The URL can be used to link to this page

CC 2015-11-24_10a CUP_Medical Office Building MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: TERESA McCLISH, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR BY: MATTHEW DOWNING. ASSOCIATE PLANNER SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF LOT MERGER NO. 15-002, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 15-006, AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION; CONSTRUCTION OF AN APPROXIMATELY 45,000 SQUARE-FOOT, THREE-STORY MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING; LOCATION – NORTHWEST CORNER OF FAIR OAKS AVENUE AND WOODLAND DRIVE; APPLICANT – TRIPLE P, LLC; REPRESENTATIVE – STUDIO DESIGN GROUP DATE: NOVEMBER 24, 2015 RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends the City Council: 1. Adopt a Resolution adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approving the proposed project; and 2. Direct staff to maintain the gate closure on Woodland Drive. IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES: There are no direct impacts to financial resources associated with the proposed project. Construction of the project will result in short-term construction employment, as well as provide office space for new jobs; however, some of these permanent jobs may be due to relocation of existing businesses. BACKGROUND: Location Subject Property Walnut Grove AG Hospital Item 10.a. - Page 1 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF LOT MERGER NO. 15-002, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 15-006, AND DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 24, 2015 PAGE 2 The subject property is Phase II of an approved mixed-use project. The City Council approved Phase I of the project in 2006, which consists of the Walnut Grove residential subdivision across Woodland Drive to the east of the property. The site currently consists of four (4) lots that will need to be merged in order to accommodate the building. Due to the City Council’s approval of Phase I of the project, the project requires final approval by the Council. Pre-Application Review The applicant processed Pre-Application 15-002 in March and April of 2015 to obtain preliminary feedback from the Staff Advisory Committee (SAC) and the Architectural Review Committee (ARC) (Attachment 1). Topics addressed during the Pre-Application included fire access and hydrant placement, landscaping requirements, site coordination with Arroyo Grande Community Hospital as part of a hospital campus, and the skyline eucalyptus trees located on the site. Both the SAC and ARC were in support of the project concept at that time and the applicant has subsequently submitted a formal application for the project. Staff Advisory Committee The SAC reviewed the project on October 28, 2015. At that time, the SAC discussed various aspects of the project, including site and utility access, emergency access, and the opening of Woodland Drive. The SAC was in support of the project with conditions of approval included in the attached Resolution. Additionally, the SAC supports the opening of Woodland Drive for better connectivity of the City’s circulation system. Architectural Review Committee The ARC reviewed the project on September 21, 2015 (Attachment 2). Members of the ARC discussed the project’s site planning, architecture, building height and massing, landscaping and mitigation plantings for the Eucalyptus trees, and need for differentiated paving in areas where pedestrian walkways cross drive aisles. The ARC was in support of the project with conditions of approval included in the attached Resolution. Traffic Commission The Traffic Commission reviewed the project’s Traffic Impact Study and the potential opening of Woodland Drive (Attachment 3) on October 26, 2015. The Traffic Commission was in support of the project with limiting some or all access from Woodland Drive and recommending acceptance of the Traffic Impact Study. The Traffic Commission was not supportive of opening Woodland Drive, recommending the gate remain closed to through traffic due to concerns regarding additional traffic in a neighborhood without sidewalks and with narrow streets, due to heavy use of the area by pedestrians and children, and due to concerns regarding cut through traffic attempting to avoid the Fair Oaks Avenue and South Halcyon Road signalized intersection. Item 10.a. - Page 2 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF LOT MERGER NO. 15-002, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 15-006, AND DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 24, 2015 PAGE 3 Planning Commission The Planning Commission reviewed the project on November 3, 2015 (Attachment 4). The Planning Commission discussed the gate at Woodland Drive, the height of the building, parking, retaining wall design, traffic generation, site circulation and driveways. The Planning Commission recommended the City Council approve the project with additional/modified conditions, including:  Aligning the lower driveway on Woodland Drive with the northern Walnut Grove driveway;  Install an electric vehicle (EV) charging station;  Removal of condition requiring continuation of pedestrian and bicycle trail easement on site;  Additional review by the Architectural Review Committee for signage, lighting, and colors; and  Requiring the public utility easement to remain at six feet (6’). In a separate motion, the Planning Commission also recommended the gate on Woodland Drive remain closed to non-emergency response traffic. ANALYSIS OF ISSUES: Project Description The proposed project consists of merging four (4) existing lots for the construction of a 45,517 square-foot medical office building. The building is proposed to be three (3) stories and the main roof ridgeline would be slightly higher than forty-five feet (45’). Some architectural features of the building are proposed to extend beyond the 45’ height mark. The building is proposed to be located in approximately the center of the site surrounded by surface parking. A total of 183 parking spaces, including seven (7) motorcycle spaces are provided. General Plan The General Plan designates the subject property for Office Professional land uses. Development of a medical office building meets Objective LU4 of the General Plan Land Use Element, which states: LU4: Provide for a diversity of medical facilities and professional office uses to complement the character and serve the population of Arroyo Grande by designating as Office (O) appropriately located areas of the City. The proposed project is also consistent with Objective ED3 and Policy ED3-3 of the Economic Development Element as follows: Item 10.a. - Page 3 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF LOT MERGER NO. 15-002, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 15-006, AND DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 24, 2015 PAGE 4 ED3: Enhance business retention and expansion consistent with the General Plan Land Use Policies to promote and enhance baseline job opportunities within the City for local residents. ED3-3: Incorporate zoning regulations that promote infill development with opportunities for retaining and expanding businesses. Development Standards The subject property is zoned Office Mixed-Use (OMU) and is covered by the D-2.20 Design Development Overlay District – Medical Mixed Use. The objective of this overlay is to provide for sufficient land for the orderly development of Arroyo Grande Community Hospital and functionally related medical uses. A letter of support has been submitted from Arroyo Grande Community Hospital for the proposed project (Attachment 4). The development standards for the OMU district and the proposed project are identified in the following table: Table 1: Site Development Standards for the OMU Zoning District Development Standards OMU Zoning District CUP 15-006 Notes Maximum Density – Mixed Use Projects 20 dwelling units/acre None Not applicable Maximum Density Multi-family Housing 15 dwelling units/acre None Not applicable, met with Phase I Minimum Density 75% of maximum density None Not applicable, met with Phase I Minimum Lot Size 10,000 square-feet 103,852 square-feet Minimum Lot Width 100 feet 310 feet Front Yard Setback 0-10 feet 70 feet Rear Yard Setback 0-15 feet 140 feet Side Yard Setback 0-5 feet 90 feet Street Side Yard Setback 0-15 feet 80 feet Building Size Limits 35 feet or 3 stories, 50,000 square-feet max 45 feet 45,512 square-feet Height limitations may be increased by 15’ for nonresidential uses to allow for architectural screening (AGMC § 16.48.030), additional building height allowed with increases in Item 10.a. - Page 4 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF LOT MERGER NO. 15-002, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 15-006, AND DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 24, 2015 PAGE 5 setbacks Site Coverage and Floor Area Ratio 70% site coverage Floor Area Ratio: 1 15% site coverage Floor Area Ratio: .438 Off-Street Parking 1 space/250 sq. ft. gross floor area (180) 183, including 7 motorcycle spaces Motorcycle parking count toward fulfilling parking requirements In addition to the development standards of the OMU district, the site is required to comply with additional development standards of the D-2.20 overlay, including: 1. As specified in the underlying zoning district (OMU and identified above); 2. Three-story building components allowed only with substantial transitional space and/or lower story elements adjacent to residential districts or users; 3. Future hospital redevelopment shall include public transportation improvements (not applicable to proposed project); 4. Maximum building size may exceed the maximum standard of fifty thousand (50,000) square-feet specified in underling zoning district. The proposed project meets these additional requirements of the D-2.20 Overlay district, as recommended by the ARC. Access The project site would contain two (2) public access points from Woodland Drive on the northern portion of the site, adjacent to the Woodland Drive curb extensions. This portion of Woodland Drive was previously improved with the development of Walnut Grove and terminates near the north property boundary at an emergency access fence. The project is also proposing an access point to the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital site at the southwestern corner of the subject property. This assumes that the Hospital would allow the coordinated use of the existing driveway, which Hospital representatives have said they would be agreeable to. The Traffic Commission recommended vehicular access to the site be limited from Woodland Drive due to the impacts to residences in Walnut Grove and reduction of street parking resulting from the driveway entrances. Instead, the Traffic Commission recommended access to the site be provided from Fair Oaks Avenue or through the hospital from Halcyon. The applicant’s representative has stated that access from Woodland Drive is necessary for several reasons, including emergency vehicle access on and through the site and grade differentiations from Fair Oaks Avenue. The Planning Commission recommended that the Woodland Drive driveways remain and require the lower driveway to align with the northernmost Walnut Grove driveway for safety. Item 10.a. - Page 5 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF LOT MERGER NO. 15-002, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 15-006, AND DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 24, 2015 PAGE 6 The project proposes to include pedestrian connection between the project site and the Hospital, located in the middle of the western lot line. The project has been conditioned to include decorative paving where this connection crosses drive aisles. Traffic Additional traffic will be generated as a result of the proposed project. A Traffic Impact Study was completed as part of the project and was reviewed by the Traffic Commission (see Attachment E of Attachment 7). The Study found that of the twelve (12) intersections studied, all would operate at a level of service (LOS) C or better. This is in accordance with City policies and therefore no mitigation was required. Woodland Drive Gate Woodland Drive is gated just north of the project site and currently accommodates traffic generated by the Walnut Grove development. During the processing of Phase I of the project, concerns regarding commercial traffic traveling into the Cerro Vista/Alpine neighborhood resulted in the limited access to vehicles, but pedestrian and bicycle access is maintained. At that time, the City Council directed staff to investigate the opening of Woodland Drive to through traffic during processing of Phase II (Attachment 6). While the applicant is not requesting Woodland Drive to be opened, nor does the project require Woodland Drive to be opened, the issue is being highlighted as previously directed. The traffic study did evaluate the opening of the gate and found that some trips would be redirected through the nearby residential neighborhood; however, there were no significant impacts to the level of service of any of the studied intersections. The study did not evaluate the potential for cut through traffic as quantifiable data was not available to forecast how much cut through traffic would occur. As stated previously, the SAC supports the opening of the street due to the resulting Citywide benefit of an open circulation network and neighborhood connectivity. Additionally, there are public safety benefits associated with ease of access for emergency personnel and vehicular connectivity for private citizen during an emergency. However, the Traffic Commission and Planning Commission recommendations were to keep Woodland Drive closed to through traffic due to design of the residential neighborhood to the north (narrow streets, sporadic sidewalks), prevalence for walkers and children to frequent that neighborhood, and the potential for cut through traffic in the neighborhood. Parking As identified in the table above, the proposed project requires parking at a ratio of 1/25 0 square-feet of building space. The 45,517 square-foot building requires a total of 182 spaces. In response to concerns regarding parking made by the Planning Commission, the applicant has added one (1) additional space, for a total of 184 spaces. Motorcycle parking is required at a ratio of 1/25 required parking spaces, resulting in seven (7) motorcycle parking spaces, which count toward the overall parking requirement per the Municipal Code. Additionally, bicycle parking is required at a rate of 7.5% of the Item 10.a. - Page 6 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF LOT MERGER NO. 15-002, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 15-006, AND DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 24, 2015 PAGE 7 automobile parking requirement, which totals fourteen (14) bicycle parking spaces that are provided to meet this requirement. Architecture The building’s architecture will be similar to more modern healthcare buildings being constructed and include large amounts of glass, smooth and clean lines, tile and brick accents, and modern metal projections. The architecture will be a more modern interpretation of the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital architecture and provide transition from the hospital to Walnut Grove. The height identified for the building is three-stories reaching forty-five feet (45’). As mentioned previously, the D-2.20 overlay does allow for three-story building components with substantial transitional space or lower story elements. In this case, the applicants are including a large ground-floor entry with a trellis feature. The building will also include a lower story block element before transitioning to the large, expansive glass features of the building. The maximum building height for the OMU district is thirty-five feet (35’), which is measured from the average finished grade to the deck line of a mansard roof in accordance with the Municipal Code. The OMU building height is five feet (5’) less than the proposed height of the medical office building. Municipal Code Section 16.48.080 allows for building heights not to exceed forty-five feet (45’) for public buildings, schools, churches, and hospitals. The applicant has indicated that the office building will be part of the hospital campus, with hospital activities leasing approximately fifty percent (50%) of the office space within the building. The applicant has also pointed to Municipal Code Subsection 16.48.030.B.5. that allows for architectural projections to exceed the maximum building height by no more than fifteen feet (15’). These allowances should be considered in addition to increases in building size being permitted through the Conditional Use Permit review process. In exchange for this flexibility in height, the front, rear and side yards shall be increased one foot for each one foot by which the building exceeds the height limit of the district. The site is laid out in such a way to more than adequately accommodate additional setbacks in all directions. Trees and Landscaping While a majority of the site is covered by ruderal species, the site does include a large grove of skyline blue gum eucalyptus trees that would be removed with the development. The impacts of removing these trees were evaluated by the applicant’s arborist (see Attachment A of Attachment 7). The arborist concluded that due to the location of the trees approximately in the middle of the site and the fall hazard the trees present, their removal was recommended. Discussion by the ARC on the topic indicated acceptance of the removal with the addition of new trees of a skyline variety to help mitigate tree removals and protect views of the adjacent residential neighborhoods. The Tree Guild was also consulted regarding the removal of the tree grove during the Pre- Application review and the planting of additional skyline trees was viewed as acceptable Item 10.a. - Page 7 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF LOT MERGER NO. 15-002, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 15-006, AND DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 24, 2015 PAGE 8 mitigation. The applicant has included numerous skyline variety trees in the landscape plan, at a replacement ratio of 2:1 as recommended by the Tree Guild, to address the lost of the existing trees. This is in addition to parking lot tree requirements (one tree for every 5 spaces totals 36 trees equally spaced throughout the parking lot area) and street tree requirements (one tree every 50’ of property frontage, located behind sidewalks). Since the Planning Commission’s review of the project, the applicant has adjusted the conceptual landscape plan to move the skyline trees away from the building. The applicant has indicated this reduces concerns regarding the trees undermining the structure as well as providing better screening of the building from nearby properties. The conceptual landscape plan indicates a sufficient number of replacement trees around the site and additionally includes shrubs and groundcover. Turf will be prohibited as part of the project and the remaining plantings will be of drought tolerant varieties. Mitigation measures have been included to ensure the project complies with the draft model landscape ordinance. Signage The project plans indicate numerous areas where signage would be located. A formal sign application is not proposed as part of the project and would be required to be approved separately. