.. '" ~". '"' "'''''''' ., w.w " ., ~" ... , ""'''''''' ,,, W, """"''' " w",. Mi. """""" '."" " ~, , "''' W" W, ,", ''', "'" h, WOO" '''''" ,-, '" .. ,","" " ''''' """".',," ,,_, ------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------- PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES FEBRUARY 8, 2006 PAGE 3 Mike Mullahey of Mullahey Ford, 330 Traffic Way, also did not support the plan. He stated he loved trees but felt in his situation they would not be helpful to his business. Chuck Fellows, 202 Canyon Way, supported the plan and stated he had the opportunity to observe an area in San Luis Obispo recently and noticed trees every several feet on Pacific Street. He stated in his opinion trees invite people; trees do not hinder business. Marie Cattoir, property owner of 401 Traffic Way, did not support the plan. She stated she felt aesthetics was taking precedence over safety and would result in punitive measures against the business owners. Mrs. Cattoir gave some history on property line problems relating to visibility. Gary Scherquist, Tree Guild member, stated he was an architect in Arroyo Grande and worked with Scott Dowlan and Kristen Barneich on the project so is a supporter of the project. He stated many concerns were considered before deciding where trees would be planted. He stated they planned to use root barriers and use deep watering procedures to prevent any sidewalk problems. He also stated all the locations for planting trees could be reviewed again. Commissioner Harrison stated trees would make Traffic Way a nicer area but felt that the business owners should have some say on where the trees were planted. Commissioner Lozano did not support the plan and stated he would hate to be involved with a city project where there would be dissension among property owners related to the project. He stated he was not convinced that trees were needed in areas where people had their businesses, especially if those people did not want them. Commissioner Lozano stated he felt the plan needed to be fine-tuned before he could support it. , Commissioner Addison confirmed that Phase 1 consisted of planting 12 trees. Director Hernandez stated there were eight trees being considered along Traffic Way and up to four trees at the Fire Station. Commissioner Addison asked if Phase 1 could be separated from the Master Plan, since those trees did not affect the businesses currently opposed to it. Director Hernandez stated the Commission could make any recommendation it wanted and gave an example. A discussion was held regarding how Phase 1 would affect Mr. Mullahey's business. Commissioner Addison stated he was in favor of proceeding with Phase 1. as long as there was no direct objection to it, and tabling Phases 2 and 3 since they were not funded. Chairperson lanneo commented that she walked the Traffic Way area every morning and had noticed things that needed attention. She also commented that she did not like the way Traffic Way looked when exiting the freeway onto Traffic Way from northbound 101. Chairperson lanneo'stated in her opinion there were many other things that needed attention on Traffic Way before the addition of trees. She stated she supported Phase 1 but felt more discussion should take place prior to Phases 2 and 3 being implemented. Commissioner Addison asked if it wouid be appropriate to approve Phase 1 without Phases 2 and 3. Director Hernandez stated the Commission was free to make any recommendation it felt necessary, and that information would be passed on to the City Council. Commissioner. Lozano stated he believed the business owners and the Tree Guild needed to discuss Phases 2 and 3 to see what they would like to do. Upon motion/second by Commissioners Lozano/Harrison it was recommended to the City Council to approve a Tree Master Plan for Traffic Way proposed by the Tree Guild PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES FEBRUARY 8, 2006 PAGE 4 to include the implementation of Phase 1 and to table Phases 2 and 3 until a consensus can be reached between the Traffic Way business owners and members of the Tree Guild. The motion passed unanimously. 7. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS/UPDATES Director Hernandez mentioned again to the Commission the District 50 Littie League would be hosting regionals at the Soto Sports Complex In July. The Parks and Recreation Commissioners; workshop would be held at Hearst Castle again on February 25"'. Please RSVP to Director Hernandez by February 1 tho Commissioners Lozano and lanneo stated they would attend. The Rotary Bandstand will be dedicated to the City of Arroyo Grande on February 23" at 11 :30 am. The dedication to the. community would take place on Saturday, February 25th Contact Brenda Barrow if Commissioners would like to volunteer in any way. Two tree removal permits had been issued: 242 McKinley (6" oak tree) and 529 Allen Street (large star pine). 8. ADJOURNMENT: Upon motion/second .by Commissioners Addison/Lozano, the meeting of the Parks and Recreation Commission was adjourned at 7:55 pm to the next scheduled meeting of March 8, 2006. . The motion passed unanimously. ~~J{f:~ON Attest: KITTY B. NORT 6.7!Y/~ ,ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY ~. ATTACHMENT 2 MEMORANDUM TO: PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION DAN HERNANDEZ, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION FROM: ROB STRONG, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ~ SUBJECT: TRAFFIC WAY STREETSCAPE PLAN DATE: SEPTEMBER 28, 2006 The City Council requested that the Tree Guild street tree planting proposals and Public Work~ Department's restriping proposals be coordinated and expanded into a Traffic Way "$treetscape" Plan, including Community Development Department proposals. Staff has . been able to meet with some, but not all of the business and property owners along the affected street frontages and the preliminary plans include some refinements and ~ alternatives which may be discussed and resolved during advisory reviews and public meetings. The first such public preview is scheduled for Parks and Recreation Commission regular meeting 6:30 p.m., Wednesday, October 11, 2006, at which time Assistant Planner, Jim Bergman, will present the plan and Kristen Barnich, of the Tree Guild. will explain their concept and proposals. Unfortunately both Rob Strong and Dan Hernandez will be out of town on that date, so presentation and response to questions may need to be continued. It would be beneficial for Parks and Recreation Commission to receive, review, and comment on the preliminary plans and to enable initial public and Tree Guild input. The first phase of ten (10) street tree planting was completed this spring/summer and the second phase grant enables an additional twenty (20) street trees this fall/winter. A third and final (future) fourth phase are also indicated on the plan, in part because of current constraints prevent earlier implementation and in some instances because implementation cannot be cooperatively pursued without future redevelopment of potential use and/or site planning and substantial new construction being accomplished concurrently. The presentation will explain some of these current constraints and concerns of several business and property owners as well as some apparent opportunities which will require further planning and design refinement. The intent of the preliminary plan is to facilitate discussion and input, particularly from the affected properties and other interested groups and advisory bodies. Parks and Recreation Commission comments will be reported to Traffic Commission, ARC, Planning Commission, and any other interested groups or individuals as the Traffic Way Streetscape Plan proceeds, including presentation of the proposed plan to the City Council at their October 24, 2006 meeting. ...;.<~ ". ""i. " ..~' '" >- z w :l; :r o ~ J. ..;{ - ~ ~~ , "lJ l~~JJ: .-- - ~ - 1"N ~ ~ ~ I- _~ t~ ") '" -.lJ '" !!...._ , ->. 3 ~ x. e #. L ~ ct u1 0:. III 1-"">- Q) U <...t-' 4- 1:i~< ' ': F~ ' ,I " '0,: ";' i. .j r ;,1 "'(1Nr,;~"9 ~"b",,,,y . , .. "'" c: cl ,WU.l "ll.'l '~ f- J" :.Ju.l ; " oj \9 <:( D- T I- ei o Z >- >--. Q ~ :3 .C U ~'-+- <l! ~ L .L D-- I- I I II ~". i ~', LJJ '-'J q: 0- I I I ; ! ~ :::J 0 Vi - \\"\l - ',; <I- ~, "'" 1\ ' .j'l ~ \l!I\'II,' Q) 0 , 1\': ,0.... 0 . :\,' ~ S ~L' "':::;" , <(i \) '\, ..1~ O. ... .,1 I:. IV I . ;,\1 I" Q) c )if L.d <<I- ~D-,. ' \ \ ~\ d [,'0,.-1 '1-\-",oN ""c::, !i!"'! 1'-.";', ib4 ,\'):I ..~A ~tll 'j ;~.~i,'_ ~ ! 4' ~ : , , ~ ~ ~ - ; . . 1 : , "';;'~c1 ,-\j.JD~1 u\,<li d<'>C::,