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the Council’s consideration:  Adopt the attached Resolution adopting the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration and approving Lot Merger 15-002 and Conditional Use Permit 15-006 and direct staff to keep the Woodland Drive gate closed;  Adopt the attached Resolution adopting the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration and approving Lot Merger 15-002 and Conditional Use Permit 15-006 and require the Woodland Drive gate to be opened;  Modify and adopt the attached Resolution adopting the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration and approving Lot Merger 15-002 and Conditional Use Permit 15- 006 and direct staff to keep the Woodland Drive gate closed;  Modify and adopt the attached Resolution adopting the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration and approving Lot Merger 15-002 and Conditional Use Permit 15- 006 and require the Woodland Drive gate to be opened;  Do not adopt the attached Resolution, provide specific findings, and direct staff to return with a Resolution denying Lot Merger 15-002 and Conditional Use Permit 15-006; or  Provide direction to staff. Item 10.a. - Page 8 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF LOT MERGER NO. 15-002, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 15-006, AND DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 24, 2015 PAGE 9 ADVANTAGES: The proposed project completes a phased mixed-use development and provides additional medical office space in close proximity to Arroyo Grande Community Hospital. DISADVANTAGES: The proposed building would be one of the tallest in the City and would be a change from what the nearby neighborhood is accustomed to seeing. This may not be compatible with neighboring residential neighborhoods. However, the area is zoned for commercial development, the project site is the commercial portion of an approved mixed-use project, and the inclusion of transitioning materials and skyline trees are intended to soften the building and lessen this visual impact to neighboring properties. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the Arroyo Grande Procedures for the Implementation of CEQA, staff has conducted an Initial Study and prepared a Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the proposed project (Attachment 7). PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS: A notice of public hearing was mailed to all property owners within 300’ of the project site, was published in The Tribune, and posted at City Hall and on the City’s website on Friday, November 13, 2015. The agenda was posted at City Hall on November 19, 2015 and the staff report was posted on the City’s website on November 20, 2015. Staff has received numerous comments from adjacent residents regarding their opposition to the opening of Woodland drive, as well as comments on the height and massing of the building, and impacts to street parking resulting from the project taking access from Woodland Drive. Attachments: 1. Minutes of the April 6, 2015 Architectural Review Committee meeting 2. Minutes of the September 21, 2015 Architectural Review Committee meeting 3. Minutes of the October 26, 2015 Traffic Commission meeting 4. DRAFT Minutes of the November 3, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting 5. Letter of support from Charles Cova, Arroyo Grande Community Hospital 6. Minutes of the March 14, 2006 and September 26, 2006 City Council meetings 7. DRAFT Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 8. Project plans Item 10.a. - Page 9 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING LOT MERGER 15-002 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 15-006; LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF FAIR OAKS AVENUE AND WOODLAND DRIVE; APPLIED FOR BY TRIPLE P, 1-LC. WHEREAS, the project site is currently vacant and located at the northwest corner of Fair Oaks Avenue and Woodland Drive; and WHEREAS, the project site is the commercial portion of a previously approved mixed-use project located in the Office Mixed-Use (OMU) zoning district; and WHEREAS, the project site is covered by the D-2.20 zoning district overlay that requires development to be for the orderly development of Arroyo Grande Community Hospital and functionally related medical facilities; and WHEREAS, the applicant has filed Lot Merger 15-002 to merge four (4) existing lots into one (1) new lot of approximately 103,850 square feet; and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied for Conditional Use Permit 15-006 for the construction of an approximately 45,000 square foot, three-story, medical office building and associated site improvements; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the project at a duly noticed public hearing on November 3, 2015, recommending the City Council approve the project; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed this project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the Arroyo Grande Rules and Procedures for Implementation of CEQA and has reviewed the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the project at a duly noticed public hearing on November24,2015;and WHEREAS, the City Council finds, after due study, deliberation and public hearing, the following circumstances exist: Lot Merger Findings 1. Merged lots should comply where feasible with the minimum lot size, lot width, and lot depth requirements of the zoning district in which it is located. Item 10.a. - Page 10 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE2 The proposed Lot Merger will merge four (4) Jots into one (1) and the new lot will be conforming to the OMU zoning district development standards for lot size, Jot width, and lot depth. 2. Adequate access and placement of easements shall be provided. Access to the merged parcel is available from Woodland Drive and Fair Oaks Avenue. Conditional Use Permit Findings: 1. The proposed use is permitted within the subject district pursuant to the provisions of this section and complies with all the applicable provisions of this title, the goals, and objectives of the Arroyo Grande General Plan, and the development policies and standards of the City. The proposed development for a medical office building is permitted within the OMU zoning district and the D-2.20 zoning district overlay, which restricts developments to be constructed for the orderly development of Arroyo Grande Hospital and functionally related medical facilities and is consistent with the Arroyo Grande General Plan. 2. The proposed use would not impair the integrity and character of the district in which it is to be established or located. The proposed use of a medical office building serves as a functionally related medical facility to the Arroyo Grande Hospital as required by the Municipal Code, meets the development standards of the OMU zoning district and the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code, and therefore would not impair the integrity and character of the district in which it is to be located. 3. The site is suitable for the type and intensity of use or development that is proposed. The site is 2.38 acres of vacant land and meets the development standards of the OMU zoning district and the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code, and is suitable for the intensity of the development.. 4. There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities and services to ensure public health and safety. The provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities were examined during development of the Initial Study and subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration and it was determined that adequate public services will be available for the proposed project and will not result in substantially adverse impacts. 5. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious to properties and improvements in the vicinity. Item 10.a. - Page 11 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE3 The proposed use will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, nor will it be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity as it will comply with all applicable codes and standards of the Municipal Code and in accordance with conditions of approval specifically developed for the project. Required CEQA Findings: 1. The City of Arroyo Grande has prepared an Initial Study pursuant to Section 15063 of the Guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), for Lot Merger 15-002 and Conditional Use Permit 15-006. 2. Based on the Initial Study, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for public review. A copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and related materials is located at City Hall in the Community Development Department. 3. After holding a public hearing pursuant to State and City Codes, and considering the record as a whole, the City Council adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration and finds that there is no substantial evidence of any significant adverse effect, either individually or cumulatively on wildlife resources as defined by Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code or on the habitat upon which the wildlife depends as a result of development of this project. Further, the City Council 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 the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration as set forth in Exhibit "B", on file in the Community Development Department and direct the City Clerk to file a Notice of Determination and approves Lot Merger 15-002 and Conditional Use Permit 15- 006 as set forth in Exhibit "C", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, with the· above findings and subject to the conditions as set forth in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. On motion by 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 November, 2015. Item 10.a. - Page 12 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE4 JIM HILL, MAYOR ATTEST: KELLY WETMORE, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: DIANNE THOMPSON, CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: HEATHER K. WHITHAM, CITY ATTORNEY Item 10.a. - Page 13 RESOLUTION NO. PAGES EXHIBIT'A' CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL LOT MERGER 15-002 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 15-006 NORTHWEST CORNER OF FAIR OAKS AVENUE AND WOODLAND DRIVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION GENERAL CONDITIONS 1. This approval authorizes the merger of four (4) lots into one (1) lot and the construction of a 45,517 square foot medical office building. 2. The applicant shall ascertain and comply with all Federal, State, County and City requirements as are applicable to this project. 3. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of approval and mitigation measures for Lot Merger 15-002 and Conditional Use Permit 15-006. 4. This application shall automatically expire on November 24, 2017 unless a building permit is issued or an extension is granted pursuant to Section 16.12.140 of the Development Code. 5. Development shall conform to the Office Mixed-Use zoning district requirements except as otherwise approved. 6. Development shall occur in substantial conformance with the plans presented to the City Council at the meeting of November 24, 2015 and marked Exhibit "C", on file in the Community Development Department. 7. The applicant shall agree to indemnify and defend at his/her sole expense any action brought against the City, its present or former agents, officers, or employees because of the issuance of said approval, or in any way relating to the implementation thereof, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his/her obligations under this condition. 8. A copy of these conditions and mitigation measures shall be incorporated into all construction documents. Item 10.a. - Page 14 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE6 9. At the time of application for construction permits, plans submitted shall show all development consistent with the approved site plan, floor plan, architectural elevations and landscape plan. 10. Signage shall be subject to the requirements of Chapter 16.60 of the Development Code. Prior to issuance of a building permit, all illegal signs shall be removed, if any. Signage shall be reviewed by the Architectural Review Committee for a recommendation to the Community Development Director. 11. Development shall comply with Development Code Sections 16.48.070, "Fences, Walls and Hedges"; 16.48.120, "Performance Standards"; and 16.48.130 "Screening Requirements", except as otherwise modified by this approval. 12. Setbacks, lot coverage, and floor area ratios shall be as shown on the development plans including those specifically modified by these conditions. 13. The developer shall comply with Development Code Chapter 16.56, "Parking and Loading Requirements", except as otherwise modified by this approval. All parking spaces adjacent/parallel to a wall, fence, or property line shall have a minimum width of 11 feet. 14. Where off-street parking areas are situated such that they are visible from the street, an earthen berm, wall, landscaping, and/or combination wall/berm/landscaping three feet (3') in height shall be erected within the required landscape area to screen the parking area. 15. All parking areas of five or more spaces shall have an average of one-half foot- candle illumination per square foot of parking area for visibility and security during hours of darkness. · 16. Trash enclosures shall be screened from. public view with landscaping or other appropriate screening materials, and shall be made of an exterior finish that complements the architectural features of the main building. The trash enclosure area shall accommodate recycling container(s). The location and function of the trash enclosures shall be reviewed and approved by South County Sanitation prior to approval of the improvement plans. 17. Final architecture and design and location of the trash enclosure(s) shall be reviewed by the Architectural Review Committee and approved by the Community Development Director. 18. Noise resulting from construction and operational activities shall conform to the standards set forth in Chapter 9.16 of the Municipal Code. Construction activities shall be restricted to the hours of 7 AM and 5 PM Monday through Friday where Item 10.a. - Page 15 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE7 adjacent to existing residential. No construction shall occur on Saturday or Sunday. 19. At the time of application for construction permits, the applicant shall provide details on any proposed exterior lighting. The lighting plan shall include the height, location, and intensity of all exterior lighting consistent with Section 16.48.090 of the Development Code. All lighting fixtures shall be shielded so that neither the lamp nor the related reflector interior surface is visible from adjacent properties. All lighting for the site shall be downward directed and shall not create spill or glare to adjacent properties. All lighting shall be energy efficient (e.g. LED). Lighting shall be reviewed by the Architectural Review Committee for a recommendation to the Community Development Director. 20. All new construction shall utilize fixtures and designs that minimize water and energy usage. Such fixtures shall include, but are not limited to, low flow showerheads, water saving toilets, instant water heaters and hot water recirculating systems. Water conserving designs and fixtures shall be installed prior to final occupancy. 21. Landscaping in accordance with the approved landscaping plan shall be installed or bonded for before final building inspection/establishment of use. The landscape and irrigation plan shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect subject to review and approval by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. The landscape plan shall be in conformance with Development Code Chapter 16.84 (Water Efficient Landscape Requirements) and shall include the following: a. Tree staking, soil preparation and planting detail; b. The use of landscaping to screen ground-mounted utility and mechanical equipment; c. The required landscaping and improvements. This includes: i. Deep root planters shall be included in areas where trees are within five feet (5') of asphalt or concrete surfaces and curbs; ii. Water conservation practices including the use of low flow heads, drip irrigation, mulch, gravel, drought tolerant plants. iii. An automated irrigation system using smart controller (weather based) technology. iv. The selection of groundcover plant species shall include drought tolerant and/or native plants. v. Linear planters shall be provided in parking areas. vi. No turf shall be planted. Item 10.a. - Page 16 RESOLUTION NO. PAGES 22. All planted areas shall be continuously maintained in a healthy, growing condition, shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing and trimming, and shall be kept free of weeds and debris by the owner or person in possession of such areas. Any damaged, dead or decaying plant material shall be replaced within thirty (30) days from the date of damage. 23. Trees shall be provided at a ratio of one tree for every five parking spaces. 24. For projects approved with specific exterior building colors, the developer shall paint a test patch on the building including all colors. The remainder of the building may not be painted until inspected by the Community Development Department to verify that colors are consistent with the approved color board. A 48-hour notice is required for this inspection. Final color and materials shall be reviewed by the Architectural Review Committee for a recommendation to the Community Development Director. 25. All new commercial electrical panel boxes shall be installed inside the building(s). 26. All Fire Department Connections (FDC) shall be located near a fire hydrant, adjacent to a fire access roadway, away from the public right-of-way, incorporated into the design of the site, and screened to the maximum extent feasible. 27. Double detector check valve assemblies shall be located directly adjacent to or within the respective building to which they serve. 28. All ducts, meters, air conditioning equipment and all other mechanical equipment, whether on the ground, on the structure or elsewhere, shall be screened from public view with materials architecturally compatible with the main structure. It is especially important that gas and electric meters, electric transformers, and large water piping systems be completely screened from public view. All roof-mounted equipment which generates noise, solid particles, odors, etc., shall cause the objectionable material to be directed away from residential properties. 29. All conditions of this approval run with the land and shall be strictly adhered to, within the time frames specified, and in an on-going manner for the life of the project. Failure to comply with these conditions of approval may result in an immediate enforcement action. If it is determined that violation(s) of these conditions of approval have occurred, or are occurring, this approval may be revoked pursuant to Development Code Section 16.08.100. SUBDIVISION CONDITIONS 30. The developer shall comply with Development Code Chapter 16.20 "Land Divisions". Item 10.a. - Page 17 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE9 31. The applicant shall remove all structures in conflict with new lot lines. BUILDING AND LIFE SAFETY DIVISION AND FIRE DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS CBC/CFC 32. The project shall c,amply with the most recent editions of the California State Fire and Building Codes and the International Building and Fire Codes as adopted by the City of Arroyo Grande. FIRE LANES 33. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall post designated fire lanes, per Section 22500.1 of the California Vehicle Code. 34. Fire lanes shall be designed in accordance with Appendix D105 of the California Fire Code. 35. All fire lanes must be posted and enforced, per Police Department and Fire Department guidelines. FIRE FLOW/FIRE HYDRANTS 36. Project shall have a fire flow in accordance with the California Fire Code. 37. Fire hydrants shall be installed, per Fire Department and Public Works Department standards and per the California Fire Code. SECURITY KEY BOX 38. The applicant must provide an approved "security key vault," per Building and Fire Department guidelines and per the California Fire Code. FIRE SPRINKLER 39. All buildings must be fully sprinklered per Building and Fire Department guidelines and per the California Fire Code. 40. Provide Fire Department approved access or sprinkler-system per National Fire Protection Association Standards. ) ABANDONMENT I NON-CONFORMING 41. The applicant shall show proof of properly abandoning all non-conforming items Item 10.a. - Page 18 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE10 such as septic tanks, wells, underground piping and other undesirable conditions. DEMOLITION PERMIT I RETAINING WALLS 42. A demolition permit must be applied for, approved and issued. All asbestos and lead shall be verified if present and abated prior to permit issuance. SPECIAL CONDITIONS 43. One week prior to scheduling of final inspection or any issuance of certificate of occupancy, a project inspection by the Building, Planning, and Engineering Divisions and Public Works Department is required. - 44. The development shall provide safe accessible paths of travel to the satisfaction of the Building Official, in accordance with Americans with Disabilities Act requirements. 45. The developer shall reimburse the City for all costs associated with outside plan checks performed at either the developer's or City's request. ENGINEERING DIVISION CONDITIONS All Engineering conditions of approval as listed below are to be complied with prior to recording the map or finalizing the permit, unless specifically noted otherwise. GENERAL CONDITIONS 46. The developer shall be responsible during construction for cleaning City streets, curbs, gutters and sidewalks of dirt tracked from the project site. The flushing of dirt or debris to storm drain or sanitary sewer facilities shall not be permitted. The cleaning shall be done after each day's work or as directed by the Director of Public Works, the Community Development Director or his/her representative. 47. For work requiring engineering inspections, perform construction activities during normal business hours (Monday through Friday, 7 A.M. to 5 P.M.), for noise and inspection purposes. The developer or contractor shall refrain from performing any work other than site maintenance outside of these hours, unless an emergency arises or approved by the Community Development Director. The City may hold the developer or contractor responsible for any expenses incurred by the City due to work outside of these hours. 48. Trash enclosure area(s) shall have a roof structure (grease trap) to reduce stormwater pollution runoff. Item 10.a. - Page 19 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE11 49. Trash enclosure area(s) shall be screened from public view with landscaping or other appropriate screening materials, and shall be reserved exclusively for dumpster and recycling container storage. Interior vehicle travel ways shall be designed to be capable of withstanding loads imposed by trash trucks. 50. All project improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the City of Arroyo Grande Standard Drawings and Specifications. 51. The property owner shall provide maintenance of all landscaping placed in and adjacent to the development. 52. Submit as-built plans at the completion of the project or improvements as directed by the Community Development Director. One (1) set of mylar prints and an electronic version on CD in AutoCAD format shall be required. As-built plans shall be required prior to release of the Faithful Performance Bond. 53. Submit three (3) full-size paper copies and one (1) full-size mylar copy of approved improvement plans for inspection purposes during construction. 54. If adequate public right-of-way does not exist beyond the back of sidewalk and/or curb ramp, a public pedestrian access easement may be required. The easement(s) shall be recorded prior to building permit issuance. The applicant shall provide any required exhibits necessary to define the area of the easement along with current ownership information and a legal description. 55. In accordance with Municipal Code Section 13.24.110 for Stormwater Management, the Registered Civil engineer shall provide certification of the best management practices (BMP's) used and shall demonstrate compliance with all applicable standards in the ordinance, prior to approval of the final map/improvement plans. 56. Show all required short-term and long-term bicycle parking per Municipal Code Chapter 16.56 and any project specific conditions to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department. The building plans shall provide a detailed site plan of any racks and all dimensions and clearances to obstructions per city standard. 57. Provide a Licensed Land Surveyor or a Registered Civil Engineer to tie-out survey monuments or vertical control bench marks within 24 inches of work. Should any existing survey monument be disturbed or destroyed during construction, it must be reset at the previous location. Should any existing bench mark be disturbed or destroyed during construction, a new one must be set at a nearby, but different, location than the existing, as determined by the City Engineer. For monuments, a Corner Record must be filed with the County and a copy delivered to the City Engineer. For bench marks, documentation of the bench mark and how it was Item 10.a. - Page 20 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE12 reset must be delivered to the City Engineer prior the project acceptance or sign off of the Encroachment Permit. 58. Provide new vertical control survey bench mark, per City Standard, as directed by City Engineer. POST CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD, STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN, OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN, AND ANNUAL STORMWATER CONTROL FACILITIES MAINTENANCE 59. The Applicant shall develop, implement and provide the City a: a. Stormwater Control Plan that clearly provides engineering analysis of all Water Quality Treatment, Runoff Retention, and Peak Flow Management controls. b. Operations and Maintenance Plan and Maintenance Agreements that clearly establish responsibility for all Water Quality Treatment, Runoff Retention, and Peak Flow Management controls. c. Annual Maintenance Notification indicating that all Water Quality Treatment, Runoff Retention, and Peak Flow Management controls have been maintained and are functioning as designed. d. All reports must be completed by either a Registered Civil Engineer or Qualified Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Developer (QSD). 60. Prior to any Permit -Stormwater Control Plan. The Stormwater Control Plan must include, at minimum: Contents a. Project information including project name; application number; location; parcel numbers; applicant contact information; land use information; site area; existing, new, and replaced -impervious area, and applicable PCR requirements and exceptions. b. Narrative analysis or description of site features and conditions, and opportunities and constraints for stormwater control. c. Narrative description of site design characteristics that protect natural resources including endangered species habitat, protected vegetation, and archaeological resources, and preserve natural drainage features, minimize imperviousness, and disperse runoff from impervious areas. d. Tabulation of proposed pervious and impervious DMAs, showing self- treating areas, self-retaining areas, areas draining to self-retaining areas, and areas tributary to each LID facility. e. Proposed sizes, including supporting calculations, for each LID facility. f. Narrative description of each OMA and explanation of how runoff is routed from each impervious OMA to a self-retaining OMA or LID facility. g. Description of site activities and potential sources of pollutants. h. Table of pollutant sources identified from the list in Appendix A and for each source, the source control measure(s) used to reduce pollutants to Item 10.a. - Page 21 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE13 the maximum extent practicable. i. Description of signage for bioretention facilities. j. General maintenance requirements for bioretention facilities and site design features. k. Means by which facility maintenance will be financed and implemented in perpetuity. I. Statement accepting responsibility for interim operation & maintenance of facilities. Exhibits m. Existing natural hydrologic features (depressions, watercourses, relatively undisturbed areas) and significant natural resources. n. Proposed design features and surface treatments used to minimize imperviousness and reduce runoff. o. Existing and proposed site drainage network and connections to drainage off-site. p. Entire site divided into separate Drainage Management Areas (DMAs). Each OMA has a unique identifier and is characterized as self-retaining (zero-discharge), self-treating, or draining to a LID facility. q. Proposed locations and footprints of LID facilities. r. Potential pollutant source areas, including loading docks, food service areas, refuse areas, outdoor processes and storage, vehicle cleaning, repair o·r maintenance, fuel dispensing, equipment washing, etc. 61. Prio~ to Final Approval -Operations and Maintenance Plan. The Operations and Maintenance Plan must include, at minimum: a. Stormwater Control Measures report number b. A site map identifying all Stormwater Control Measures requiring Operations and Maintenance practices to function as designed. c. Operations and Maintenance Procedures for each structural stormwater control measure including, but not limited to, Low Impact Design facilities, retention and detention basins, and manufactured or propriety devices operations and maintenance. d. Short-and long-term maintenance requirements, recommended frequency of maintenance, and estimated cost for maintenance. 62. Prior to Occupancy -Maintenance Agreement. The Applicant shall provide a signed statement accepting responsibility for the Operations and Maintenance of the installed Storm Water Control Measures. The Applicant shall include written conditions in the sales, lease agreements, deed, CCRs, HOA or any other legally enforceable mechanism that require the assumed responsibility for the Operations and Maintenance of Stormwater Control Facilities. Additionally, the signed statement shall include the following information: a. Stormwater Control Measures Report Number b. The location and address of Storm Water Control Facilities c. Completion dates of the following milestones Item 10.a. - Page 22 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE14 i. Construction ii. Field verification of Stormwater Control Facilities iii. Final Project approval/occupancy d. Party responsible for O&M e. Source of funding for O&M f. Statement indicating the Storm Water Control Facilities are Maintained as required in the Operations and Maintenance Plan and facilities continues to function as designed or have been repaired or replaced g. Statement describing any vector or nuisance problems. 63. Annual -Maintenance Notification. The Owner/Applicant shall provide a signed statement notifying the City of all maintenance of the installed Storm Water Control Measures. Additionally, the signed statement shall include the following information: a. Stormwater Controi Measures Report Number b. The location and address of Storm Water Control Facilities c. Completion date of the maintenance activities d. Party responsible for O&M e. Source of funding for O&M f. Statement indicating the Storm Water Control Facilities are Maintained as required in the Operations and Maintenance Plan and facilities continues to function as designed or have been repaired or replaced g. Statement describing any vector or nuisance problems. IMPROVEMENT PLANS 64. Improvement plans (including the following) shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer or qualified specialist licensed in the State of California and approved by the Public Works or Community Development Department: a. Grading, drainage and erosion control. b. Street paving, curb, gutter and sidewalk. c. Public utilities. d. Water and sewer. e. Landscaping and irrigation. f. Other improvements as required by the Community Development Director. (NOTE: All plan sheets must include City standard title blocks). g. Engineers estimate for construction cost based on County of San Luis Obispo unit cost. 65. The site plan shall include the following: a. The location and size of all existing and proposed water, sewer, and storm Item 10.a. - Page 23 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE15 drainage facilities within the project site and abutting streets or alleys. b. The location, size and orientation of all trash enclosures. c. All existing and proposed parcel lines and easements crossing the property. d. The location and dimension of all existing and proposed paved areas. e. The location of all existing and proposed public or private utilities. 66. Landscape and irrigation plans are required within the public right-of-way, and shall be approved by the Public Works Director. 67. Improvement plans shall include plan and profile of existing and proposed utilities. 68. Submit all retaining wall calculations for review and approval by the Community Development Director for walls not constructed per City standards. 69. Prior to approval of an improvement plan the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City for inspection of the required improvements. 70. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining an encroachment permit for all work within a public right-of-way. STREET IMPROVEMENTS 71. Obtain approval from the Public Works Director prior to excavating in any street recently over-laid or slurry sealed. The Director shall approve the method of repair of any such trenches, but shall not be limited to an overlay, slurry seal, or fog seal. 72. All street repairs shall be constructed to City standards. 73. 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 Public Works Director. 7 4. Street structural sections shall be determined by an R-Value soil test or recommendation by a soils report, but shall not be less than 3" of asphalt and 6" of Class II AB. 75. The developer shall show that emergency vehicles can negotiate the final site plan. CURB. GUTTER. AND SIDEWALK 76. Install new concrete curb, gutter, and sidewalk as directed by the Community Development Director and Public Works Director. 77. In special designated zones, including where driveways cross pedestrian sidewalks, new facilities shall be color and/or installation of exposed aggregate Item 10.a. - Page 24 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE16 concrete finish shall be as directed by the Community Development Director. 78. Install ADA compliant facilities where necessary or verify that existing facilities are compliant with State and City Standards. The project shall include sidewalk and ADA compliant paths consistent with State Standards. This shall include the driveway approach at the southwest property line 79. The applicant shall dedicate a pedestrian access easement(s) when the ADA sidewalk extension does not fall within the City's right-of-way. 80. Install tree wells with root barriers for all trees planted adjacent to curb, gutter and sidewalk to prevent damage due to root growth. 81. Any sections of damaged or displaced curb, gutter & sidewalk or driveway approach shall be repaired or replaced to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. DEDICATIONS AND EASEMENTS 82. A private/public (fire, water main, sewer, open space, drainage) easement shall be reserved on the map. 83. A Public Utility Easement (PUE) shall be dedicated· a minimum 6 feet wide adjacent to all public streets. The PUE shall be wider where necessary for the installation or maintenance of the public utility vaults, pads, or similar facilities. 84. A ten foot (1 O') sewer main and/or water main easement(s) shall be dedicated to the City via an agreement. 85. All easements, abandonments, or similar documents to be recorded as a document separate from a map, shall be prepared by the applicant on 8 1 /2 x 11 City standard forms, and shall include legal descriptions, sketches, closure calculations, and a current preliminary title report. The Developer shall be responsible for all required fees, including any additional required City processing. 86. Lot Merger certificate will be required. GRADING AND DRAINAGE 87. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A GRADING PERMIT, the developer shall submit two (2) copies of the final project-specific Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) or a Water Quality Control Plan (WQCP) consistent with the San Luis Obispo Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWCB) requirements. 88. All grading shall be performed in accordance with the City Grading Ordinance. Item 10.a. - Page 25 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE17 89. All drainage facilities shall be designed to accommodate a 100-year storm flow. Provide a complete drainage report. 90. The developer shall provide appropriate documentation stating the projects compliance with the post-construction requirements set by the State Water Resources Control Board and Municipal Code Title 16, Chapter 68. The statement shall clearly identify the level of compliance with each of the applicable Performance Requirements the project is subject to. The statement shall be signed and stamped by the Engineer of Record and shall include any identified deficiencies, per Performance Requirements. 91. Submit a soils report for the project 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. 92. The Developer shall provide specific design for drainage systems in compliance with the Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements and Municipal Code Title 16, Chapter 68. 93. Infiltration basins shall be designed based on soil tests. Infiltration test shall include a minimum of 2 borings 15 feet below the finished basin floor. Additional borings or tests may be required if the analysis or soil conditions are inconclusive. WATER 94. Whenever possible, all water mains shall be looped to prevent dead ends. The Public Works Director must grant permission to dead end water mains. 95. The applicant shall extend the public water main to adequately serve the project across the property frontage. 96. A Reduced Pressur~ Principle (RPP) backflow device is required on all water lines to the (structure and/or landscape irrigation). 97. A Double Detector Check (DOC) backflow device is required on the water service line. Fire Department Connections (FDC) must be remote and locations to be approved by the Building Official and Fire Chief. 98. The DOC shall be placed inside the building or adjacent to the building. Other locations for the DOC shall be approved by the Director or Community Development. 99. Non-potable water is available at the Soto Sports Complex. The City of Arroyo Item 10.a. - Page 26 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE18 Grande does not allow the use of hydrant meters. 100. Existing water services to be abandoned shall be properly abandoned and capped at the main per trye requirements of the Public Works Director. SEWER 101. The applicant shall extend the sewer main to adequately serve the project across the property frontage. All new sewer mains shall be a minimum diameter of 8". 102. All sewer laterals within the public right-of-way must have a minimum slope of 2%. 103. Existing sewer laterals to be abandoned shall be properly abandoned and capped at the main per the requirements of the Public Works Director. 104. All sewer mains or laterals crossing or parallel to public water facilities shall be constructed in accordance with City standards. 105. Obtain approval from the South County Sanitation District for the development's impact to District facilities prior to permit issuance. 106. Obtain approval from the South County Sanitation District prior to relocation of any District facilities. PUBLIC UTILITIES 107. The developer shall comply with Development Code Section 16.68.050: All projects that involve the addition of over 100 square feet of habitable space shall be required to place service connections underground -existing and proposed utilities. 108. Prior to approving any building permit within the project for occupancy, all public utilities shall be operational. 109. Public Improvement plans shall be submitted to the public utility companies for review and approval. Utility comments shall be forwarded to the Director of Public Works for approval. 110. Street lights shall be placed 200' -250' apart on streets 40' or less in width. On streets greater than 40' in width, a street lighting plan shall be designed and submitted to the Community Development Director for approval. Item 10.a. - Page 27 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE19 FEES AND BONDS FOR ALL CITY DEPARTMENTS The applicant shall pay all applicable City fees, including the following: 111. FEES TO BE PAID PRIOR TO PLAN SUBMITTAL a. Map check fee for Tract Map. b. Map check fee for Parcel Map. c. Plan check for grading plans. (Based on an approved earthwork estimate) d. Plan check for improvement plans. (Based on an approved construction cost estimate) e. Permit Fee for grading plans. (Based on an approved earthwork estimate) f. Inspection Fee of subdivision or public works construction plans. (Based on an approved construction cost estimate) g. Plan Review Fee (Based on the current Building Division fee schedule) 112. FEES TO BE PAID PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT a. Water Neutralization fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, involving water connection or enlargement of an existing connection. b. Water Distribution fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, in accordance with Municipal Code Section 13.04.030. c. Water Meter charge to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, in accordance with Municipal Code 6-7.22. d. Water Availability charge, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, in accordance with -(not correct). e. Traffic Impact fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, in accordance with Ord. 461 C.S., Res. 3021. f. Traffic Signalization fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, in accordance with Ord. 346 C.S., Res. 1955. g. Sewer Connection fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, in accordance with Municipal Code Section 13.12.190. h. South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District Connection fee in accordance with Municipal Code Section 13.12.180. i. Drainage fee, as required by the ·area drainage plan for the area being developed. Item 10.a. - Page 28 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 20 j. Park Development fee, the developer shall pay the current parks development fee for each unit approved for construction (credit shall be provided for existing houses), to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance in accordance with Ord. 313 C.S. k. Construction Tax, the applicant shall pay a construction tax pursuant to Section 3-3.501 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code. I. Alarm Fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of development in accordance with Ord. 435 C.S. m. Strong Motion Instrumentation Program (SMIP) Fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of development in accordance with State mandate. n. Building Permit Fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of development in accordance with Title 8 of the Municipal Code. 113. Preliminary Title Report, a current preliminary title report shall be submitted to the City Engineer prior to checking the map. A current subdivision guarantee shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works prior to recording the Map. BONDING SURETY 114. Erosion Control, prior to issuance of the grading or building permit, all new residential construction requires posting of a $1,200.00 performance bond for erosion control and damage to the public right-of-way. This bond is refundable upon successful completion of the work, less expenses incurred by the City in maintaining and/or restoring the site. 115. The applicant shall provide bonds or other financial security for the following. All bonds or security shall be in a form acceptable to the City, and shall be provided prior to recording of the map, unless noted otherwise. The minimum term for Improvement securities s.hall be equal to the term of the subdivision agreement. a. Faithful Performance, 100% of the approved estimated cost of all subdivision improvements. b. Labor and Materials, 50% of the approved estimated cost of all subdivision improvements. c. One Year Guarantee, 10% of the approved estimated cost of all subdivision improvements. This bond is required prior to acceptance of the subdivision improvements. d. Monumentation, 100% of the estimated cost of setting survey monuments. e. Tax Certificate, In accordance with Section 9-15.130 of the Development Code, the applicant shall furnish a certificate from the tax collector's office indicating that there are no unpaid taxes or special assessments against the property f. Accessory Structures, the applicant shall remove or bond for Item 10.a. - Page 29 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 21 removal of all accessory structures not sharing a parcel with a residence. g. Garages, the applicant shall construct, or bond for construction of a two-car garage and driveway for the existing house on lot __ h. Curb cuts, the applicant shall construct or bond for construction of individual curb cuts and paved driveways for parcels. TREE PRESERVATION/TREE REMOVAL PLAN 116. Prior it issuance of a grading permit and during construction the applicant shall comply with the provisions of Ordinance 431 C.S., the Community Tree Ordinance. 117. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the developer shall submit a tree removal plan to the Director of Public Works/City Arborist for undeveloped parcels or lots with trees. The plan shall include the location, size and species of all trees located on the lot or on adjoining lots, where development could affect the roots or limbs of trees on adjacent property. 118. All significant trees to be removed as designated by the Director of Public Works/City Arborist shall be replaced at a 3:1 ratio and planted on site. All skyline Eucalyptus trees to be removed shall be replaced at a 2:1 ratio with skyline variety trees and planted on site. With the approval of the Public Works Director, tree removal shall be mitigated by planting on site, off-site, or payment of in-lieu fees (at the current street tree fee rate for a 15 gallon tree). 119. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, all trees to remain on site shall be marked with paint/ribbon and protected by a five foot (5') vinyl or chain link fence. The fence shall be located at a minimum of eight foot (8') radius from the truck on the tree. · 120. All trees on the construction site to be preserved shall be protected under the conditions of the Community Tree Ordinance (431 C.S.) which include, but are not limited to: a. No mechanical trenching within the drip line of a tree, unless approved by the Public Works Director. b. No storage of equipment, supplies, tools, etc., within 8' of the trunk of any tree. c. No grading shall occur under a tree's drip line unless approved by the Public Works Director 121. All trees to be pruned shall be pruned under supervision of a Certified ·Arborist using the International Society of Agricultural Pruning Standards. Item 10.a. - Page 30 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 22 SPECIAL CONDITIONS 122. Ensure access to the storm drain in the drainage easement on the north side of the project site. If the train is to be relocated, the existing pipe shall be abandoned and manholes shall be required at all areas where a change of direction occurs. POLICE DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS 123. Prior to issuance of building permit, applicant to submit exterior lighting plan for Police Department approval. 124. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall post handicapped parking, per Police Department requirements. 125. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall install a burglary [or robbery] alarm system on commercial buildings per Police Department guidelines, and pay the Police Department alarm permit application fee of ($94.00). Annual renewal fee is $31.00. 126. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, for any parking lots available to the public located on private lots, the developer shall post private property "No Parking" signs in accordance with the handout available from the Police Department. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE CONDITIONS 127. The applicant shall incorporate a textured walkway crossing the parking lot off Fair Oaks Avenue and connecting to the hospital. 128. Retaining wall details shall return to the ARC for a recommendation to the Community Development Director PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITIONS 129. The lower Woodland Driveway shall be aligned with the Walnut Grove driveway immediately opposite. 130. Electrical vehicle (EV) charging stations shall be installed with the project. 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. Item 10.a. - Page 31 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 23 MITIGATION MEASURES: MM 111-1: On-road diesel vehicles shall comply with Section 2485 of Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations. This regulation limits idling from diesel- fueled commercial motor vehicles with gross vehicular weight ratings of more than 10,000 pounds and licensed for operation on highways. It applies to California and non-California based vehicles. In general the regulation specifies that drivers of 'said vehicles: • Shall not idle the vehicle's primary diesel engine for greater than 5 minutes at any location. • Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system (APS) to power a heater, air conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on that vehicle during sleeping or resting in a sleeper berth -for greater that 5 minutes at any location when within 1,000 feet of a restricted area. MM 111-2: Off-road diesel equipment shall comply with the 5 minute idling restriction identified in Section 2449(d)(2) of the California Air Resources Board's In-Use Off-Road Diesel regulation. MM 111-3: Signs must be posted in the designated queuing areas and job sites to remind drivers and operators of the State's 5 minute idling limit. MM 111-4: The project applicant shall comply with these more restrictive requirements to minimize impacts to nearby sensitive receptors (adjacent residential development): • Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors; • Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors shall not be permitted; • Use of alternative fueled equipment is recommended; and • Signs that specify no idling areas must be posted and enforced at the site. MM 111-5: The following standard mitigation measures for construction equipment shall be implemented to reduce the ROG, NOx, and diesel particulate matter (DPM) emissions during construction of the project: • Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer's specifications; • Fuel all off-road and portable diesel powered equipment with ARB certified motor vehicle diesel fuel (non-taxed version suitable for use off- road); • Use diesel construction equipment meeting ARB's Tier 2 certified engines or cleaner off-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State Off-Road Regulation; Item 10.a. - Page 32 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 24 • Use on-road heavy-duty trucks that meet the ARB's 2007 or cleaner certification standard for on-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State On-Road Regulation; • Construction or trucking companies with fleets that do not have engines in their fleet that . meet the engine standards identified in the above two measures (e.g. captive or NOx exempt area fleets) may be eligible by proving alternative compliance; • All on-and off-road diesel equipment shall not idle for more than 5 minutes. Signs shall be posted in the designated queuing areas and or job sites to remind drivers and operators of the 5 minute idling limit; • Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors is not permitted; • Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors; • Electrify equipment when feasible; • Substitute gasoline-powered in place of diesel-powered equipment, where feasible; and • Use alternatively fueled construction equipment on-site where feasible, such as compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane or biodiesel. MM 111-6: The project shall implement the following mitigation measures to manage fugitive dust emissions such that they do not exceed the APCD's 20% opacity limit (APCD Rule 401) or prompt nuisance violations (APCD Rule 402): • Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible; • Use of water trucks or sp~inkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site and from exceeding the APCD's limit of 20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in any 60 minute period. Increased watering frequency would be required when wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed (non-potable) water shall be used; • All dirt stock pile areas shall be sprayed daily and covered with tarps or other dust barriers as needed; • Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans shall be implemented as soon as possible, following completion of any soil disturbing activities; • Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading shall be sown with a fast germinating, non-invasive, grass seed and watered until vegetation is established; • All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation should be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD; • All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed as soon as possible. In addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used; • Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site; Item 10.a. - Page 33 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 25 • All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with CVC Section 23'114; • Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site; • Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers shall be used with reclaimed water and roads shall be pre-wetted prior to sweeping when feasible; • A listing of all required mitigation measures shall be included on grading and building plans; and, • The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below the APCD's limit of 20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in any 60 minute period. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork or demolition. MM 111-7: Prior to any construction activities on the site, the project proponent shall contact the APCD Engineering Division to obtain all necessary permits for portable equipment used during the construction and operational phases of the project. Typical equipment requiring a permit includes, but is not limited to, the following: • Diesel engines; • Portable generators and equipment with engines that are 50 horsepower or greater; • Electrical generation plants or the use of standby generators; and • Portable plants (e.g. aggregate plant, asphalt batch plant, concrete batch plant, etc.) MM 111-8: Prior to any grading activities, the project sponsor shall ensure that a geologic evaluation is conducted to determine if naturally occurring asbestos (NOA) is present within the area that will be disturbed. If NOA is not present, an exemption request must be filed with the APCD. If NOA is found at the site, the applicant must comply with all requirements outlined in the Air Resource Board (ARB) Air Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) for Construction, Grading, Quarrying and Surface Mining Operations. MM 111-9: Burning of vegetative material on the development site shall be prohibited. Item 10.a. - Page 34 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 26 MM 111-10: Should hydrocarbon-contaminated soil be encountered during construction activities, the APCD shall be notified within forty-eight ( 48) hours of such contaminated soil being discovered to determine if an APCD permit is required. In addition, the following measures shall be implemented immediately after contaminated soil is discovered: • Covers on storage piles shall be maintained in place at all times in areas not actively involved in soil addition or removal. • Contaminated soil shall be covered with at least six (6) inches of packed, uncontaminated soil or other TPH -non-permeable barrier such as plastic tarp. No headspace shall be allowed where vapors could accumulate. • Covered piles shall be designed in such a way as to eliminate erosion due to wind or water. No openings in the covers are permitted. • During soil excavation, odors shall not be evident to such a degree as to cause a public nuisance. • Clean soil must be segregated from contaminated soil. Operational Phase Emissions MM 111-11: The project proponent shall coordinate with and obtain all necessary equipment and operation permits that are required by APCD. Typical equipment requiring such permits incl.udes, but is not limited to, the following: • Portable generators and equipment with engines that are 50 hp or greater; • Electrical generation plants or the use of standby generators; • Boilers; • Internal combustion engines; • Sterilization unit(s) using ethylene oxide and incinerator(s); and • Cogeneration facilities. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande -COD, Public Works Dept., Building Division, Engineering Division Timing: Prior to issuance of Grading Permit and during construction MM 111-12: Operation of any commercial building with a loading area shall include the establishment of a 'no idle' zone for diesel-powered delivery vehicles. Vehicle idling shall be minimized to the maximum extent feasible using the following techniques: • Each delivery vehicle's engine shall be shut off immediately after arrival in the loading dock or loading area, unless the vehicle is actively maneuvering. • The scheduling of deliveries shall be staggered to the maximum extent feasible. • Vehicle operators shall be made aware of the 'no idle' zone, including notification by letter to all delivery companies. Copies of the letters shall be sent to the City's Community Development Department. Item 10.a. - Page 35 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 27 • Prominently lettered signs shall be posted in the receiving dock area to remind drivers to shut off their engines. • Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors is not permitted. • Use of alternative-fueled vehicles is recommended whenever possible. • Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande -COD, Public Works Dept., Building Division, Engineering Division Timing: Prior to issuance of Grading Permit and during construction MM IV-1: To avoid impacts to nesting birds, construction activities shall occur outside of nesting bird breeding season, which is approximately February- August. MM· IV-2: If construction is scheduled to occur within the nesting bird breeding season, then no more than two weeks prior to initiation of ground disturbance, a nesting bird pre-construction survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist within the disturbance footprint. If no active nests are observed, no further mitigation is required. If active raptor nests are found, the biologist shall prepare and submit for City approval a monitoring plan, outlining adequate protections for the nests. Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: construction Dept. Developer City of Arroyo Grande -COD, Public Works Prior to issuance of Grading Permit and during MM V-1: A qualified archaeologist shall be retained to monitor all grading activities. The monitor shall work closely with construction crews in close proximity to earth moving equipment in order to investigate and evaluate exposed materials immediately upon exposure and prior to disturbance. A daily log shall be maintained by the monitor to record when and where earth-moving activities take place within the project area, as well as the presence/absence of archaeological materials in the monitored matrix. 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. The client and the City shall be notified should resources meeting CEQA significance standards be discovered. The archaeologist shall work as quickly as possible . to permit resumption of construction activities. It is preferred that location data of finds be recorded using a hand-held global positioning system Item 10.a. - Page 36 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 28 receiver (GPSr). Following the field analysis work, the qualified archaeologist shall prepare 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 copy shall be provided to the Community Development Director for retention in the project file. MM V-2: If human remains are encountered during earth-disturbing activities, all work in the adjacent area shall stop immediately and the San Luis Obispo County Coroner's office shall be notified. If the remains are determined to be Native American in origin, the Native American Heritage Commission shall be notified and will identify the Most Likely Descendent, who will be consulted for recommendations for treatment of the discovered remains. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande -Engineering Division; Public Works Department Timing: Prior to issuance of a grading permit and during grading activities MM Vl-1: The recommendations provided in the geotechnical investigation report prepared by GSI Soils, Inc dated June 22, 2015 shall be incorporated into the project plans and specifications. Final improvement plans submitted to the City shall be accompanied by a letter of certification from the civil engineer that the plans are in conformance with the geotechnical investigation report and all applicable Codes and Ordinances. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande -Engineering Division; Public Works Department Timing: Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit MM Vll-1: All construction plans shall reflect the following GHG-reducing measures where applicable. Prior to issuance of building permits, the project sponsor shall submit impact reduction calculations based on these measures to , the APCD for review and approval, incorporating the following measures: • Incorporate outdoor electrical outlets to encourage the use of electric appliances and tools. • Provide shade tree planting in parking lots to reduce evaporative emissions from parked vehicles. Design should provide 50% tree coverage within 10 years of construction using low ROG emitting, low maintenance native drought resistant trees. Item 10.a. - Page 37 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 29 • No residential wood burning appliances. • Provide employee lockers and showers. One shower and 5 lockers for every 25 employees are recommended. • Trusses for south-facing portions of roofs shall be designed to handle dead weight loads of standard solar-heated· water and photovoltaic panels. Roof design shall include sufficient south-facing roof surface, based on structures size and use, to accommodate adequate solar panels. For south facing roof pitches, the closest standard roof pitch to the ideal average solar exposure shall be used. • Increase the building energy rating by 20% above Title 24 requirements. Measures used to reach the 20% rating cannot be double counted. • Plant drought tolerant, native shade trees along southern exposures of buildings to reduce energy used to cool buildings in summer. • Utilize green building materials (materials which are resource efficient, recycled, and sustainable) that are available locally if possible. • Install high efficiency heating and cooling systems. • Design building to include roof overhangs that are sufficient to block the high summer sun, but not the lower winter sun, from penetrating south facing windows (passive solar design). • Utilize high efficiency gas or solar water heaters. • Utilize built-in energy efficient appliances (i.e. Energy Star®). • Utilize double-paned windows. • Utilize low energy street lights (i.e. sodium). • Utilize energy efficient interior lighting. • Install energy-reducing programmable thermostats. • Use roofing material with a solar reflectance values meeting the EPA/DOE Energy Star® rating to reduce summer cooling needs. • Eliminate high water consumption landscape (e.g., plants and lawns) in residential design. Use native plants that do not require watering and are low ROG emitting. - • Provide on-site bicycle parking both short term (racks) and long term (lockers, or a locked room with standard racks and access limited to bicyclist only) to meet peak season maximum demand. One bike rack space per 10 vehicle/employee space is recommended. • Require the installation of electrical hookups at loading docks and the connection of trucks equipped with electrical hookups to eliminate the need to operate diesel-powered TRUs at the loading docks. • Provide storage space in garage for bicycle and bicycle trailers, or covered racks/ lockers to service the residential units. • Provide three-phase electrical stub outs for electric vehicle charging stations. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande -COD; Building Division; APCD Item 10.a. - Page 38 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 30 Timing: Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit or Building Permit MM IX-1: The conclusions and recommendations provided in the Permeable Paver Plan Review prepared by GSI Soils, Inc. dated August 27, 2015 shall be incorporated into the project plans and specifications. Final improvement plans submitted to the City shall be accompanied by a letter of certification from the civil engineer that the plans are in conformance with the soils report and the Permeable Paver Plan Review. MM IX-2: The following BMPs shall be incorporated into the project: • Roof Downspout System. Direct roof drains to pervious areas to allow infiltration prior to discharging to water bodies or the municipal storm drain system. • Run-off Control. Maintain post-development peak runoff rate and average volume of runoff at levels that are similar to pre-development levels. • Labeling and Maintenance of Storm Drain Facilities. Label new storm drain inlets with "No Dumping -Drains to Ocean" to alert the public to the destination of stormwater and to prevent direct discharge of pollutants into the storm drain. • Vehicle/Equipment Cleaning. Commercial/industrial facilities or multi- family residential developments of 50 units or greater should either provide a covered, bermed area for washing activities or discourage vehicle/equipment washing by removing hose bibs and installing signs prohibiting such uses. Vehicle/equipment washing areas shall be paved designed to prevent run-on or run off from the area, and plumbed to drain to the sanitary sewer. • Common Area Litter Control. Implement trash management and litter control for commercial and industrial projects or large-scale residential developments to prevent litter and debris from being carried to water bodies or the storm drain system. • Food Service Facilities. If food service facilities are included in the project, design food service facilities (including restaurants and grocery stores) to have a sink or other area for cleaning floor mats, containers, and equipments that is connected to a grease interceptor prior to discharging to the sanitary sewer system. The cleaning area should be large enough to clean the largest mat or piece of equipment to be cleaned. • Refuse Areas. Trash compactors, enclosures and dumpster areas shall be covered and protected from roof and surface drainage. Install a self- Item 10.a. - Page 39 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 31 contained drainage system that discharges to the sanitary sewer if water cannot be diverted from the areas. • Outdoor Storage Controls. Oils, fuels, solvents, coolants, and other chemicals stored outdoors shall be in containers and protected from drainage by secondary containment structures such as berms, liners, vaults or roof covers and/or drain to the sanitary sewer system. Bulk materials stored outdoors shall also be protected from drainage with berms and covers. Process equipment stored outdoors shall be inspected for proper function and leaks, stored on impermeable surfaces and covered. Implement a regular program of sweeping and litter control and develop a spill cleanup plan for storage areas. • Cleaning, Maintenance and Processing Controls. Areas used for washing, steam cleaning, maintenance, repair or processing shall have impermeable surfaces and containment berms, roof covers, recycled water wash facility, and discharge to the sanitary sewer. Discharges to the sanitary sewer may require pretreatment systems and/or approval of an industrial waste discharge permit. • Loading Dock Controls. Design loading docks to be covered, surrounded by berms or curbs, or constructed to prevent drainage onto or from the area. Position roof downspouts to direct stormwater away from the loading area. Water from loading dock areas shall be drained to the sanitary sewer, or diverted and collected for ultimate discharge to the sanitary sewer. Door skirts between the trailers and the building shall be installed to prevent exposure of loading activities to rain. • Street/Parking Lot Sweeping: Implement a program to regularly sweep streets, sidewalks and parking lots to prevent the accumulation of litter and debris. Debris resulting from pressure washing should be trapped and collected to prevent entry into the storm drain system. Wash water containing any cleaning agent or degreaser, shall be collected and discharged to the sanitary sewer. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande -COD; Engineering Division; Building Division Timing: Prior to issuance of a Building Permit MM XVll-1: The following water conservation measures shall be incorporated into the project: • Landscaping shall be native, drought-tolerant plants only. • No turf shall be allowed to be .installed in landscaped areas. Item 10.a. - Page 40 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 32 • All landscaped areas shall be irrigated using a drip irrigation system, include smart irrigation controllers, and have a dedicated landscape water meter. • Utilize low-flow fixtures that minimize water usage. Such fixtures shall include, but not be limited to, low flow showerheads, water saving toilets, instant water heaters, and hot water recirculating systems. Responsible Party: Developer Monitoring Agency: City of Arroyo Grande -COD; Engineering Division; Building Division Timing: Prior to issuance of a Building Permit Item 10.a. - Page 41 INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION EXHIBIT "B" (Full copy on file in the Community Development Department) "'.\ . Lot' e.rger 15-002 and Conditional Use Permit 15-006 "'~~..? Northwest Corner of Fair Oaks Avenue and Woodland Drive October 2015 Item 10.a. - Page 42 EXHIBIT "C" Item 10.a. - Page 43 \ "' C5 OVERALL SITE PLAN FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING f ZON!DOfflc:ll MDCt0115! {CVl!u.\Yl>-z.20) ' ~ .·.·.~ ( J PROJECT SUMMARY SHEET INDEX Tue~~dltd pl.mi= lnSJl>u.:inlial coofoonance w11~ •ppUc.>hle st:rte !<>cal ind <>1her l~W'I rq;ula!lngth"'Yf"'"'~l<ipmfnl AOO RENDERINGS ,i.1.0 PROJECTSITEPLAN ,..11 SIIEPLANPHOTOMETR!C ~:~ ~~~: Al ~ JNO FLOOR Pl.AN Al.5 JRDHOORPIAN ~ ! i:!£~r~~~~~~ONS AJO SUR\EY Ci.0 PREUM!NAR\ GRAOlNC Pl.AN ~: ! ~':~~~~TURNING AAOIUS ctP-01 CONUPTUAL l.ANO<.CAPE PL ... N 01 01'-02(0NCll'lUi\l.LANDSOJ'EPL...,...02 CLP-OlCONCD'TUALlANOSC\J'fl'lANo.1 I~ ' I ~ '!. PROJECT LOCATION '. ft.C1~ INC Btl.lrlS!:Ur-llc•C1Sl1S Item 10.a. - Page 44 ~ ':~8::1 1W\RI) ""~ J - \ I I ~""" \ '~" \ ,. __.\ '"~ ~ \ \ I \ \ I ~·~" r-~:-=~(R I \ I I lo I + I I I I ~ I ~ ,J I h lj~ I; I l ~1 ! I, l I ,...,..U..MTatCIM I I"'"'··~• I I I _lJ2!-r~L. ~I I ;I I I ; Item 10.a. - Page 45 ( ) ''""""""" ~ ~~~~OOH pp:~~-hl~:~==:" -------- ~~· !1.0f001CANPl.E!I QNNEll;l!IHOON ·~~ ~~ .... ~~-·---~~';;'.' ~· '~'"' ~-"·~·~-· ;;~~' tm:l'l.AN) !1.0fOO'ICANOl.!S , {INNEll:llHOON ' ' ' ' ' ' $1Tl0'LAN) :;::-,.,:;..----=~-::-- ::;:::;._ ... .,,.~--........ SITE LIGHTING FIXTURE w 111111'1'1'1'1'1'1'1 UlHONIA AERIS.A.52 ..,,.w MEfAt.HAUPE (20'1'0LE) AC:RIJ,. $,•.llln~-E.iili= ___ - h'"""IH!l1H"4 y,""' 0 Uh•~ D<,t<ll!21U.,I Y>•tllr~..,,m••lll MFTllLHIUJnr 'J!";N/"1Stf.V,3'1l'llWV400\J lit tQJ'; M~,.,,,loq Item 10.a. - Page 46 / "' (5 1 ST FLOOR PLAN FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING ' w ····-~ T!:Cl'i INC e™nSlarr-L1clC15175 Item 10.a. - Page 47 '" cs 2ND FLOOR'PLAN FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING ' w ----.~ "'R1:um:cr:.1"'i:; llrJon~rr-Llc1Cl5175 Item 10.a. - Page 48 "' NORTH (_!) 3RD FLOOR PLAN FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING ····-~ 1mccn INC Rrl•n~ta.,.-lk"KISl75 Item 10.a. - Page 49 NORTH ELEVATION • FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING SOUTH ELEVATION FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING GCU 11'-li: Rtlan~i..rr-UcJC1Sl75 Item 10.a. - Page 50 AltO\VABL~ AACHrEATURES WEST ELEVATION FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING ALLO\V,O.llLE ARCH ff"IURf~ AUOWAtlLE ROOHIT EAST ELEVATION FAIR OAKS MEOICA~ OFFICE BUILDING TCCT~ INC Rrl•n~i.,,-Uc:rC151'5 Item 10.a. - Page 51 ALLO\\AllLE Alt.CHIVITURES AttO\\ABLE ROOPllT ALLOWAlllE AROifEAT1JRES AUO\YASlE ROOfHT . ' -111111111111111111111111111111111 ~ ----------------------""-"-~'""-" -------------------F=fll~-------..i ..... ----1 -------------------r11-"~~~~._..~..._.-...__,_-+ ------·--------------:L'~.'?2!!.~~R.~- -------------------------F~~-1111 _____________________ :J}!'.'?2!!.t<;_i:.~~-- SECTION A ...•. ._•-••==-~·-------... ::: __ -:·---· ""'"'"' -f,,f,~~;f,ii~~RcE-sliilciiii<G----------------------------------------------~:Y .... ~~--= ... ~~~STl-NCGRADf FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING ----------------------------------t---1---1~-t-~" .. n ... n ... "':~: ..._..._~.~..__._n~H--------------------"'~""-"rr~- ---~ --------------~------~-----~-----=------~-----;;,;;;;-------~------~----:-~--F== ____ t:= __ = ____ :E __ 1==-____ ~--=----"=-~----='=:1_r__F------~-----~------~----~----~-----~:_:::_~n::---~--o~---~---::;;;;;;::::_~::::;;;.; __ ~~:: ___ :-~~1-1---~ __ ,_= ___ ~ ____ ., __ t-l~-----:-~_: ~~--~~------b_:::_:~:_:::::-=:::: __ :-=::~:::-=:~::_:-=:::::Rw __ :: __ b_:::::~:::: ~--= _____ J ___ --===---:_-_-~::::: _________ ::::,:,:_~:: __ ----------------------;119-i6AfG:-- SECTION B FA1R OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING ...... MKt;H)TCCT') {1'.1; llrlan~t>rr-LkJCIS\15 Item 10.a. - Page 52 ARROYO GRANDE HOSPJTAL ', \ ',. \mi\ •ll.'" '' '' \ 1 'I \\\ \ \ ---------- ----------- .,..._. } -9- 1 '"W SURVEYORS STATEMENT I HEREBY STATE lHAT THIS MAP CORREC11.Y REPRESCJH'S A SUR"va' MADE BY ME DR UNDER MY DIRECTION UNDER THE BASIS OF BEARINGS THE "BASlSOFBEAAINGS f0flll11S SURVE'I' ISTHE CENTti!Uf'lt: OF tlOODl.AND ~VE SET'/IIDI fOVNtl lolOr.11.NENTATlON ANDNOTDllJEREO!l1'S N00"254D"E PER(111) BENCHMARK TliEBENCHUARKrORTI-llSSU!l\ICTISTHETOPOFDnASS CAP MONUMENT IN MCWJimlT WW. AT TH~ COITERUNE l'fl!RS[Clltl" or rAIR OAASOf!lvt AND WOOOt.AND ORM n.EVATIOl<•10COfi(ASSU"'ED0AlUM). 0 DENOmlHIUllD llctlU"'OH t.SSliO\'nl AND DESCllllED ~ OENOl'E5FOUNOBllAS5CAl'IHMON WELLPER(R1) (~1) OtNOIES l!ECClll) OAT• PER MAI'S J!•1'i TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY A TOPOGRAPHIC SURvtY or LOTS 32, 33, 34, AND JS Of lRACT NO 2792, IN THE CITY or ARROYO CRANDE, COUNTY Of SAN LUIS OBISPO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA PER MAP BOOK 31, PACES 19 TI-IROUCH 22 ~~~~~~c!{i:;DFE¥tl~FDTHf~~~~!~* yt ~: sv~~ COMPUTER GENERATED :; L. F"ARGEN ~ @ 2624AIRPARl<ORIVE SANTA t.4ARlA, CA 93455 PHONE 805-934-5727 f"AX B05-934-J448 DATE. SEPT 2D14 ~...,,.l 7a'?a! Item 10.a. - Page 53 GRAPHIC SCALE ko• • ..;J-.J (IHrFTI) llt!ch•20 11.. '"""'-----(IOi!.83)11# _J_ + FAIR OAKS AVENUE b~BETHEL !.--engineering 2824~Dr.-toY..-loO. ~~IOll'IO' 1'°')1J<-,n7 REVISIONS 6 MBWIOIUI CUntR Wli\iF'llONTCUTO!'f''ll'AIJ. SECT/£:.~ .d NOTE PERMEABLE PAVER BECTlON, EARTHWORK Wl'----1J...Q!!._C.T(R•w) f!\.L.~C.Y(R•'ll) SEE STORM WATER QUALITY STUDY FOR STORM WATER RETARDATION DETAILS CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DEPARTMENTOfPUBUCWOllKS AS NOTED &. FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING l--=&"--1---1--+----+-------l PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN 06(09/15 Ookal.t0BJ>GP.J)ll091S.d-.q Cl. 0 Item 10.a. - Page 54 CONTOUR MAP ---:---::-------------------~ -~-.. --;" ------------~,/ 1i ~::;~~ \ 6"12J017"' I _,, !' ~~~~---r'-1!1-........ .-+-----'--.0...,...-'-+/,-.:----''---<---Hb.-.i-'tf-11+-~-H---l""'--!---\Hr-l \_ / / GRAPHIC SCALE k• • .LJ-J (lll'rEET) llti<:h•20 ft. .,, >-~ .· J / l / / / / / / 1- / R•2COO l•31•2 6"90"0000 ~~BETHEL ~ engineering :~:..:~~~~~~' I I !\ I\ ' 'I NOTE SEE STORM WATER QUALITY STUDY FOR STORM WATER RETARDATION DETAILS RE\llSIONS CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE "''" AS NOTED !-=&"-+---+--1---1-------1 FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING & PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN 06/09/15 OoksMOB....PCP_060915d•q CHECXEDOY.FlJ.G. DATE .IJHE2015 Cl.l Item 10.a. - Page 55 -0 -=,~1 I I I / I / I , __ ,_,___ Q _/ GRAPHIC SCALE ko• • .LJ-J (lli'n:ET) ,,..,b .. 20 n. -.. -.- ! I ~ INSl~ClAM,NIGLI --L CHASSISOVUHANG ADDITIDNMIUMPE~UNGTlt flON!OVUHANG ~·~ I ~•noru•~•um I INSICET\llH" UJ. ~~~~~ !!1 RE'ilSIONS .. an• •a• ,,. r "" .,. SCALE AS NOTED --- CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE µ&=---+--1--l----+-------FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING & FIRE DEPARTMENT TURNING RADIUS 07/16/l' Col<s MOO_FICP_(l71615dwq Cl.2 Item 10.a. - Page 56 l ~ i f FAIR OAKS AVENUE C CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN • CLP-01 BENCHES PEA GRAVEL SEATING AREA REDWOOD HEADER D0 PATH --=:j:f*.-!Jt ___ 16 BIKE RAGKS @u-t..J NORTH SCALE. r • 20'-0"' ~ ii2 c c z <( ...I c 0 ~ FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING /IArroyoGrande,CalifomJa/20150714 PLANT LEGEND: 0 TREES @ AGGENT TREES © SKYLINE TREES 0 STREET TREES 0 51REET TREES 0 SHRUBS Gk> SMALL SHRUBS @ MEDIUM SHRUBS @ LAR6E SHRUBS 0 GROUNDCOVERS ~ GROUNDCOVER5 ~ RIYERROGK 0 VINES FLOJ."4ERIN5 VINE ............... CLINGING VINE City of Arroyo Grande Site calculations Percentaseortandscape Totalslte;ue• land5'ilpe1re1 Enliancedpavlng Requirement Parking stalls !leplacementtrtt5 Addlt1<>i.allreepro111ded SlteTreeflequlrements Criteria lperSparklngstalls 2Sk'y11netreesperltrceremoved R~quil'tmenl Ollf'rla fairOib 1per50'ofsbtttfrontage Woodland Drive lper50'ofttreetlront111,e .Addl1lonaltreesp1ovlded CONCEPTUAL PLANT LIST· D 8ITI! TREES 103.852 21,991 "' lltqulred Provl~ (+/) 78 16 37 21 u 24 24 Requtl'l!d PrO\l!d"d (+/) Not~ 319 6 1 "' Totals @ NORTH H.T.S. CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN 01 / CLP-01 Item 10.a. - Page 57 DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND CONCEPTS We beUeve In green design as a philosophical approach Sustalnablhtv cons!deratlorl5 will guide our team throughout the design and development proces1 We will develop design, construttlon and operating strategies consistent with sound design prlnclpals Beginning with theprogramm!ngprocess,sustalna!illlty conslde111tlonsw1Ilprovldeusdlrectlon Bulldlngsrteor!entation,thequahtyofopenspace,efflc.lenti.Jseofenvironmentallyfrlendlymaterlals,loglcal sltecirtulatlonpatterns andeoergyeffidencyareallconslderatlons Design coordination between <ill nrajor team members has been part of the m1tJal design process The approach will continue to evolve during the entire development process, and will help us to continually analyze alternative considerations Site considerations include reduction of Impervious materials to enhance reabsorblngofralnwaterlomln!mlzeslterunoff landscaping wlll Include the use of native, drought-tolerant plantlng materials, blo swales and site water retention Plants of similar water rl!qunements will be grouped together to for hydro-tones based on WU COLS ratings Solis will be amended to provide additlonal moisture retention Project green open spaces will be usablebytenantsandw1tlhelptoreducetheheatlslandeffect. Reduced water consumption wdl be part of the des!gn and construction process for the landscape The lmgatson system will be des1gn~d m iones to take care of the plantJng hydro iones The system will Include efficient head layout and products including drip systems where appropriate The controller wlll be weather based to maximize the appl!catlon of Irrigation based on the plants speclflc needs Additional equipment will lncludeautomatlcralnshutoff,molsturesensorsandorwlndsensors The overall landscape design Is one that will require minimal labor and resources over the long term and become nearly self sustaining and fully comp II ant with state and local conservation requirements, 0 SECTION I ELEVATION -01 N.T.B. SC.REEN SHRUB STEPPED ~ALL BEYOND FLO~ERING GROUNDGOVER GABION ~ALL TO RETAIN GRADE CONCRETE ~ALKHA Y / I 0 SECTION I ELEVATION -01 FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING /1Arroy0Grande,Ca/1fom1a/20150714 NT.S. CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN 02 / CLP-02 1 "lh .... J"r.,Jf.•.t.1:-1t11 ~Vt•'-""'' ltf~'-I ( ~~-~~·~,~~~1<E ~'T Item 10.a. - Page 58 SITE TREES STREET TREES SHRUBS SHRUBS CONTINUED GROUNDCOVER, VINES AND HARDSCAPE Japanese Maple AfncaSumac Meyer Asparagus Hof lips Sage Cotoneaster White Alder Ansfocrat Flowering Pear Cal1forma Sycamore Manna Strawbeny Evergreen Pear Chinese P1stache Rus~mn Sage Sliver She;en Kohuhu Dwarf Mock Orange Deer Grass Indian Hawthorn Heuchera Banks Rose Tra1f1ng Rosemary FAIR OAKS M'EDICAL OFFICE BUILDING l!Arroy0Grande,Cal1fomia/201507.14. Westem Redbud Howard Mcminn Manzamta Lemon Scented Gum Bradford Ftowenng Pear Blue Oat Grass Ca GrayRush Cape Rush Rose Glow Barbeny Carex D1vufsa John Dourley Manzanita D G Path Gab1on Wall River Rock CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN 03 I CLP-03 Item 10.a. - Page 59 ATIACHMENT1 ACTION MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE MONDAY, APRIL 6, 2015 CITY HALL SECOND FLOOR_ CONFERENCE ROOM, 300 EAST BRANCH STREET ARROYO GRANDE, CA 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Hoag called the Regular Architectural Review Committee meeting to order at 2:30 2. ROLL CALL ARC Members: Committee r:iembers Mary Hertel, Bruce Berlin, Jo Chair Mike Peachey and Chair Warren Hoag City Staff Present: Assistant Planner Matthew Downing and Planning Intern Haleigh Kin 3. FLAG SALUTE Vice Chair Peachey led the Flag Salute. ~-0 ~~MMUNITY,SA 5. APPROVAL ~NUTES ade a motion, seconded by Michaei Peachey, to approve the minutes of March submitted.-The motion passed on a 4-0-1 voice vote, with John Rubatzky 6. PROJECTS . 6.a. Consideration of Pre-Application No. 15-002; Lot Merger and Conditional Use Permit for Construction of an Approximately 44,000 Square-Foot Medical Office Building; Location -800 Fair Oaks Avenue; Applicant -Triple P. LLC; Representative - Studio Design Group (Downing) Staff Contact: Matthew Downing Assistant Planner Downing presented the staff report. The Committee asked questions regarding the presence of the eucalyptus trees on the property, the design of parking lot landscape, archeological concerns from previous projects, and the steep embankment in the parking lot. Chair Hoag clarified for' fellow Committee 111embers that this project is in the Pre-Application stage and the applicant is looking for initial comments and issue identification prior to submission of a formal application. Brian Starr, project arc~itect, Studio Design Group, was present at the meeting for questions. Item 10.a. - Page 60 Minutes: ARC Monday, April 6, 2015 PAGE2 The Committee commented that they liked the design of the building and thought it would be a great addition to the City of Arroyo Grande. Committee members suggested including skyline trees in final project to help mitigate removal of the eucalyptus trees and protect views for adjacent neighborhoods, incorporation of drought-resistant landscape materials throughout the project, suggested using permeable pavers in the parking lot to min.imize runoff and maximize filtration, and including a detailed landscape and grading plan with a formal project submission. Committee members furt~er suggested that the pedestrian conn_ection between the project and the hospital be further considered to provide _safe and easy access between the two buildings, and suggested paying special attention to sidewalks and vehicle stacking at the shared driveway to help ensure pedestrian, cyclist, and vehicle safety due to heavy traffic along Fair Oaks Avenue at certain times of the day. No formal action was required. 7. DISCUSSION ITEMS: 7.a. Appointment of Architectural Review Committee member to the Bridge Street Bridge Committee Stakeholders Group _ After a brief discussion, the ARC unanimously appointed John Rubatzky to re Committee on the Bridge Street Bridge Committee Stakeholders Group. If Co ittee member Rubatzky is unable to attend a meeting, fellow Committee members a d that any one of them could serve in his absence. 8. COMMITIEE COMMUNICATIONS None. 9. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS Committee members and Staff agreed to a artier start time of 2:30 pm, for the April 20, 2015 meeting. t 3:30 pm to a ·special meeting on April '20, 2015 at 2:30 pm. aleigh King, Planning Intern (Ap9 ved at ARC Mtg April 20, 2015) Item 10.a. - Page 61 Minutes: ARC Monday, September 21, 2015 ATIACHMENT2 Chair Hoag opened the meeting for public comment. Heather Jensen, May Street, expressed her concern for .traffic ingress/ezre s, indicated the proposed hotel seems overwhelming, and seems big for the area Hearing no further public comments, Chair Hoag closed the public comme period. The Committee spoke in support for the project and provided the allowing comments: the proposed project fits well, split face block is not appropriate JP ing East Branch Street and recommend use of stor:ie to tie in with local stone. The spljt/'f8ce block on the side facing the creek could be simplified with stucco or straight bl:aok be aGse of vegetation. like the pathway, add dormer vents, the applicant has done a good · working with the Design Guidelines, questioned why the two zoning districts are being , mbined, would like to save the oak tree, is in support of the landscape plan and the plant lt"erial selection; agree with HRC condition for the Monterey Colonial style and the shutters nd the detail between the new towers needs to be consistent. Michael Dammeyer, representative Steven Puglisi Architects, Inc., and Nick Tompkins, applicant, NKT Commercial, resp ded to Committee Members comments. Bruce Berlin made a motio , seconded by Michael Peachey, to recommend approval of the project to the Planning Commission with the following modifications: 1. Incorporate ad fflonal details to the transitional towers between the two buildings for ARC review. 2. An examP, of the experimental block wall shall be reviewed by the ARC or an alternaf e proposed. 3. The plicant shall provide additional details on roof venting for ARC review. 4. Su ort a' simplistic design, lo~ger windows, transom windows, and shutters. . \ t1on carried on a 3-0 voice vote, with Mary Hertel and John Rubatzky absent. uce Berlin made a motion, seconded by Michael Peachey to continue the meeting past 5:00 /pm as per By-laws. The motion carried on a 3-0 voice vote, with Mary Hertel and John Rubatzky absent. 6.b. CONSIDERATION OF LOT MERGER 15-002 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 15-006j CONSTRUCTION OF AN APPROXIMATELY 45,000 SQUARE-FOOT MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDINGj LOCATION -800 FAIR OAKS AVENUE AND WOODLAND DRIVE; APPLICANT -TRIPLE P, LLC; REPRESENTATIVE -STUDIO DESIGN GROUP (DOWNING) Staff Contact: Matthew Downing Associate Planner Downing presented the staff report and responded to questions from the _, Committee on the proposed project. Item 10.a. - Page 62 Minutes: ARC PAGE3 Monday, September 21, 2015 Will Drake, representative, Studio Design Group Architects, Inc., presented the project and responded to Committee question's. The Committee spoke in support of the project and provided the following comments: supports the landscape plan and appreciates the pictures, like the look of the building, the pedestrian passage needs to be addressed, like the architecture, would like to see the retaining wall detail, the grading and ·drainage plan does not match the landscape plan, and suggested to use different pavers for the pedestrian path to the hospital, which will help slow traffic down and reduce concern with traffic and pedestrian interactions. Russ Garrison, principal engineer, Bethel Engineering,· addressed the Committee's concerns relating to vehicular access. Michael Peachey made a motion, seconded by Bruce Berlin, to recommend approval of the project to the Planning Commission with the following conditions: 1. Incorporate a textured walkway crossing the parking lot off Fair Oaks Avenue and connecting to the hospital. 2. The retaining wall details come back to ARC for consideration. 3. ARC is in support of the height that the ordinance allows to accommodate and conceal the roof equipment. 4. Colors and materials are acceptable. The motion carried on a 3-0 voice vote, with Mary Hertel and John Rubatzky absent. 7. DISCUSSION ITEMS: Community Development Director McClish briefed the Committee on th:z:East -nch Streetscape Project. It was determined that Mary Hertel will be representing ARC. Associate Planner Downing requested concurrence on a color preference for JA new structure at 756 Myrtle Street The ARC was in agreement that they preferred the green color_palette. 8. COMMITTEE COMMUNICATIONS None 9. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS Associate Planner Downing reminded the Co ittee that Aileen Nygaard is no longer with the City. Community Development Director Clish added that staff has deadlines that need to be made on a couple of grants. ed at 5:35 pm to a meeting on October 5, 2015 at 2:30 pm. WARREN HOAG, CHAIR (Ap oved at ARC Mtg October 5, 2015) Item 10.a. - Page 63 MINUTES: SPECIAL TRAFFIC COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY OCTOBER 26, '2015 ATTACHMENT 3 PAGE2 6. BUSINESS ITEMS 6.a Consideration of Lot Merger 15-002 and Conditional Use Permit 15-006; Construction of an approximately 45,000 square-foot medical office building; Location -Northwest corner of Fair Oaks Avenue and Woodland Drive; Applicant; Triple P LLC; Representative -Studio Design Group. RECOMMENDATON: It is r~commended that the Commission; 1. Review and provide input related to the Traffic and Circulation Study for the proposed project, and 2. Provide input regarding opening vehicular access on Woodland Drive. Carmen Leyva, Associate Engineer, gave the presentation to the Commissioners. Chair Ross opened the public comment. The following members of the public spoke: Jeanie Downer -Creekview Court -Lives in the Walnut Creek development; was told by developers when they purchased their homes that Woodland was a permanent closure; said that if opened, high school traffic will cut through increasing volume and speed of traffic; said she is not in favor of opening Woodland Drive. Dan Winterberg -Grover Beach -Speaking on behalf of his grandmother who resides ·on Cerro Vista Circle; said the safety for elders and children is his primary concern if Woodland is opened; through traffic plus overflow spill of parking from the hospital would increase danger; said the road is not very wide; not in favor of opening Woodland Drive. Janey Dale -Woodland Drive -said this is a huge project and is worried that overflow parking will encroach if Woodland is opened; said people who live on this street don't go out during the peak hours because of the volume of traffic; is not•in favor of opening Woodland Drive. Diane Yaps -Thunder Gulch -is a Board Member of the Walnut Creek HOA; is concerned about increased traffic and speed in that area; feels it would be very dangerous. for the children of the neighborhood and all residents; said that ·if Woodland D'rive is opened it would severely impact Fair Oaks; is not in favor of opening Woodland Drive. Gary Reinhart -Creekview Court -is concerned about lack of parking; difficulty in seeing when trying to get . out of the driveway; the safety of children who walk in the neighborhood wit.h intermittent sidewalks; feels the traffic. will back up if the gate is opened; is not in favor of opening Woodland Drive. · Gloria Telecky -Woodland Drive -feels that parking is a major concern; is concerned about the safety of residents, children and young adults; is not in favor of opening Woodland Drive. Item 10.a. - Page 64 MINUTES: SPECIAL TRAFFIC COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY OCTOBER ~6, 2015 PAGE3 Barbara Washington -Cerro Vista Circle -stated that the opening of Woodland Drive would impact Ce_rro Vista; is concerned about a very narrow corner; suggested a trial, opening; is not in favor of opening Woodland Drive. Gerald Yaps--Thunder Gulch -is a retired CHP Officer; said that if Woodland Drive is opened the high school. kids as well as people in general will not adhere to the speed limit; is concerned for the safety of both the elementary and high school students; is not in favor of opening Woodland Drive. Angie ·Ireson -Cerro Vista Circle -is concerned about the lack of sidewalks and the amount of walkers that come through the area; is not in favor of opening Woodland Drive. Tracy Walker -Creekview Court -has a toddler·and walks with others pushing strollers in the neighborhood; is not in favor of opening Woodland _Drive. Monette Crank -Creekview Court -does a lot of walking on the street because of the lack of sidewalks and is concerned about the safety of walkers; is not in favor of opening Woodland Drive. · Upon hearing no further comments, Chair Ross closed the public comment. The Traffic Commissioners had the following comments: Vice Chair Carson stated that the Traffic study was on target as far as the numbers and conclusion; stated -that he agrees with the possibility of access from Fair Oaks or Halcyon if possible; stated that he thinks it is important to look at the history of the decision regarding Woodland and respect the decisions. His conclusion is that he believes in the project l;>ut has concerns about opening the street. Commissioner Price agreed with Vice Chair Carson and feels that it would be a bad idea to open Woodland Drive. He says it is important to listen to the public regarding safety. Commissioner Henkel concurred with both Commissioners. He feels it would be good if access could be available off of Fair Oaks; said he is not of proponent of opening Woodland Drive. due to intermittent sidewalks and narrow width of Alpine; supports the building project. 'Chair Ross stated he is concerned about adequate parking for the building; said he t~ought the intent of the City Council )n 2006 was to provide emergency access. He said he is in favor of the project and is not in favor of opening the gate. . ' ACTION: Vice Chair Carson made a motion to accept the Engineering Report with regard to the 45,000 square foot building; a preference to provide site access from the main thoroughfare or using the existing hospital property. Commissioner Price seconded the motion and the motion passed on the following vote. Item 10.a. - Page 65 MINUTES: SPECIAL TRAFFIC COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY OCTOBER 26, 2015 PAGE4 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Carson, Price, Henkel, Ross None Pell ACTION: Vice Chair Carson made a motion to recommend the gate at Woodland Drive remain closed for reasons of increased traffic, lack of existing sidewalks, heavy use by pedestrians, bikes and children. Commissioner Price seconded the motion and the motion passed on the following vote. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Carson, Price, Henkel, Ross None Pell Item 10.a. - Page 66 8.a. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES NOVEIYIBER 3, 2015 AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: Keen, Martin, Fowler-Payne, Mack None George 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS ATTACHMENT 4 CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT NO. 15-00~ 0 AMEND CHAPTER 16.84 OF THE ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL CODE REGAR ~NG WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS; LOCATION -CITYWIDE; APP ANT -CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE Associate Planner Heffernen presented the staff report an recommended that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending the City Co cil approve the proposed Ordinance amending Chapter 16.84 of the Arroyo Grande Municip I Code and adopting by reference the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance of the St .e' of California . . Chair George opened the public hearing. Speaker, suggested staff looks at ~ing commercial businesses and farmers participate. Hearing no further comments, oi<air George closed the public hearing. Action: Commissioner~~ moved to adopt a resolution entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING THAT THE . CITY COUNCIL Al!!_END CHAPTER 16.84 OF THE ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS; DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT/No. 15-002; LOCATION CITYWIDE", as modified to adopt the Model Water Efficient L~ncfscape ordinance of the State of California by reference and to include greywater reuse for,-all new residential and mixed-use developments. Commissioner Mack seconded and.the motion passed on the following roll call vote: ? / / ~YES: /NOES: Martin, Mack, Fowler-Payne, Keen, George None .,, ABSENT: None 8.b. CONSIDERATION OF LOT MERGER NO. 15-002 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 15- 006; CONSTRUCTION OF AN APPROXIMATELY 45,000 SQUARE-FOOT, THREE-STORY MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING; LOCATION -NORTHWEST CORNER OF FAIR OAKS AVENUE AND WOODLAND DRIVE; APPLICANT -TRIPLE P, LLC; REPRESENTATIVE -STUDIO DESIGN GROUP Associate Planner Downing presented the . staff report and recommended that the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution recommending the City Council approve the project. Associate Planner Downing responded to questions from th~ Commission. Nate Stong, Omni Means, explained the traffic study for the proposed project and responded to Commission questio·ns. Will Drake, representative, Studio Design Group Architects, Inc., presented the project and responded to Commission questions. Item 10.a. - Page 67 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES NOVEMBER 3, 2015 -- PAGE3 Russ Garrison, principal engineer, ,Bethel Engineering, talked about the slope, grading, stated a lot of dirt is being removed to keep floor level low, and responded to questions from the Commission. Chair George opened the public hearing: Ed Cox, asked that staff revisit the lighting in the parking lot and requested that consideration be given to monument lighting for the proposed project. , Jeanie Downer, Creekview Court, presented pictures of the street grade and gate. She expressed her concern with traffic and opposed opening the gate. Gerald Yaps, Thunder Gulch, opposed opening the gate, said there will be cut through traffic, and excessive speed. Ken Dalebout, Hospital Administrator, Arroyo Grande Community Hospital, spoke in support of the proposed medical building, stated the hospital will share reciprocal access through the parking lot, does not want to increase traffic through the parking lot, does not support the pedestrian trail, addressed the access to the hospital, and responded to Commission questions. Monette Crank, Ceekview Court, said to get to your mail box you have to stand in the street, there is excessive traffic on Woodland, and there are 30 homes which park on Woodland. Jerry Carrasco, Creekview Way, expressed his concern with the lights, supports monument lights, stated Fair Oaks Avenue has excessive traffic -making it difficult to pull out, added drivers do not pay attention, vehicles park on both sides of Fair Oaks Avenue and asked where will the employees park. Diane Yaps, Thunder Gulch, inquired about how many parking spaces are handicap and stated there will be a lot of pedestrian traffic. Colleen Martin, Olive Street, spoke in support of the medical office, but is concern with the massiveness of the project, concern with Woodland, stated Fair Oaks should be looked at, safety is a concern if the gate is open, questioned if this is a phased project in the mixed use, why is it not , similar between the two phases. Gloria Telecky, Woodland Drive, stated with the two schools and hospital, traffic will impact Fair Oaks and Woodland and expressed her concern with parking. Beatrice Spencer stated the project is under parked, does not see a need for seven motorcycle parking spaces, suggested two more handicap-spaces, does not feel two dumpsters is adequate, opposed opening gate, and said to dig the project down a little deeper. Gary Reinhart, Creekview Court, expressed concern with traffic, noise, lights, too many motorcycle parking spaces, the trash containers will cause-a lot of banging, and safety is an issue. Hearing no further comments, Chair George closed the public hearing. Item 10.a. - Page 68 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES NOVEMBER 3, 2015 PAGE4 Commissioner Fowler-Payne comments ensued concern with circulation coming out on Halcyon Road, asked if there could be, another access point on the northerly side of the hospital that would eliminate traffic on Woodland Drive, ~nd expressed concern with lighting for adjacent neighbors. Commissioner Martin opposed the gate being opened, remove Condition ot' Approval No. 32 requiring pedestrian access and Condition of Approval No. 84 be amended to go back to a six feet wide easement. Commissioner Keen .comments ensued support the project, not fonq of the height but willing to accept the height, likes the architecture, concern with driveway off.of Fair Oaks too sharp of a turn, does not feel the need for seven motorcycle spaces,. would rather see two more parking spaces, lighting will not be 24 hours like the hospital, Condition of Approval No. 32 decision should be made by City Council as they do the Master Plans, and the 6 feet easement meets the code and should be sufficient. Commissioner Mack comments ensued having trouble with the bulb out, not in favor of creating pedestrian link in back of parking lot, modify condition of approval 32 to abandon easement, make the connectivity to the hospital, condition of approval no. 19 put height limit on light, the gate should stay closed, traffic should be opened for .discussion, do not know if the residents can park there, parking, there is room to bring building down, not a fan of parking stalls as you will not come on a motorcyci~, and would like the building height not to be overf45 feet. Chair George comments ensued she is in favor of the project, likes the architecture, does not feel the need to open the gate at Woodland, in favor with the driveway should align on Woodland (bottom of north), in favor of vehicle plug in, support solar stubs, do not need the easement mentioned in Condition of Approval No. 32, remove Condition of Approval No. 84, Conditional of Approval No. 17 add to ARC, Conditional of Approval No. 10 the signage, lighting plans should be reviewed by ARC and mention monuments to ARC, review color board samples, the left hand turn out onto Fair Oaks may be brought back, suggested having a study there to see if feasible to put a light, seven motorcycle parking spots are not needed and the City should revisit and come back with another option and suggested permit parking for Woodland Drive. Action: Commissioner Martin moved to adopt a resolution entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A MIT/GA TED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVE LOT MERGER 15-002 AND CONDIT/Of:JAL USE PERMIT 15-006; LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF FAIR OAKS AVENUE AND WOODLAND DRIVE; APPLIED FOR BY TRIPLE P, LLC. ", as modified to include the lower driveway on Woodland shall be, oppose the driveway coming out of Walnut Grove, electrical out lets shall be included, omit Conditional of Approval No. 32, Condition of Approval No.'s 10, 19, 24 are amended 'to include ARC review, Conditional of Approval No. 84 be reworded "Dedicated to the existing 6 feet wide adjacent to all public streets", and remove minimum ten feet wide. Commission~r Keen seconded and the motion passed on the following roll call vote: · AYES: NOES: ·. ABSENT: Martin·, Keen, Fowler-Payne,· George None Mack Action: Commissioner Keen moved to keep the access gate , closed on Woodland Drive. Commissioner Mack seconded and the motion passed on the following roll call vote: Item 10.a. - Page 69 . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES NOVEMBER 3, 201'5 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Keen, Mack, Martin, Fowler-Payne, George None None 9 NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 9.a. SIDERATION OF APPOINTMENT TO COMMUNITY·SERVICE GRANT PANEL PAGES munity Development Director McClish presented the staff report and recommended that the · Plann~ Commission appoint one Commission Member and one alternate to serve as a represent tive on the Community Service Grant Panel. Commissione George nominated Commissioner Keen to serve as a representative on the Community Se ~e Grant Panel. Commissioner ·Martin seconded and the motion unanimousiy carried. Commissio er Fowler-Payne volunteered to be an alternate. 10. NOTICE OF ADMI STRATIVE DECISIONS SINCE OCTOBER 20, 2015 This is a notice of adminis tive decision for Minor Use Permits, including any approvals, denials or referrals by the Community velopment Director. An administrative decision must be appealed or called u for review b the Plan in Commission b a ma·orit vote. Case No. · Applicant · · · Address · · · Descriptio·n Action Plann~r " -' , t - TUP 15-020 Saint Patrick Xmas tree sale Dec 4 -A S. School Street 6, 2015 Anderson In answer to Commissioner Fowler-Pay , Associate Planner Downing stated the street side yard setback required a Minor. Exception. 11. COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS Commissioner Mack stated that the parking stand ds need to be reviewed. has scheduled a meeting to start the review. 12. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS None 13. ADJOURNMENT On motion by Commissioner George, seconded by Commissione the meeting adjourned 9:59 p.m. ATTEST: stated that staff -- DEBBIE WEICHINGER LAN GEORGE, VICE-C SECRETARY TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION (Approved _____ _, Item 10.a. - Page 70 ~ Dignity Health. '1\i Arroyo Grande Community Hospital August 25, 2015 Mr. Matthew Downing Assistant Planner City of Arroyo Grande · 300 East Branch Street Arroyo Grande, California 93420 Mr. Downing: ATTACHMENT 5 We understand that the City is considering an application by Triple P, LLC in connection with a medical office building to be located at the North-West comer of Fair Oaks Avenue and Woodland Drive (MOB). Arroyo Grande Community Hospital is pleased to provide its support for the development of the MOB. Arroyo Grande Community Hospital believes that the proposed MOB would not only be a benefit to our hospital but to the Arroyo Grande community as a whole. The proximity of the proposed MOB to Arroyo Grande Community Hospital would provide an ideal location for medical professionals to deliver much needed medical services to the community. In addition, we are currently investigating the expansion of certain medical services that are instrumental to the hospital such as physician offices, infusion services, imaging and laboratory centers. As part of this expansion, Arroyo Grande Community Hospital anticipates that it will have space needs both on and off of our hospital campus. While we do not yet have the necessary approvals, we believe that the proposed MOB would be a preferential location for our medical offices and ancillary clinical services. Thank you for allowing us to comment on this important addition to the community. Very truly yours, ~ck,~ Charles J. Cova President & CEO CC: Chris Will, Triple P, LLC (via email) ~ECE~VE~=f ~ SEP 0 S 20!'.~ ~ [161270)731790 ; , Cffi' OF Al\:ROYO G!Ml\'Jf]E ~ g C:t,?~~!~°!Y_D§!_E!;9\~r;~'.!f.i Item 10.a. - Page 71 --~ i ! Minutes: City Council Meeting Tuesday, March 14, 2006 9. PUBLIC HEARING AITACHMENT 6 9.a. Consideration of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 05-003 and Planned Unit Development No. 05-007 for a Phased, Mixed-Use Development Located on Fair Oaks Avenue East of Arroyo Grande Community Hospital; Applied for by Central Coast Real Estate Development. Acting Community Developm~nt Director Heffernan presented the staff report and recommended the Council adopt a Resolution approving Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 05-003 and Planned Unit Development No. 05-007. Staff responded to questions regarding open and common space standards; drainage as it relates to the use of porous pavers versus underground vaults or bioswales; and the proposed gate at the end of Woodland Drive for emergency access only. Mayor Ferrara opened the public hearing and invited comments from those in the audience Who wished to be heard on the matter. Garv Young, representing Central Coast Real Estate Development, gave a brief history of the project's development review process and explained that based on feedback received, a project was developed which addressed the constraints that were raised. He thanked Arroyo Grande Community Hospital {Hospital) and Catholic Healthcare West (CHW) which attended all the prior meetings and helped develop the project. Rick Castro, President and CEO of Arroyo Grande Community Hospital, noted that 20 months ago Arroyo Grande Hospital was acquired by CHW and had started a process to develop a Strategic Plan to address immediate healthcare needs and to determine future needs. He acknowledged that the hospital was landlocked; however, the Hospital needs to plan for future growth. He acknowledged the Council's approval of the OMU D-2.2 Overlay. He commented that healthcare is a changing environment and the Hospital needs time to plan for its future growth and to define the needs of the medical and surrounding .community. He supported the project as proposed. In response to questions 'by the Council regarding the conceptual design, Mr. Castro aonfirmed that the Hospital needs the maximum amount of square footage (up to 120,000 sq. ft.), as well as the other 3.5 acres to ,the north, for· potential future expansion. He noted the Hospital needs time to plan appropriately and that it was not yet known whether the expansion would be to the Hospital or for separate medical offices or exactly how much space would be required to meet the needs of the community. · David Foote, from FIRMA and speaking on behalf of the applicant, addressed issues relating to proposed agricultural buffers and setbacks; and responded to questions from Council regarding the width of the proposed pedestrian path; landscaping; fencing; and soil type/class on the adjacent triangular piece of land. Bardhyll Nushi, Cerro Vista Circle, stated. he was speaking on behalf of his neighborhood which includes Cerro Vista Circle, S. Alpine, Dodson, Newman Drive, Eman Court, and Taylor Place and asked those in the audience who live in those areas and_ for whom he speaks to please stand. He read from a prepared statement (on file in the Administrative Service Department) expressing concerns and opposition to th~ proposed project, including the Woodland Drive extension as it relates to public safety; the proposed site design as it relates to size, scale and loss of rural character; site design as it relates to buffers and the proposed pathway; lack of compliance-with Ordinance 557 (OMU D-2.2 Overlay); and the lack of an approved Hospita.1 Facilities Plan: He concluded by requesting the Council to reconsider this project. Darlene Mack, Woodland Drive, spoke in opposition to the extension of Woodland Drive .and requested the existing termination of Woodland Drive be permanent. She submitted written comments for the record (on ·me in the Administrative Services Department.) Item 10.a. - Page 72 Minutes: City Council Meeting _Tuesday, March 14, 2006 Page5 Deborah West, S. Alpine Street, stated that the project's density is a problem because of traffic and noted that it is surrounded by a lov,r-density residential area which includes a neighborhood· of children and schools. She suggested consideration of a plan that could be spread out. She expressed concerns about the Phase 2 with so much office space and where the traffic would exit. She stated the Hospit~I should have more space for its use and opposed high-density housing. She also stated preservation of open space is very important. Gabe West, S. Alpine Street, stated he and his friends play in the neighborhood and the existing open space is very important to them. . · Scott Washington, Cerro Vista Circle, agreed with previous public comments and stated 'he likes to play with his friends in the open field. Bernard Lansman, Newman Circle, read from a prepared statement (on file in the Administrative Service Department) expressing concerns about the project's poten_tial impact to Arroyo Grande Creek. He referred to and read excerpts from Ordinance No. 550 regarding agricultural buffer requirements. -He urged the Council to take into consideration concern for the creek environment. Victoria Shutton, S. Alpine Street, expressed concern about congestion, safety, and loss of open space as a result of the proposed development in this area. Robert Berrvhill; Cerro Vista Circle, referred to the pedestrian pathway and stated it would be difficult for law enforcement to patrol· this area and the pathway within the project could attract vandalism, graffiti, and a criminal element. He further opposed the size and scale of the project as it would impact views and decrease property values in the neighborhood. No further public comments were received and Mayor Ferrara closed the public hearing. Gary Young, applicant, responded to issues regarding drainage and conditions -of approval that will address rehabilitation of the ·existing storm drain line; noted that there is a long term agreement with Catholic Healthcare West for the development of the property; stated that approval of a deed restriction on the property would ·restrict Phase 2 to hospital/medical office · use-, and noted that prior to recordation of the final map, they would execute and record an agreement with CHW; stated that the project meets the standards of the OMU 02.2 Overlay; provided further information on the u~e of biofiltration swales1 to facilitate project storrnwater drainage, and displayed a sample of a porous paver. Council Member Arnold provided the following comments: Initially thought Phase 2 should be developed first; however, after meeting with Hospital representatives, he understands their timing issues for future planning; -Concern with residential parking availability; acknowledged Development Code requirements had been met; however, he thought more parking should be required for this project. Suggested a parking agreement with Phase 2. to provide additional parking for residential component; Acknowledged community concerns; however, supported the Woodland Drive extension and noted that the existing stub was meant for the road to go through; Suggested traffic mitigation measures such as speed humps, additional stop signs, bulb- outs, and enhanced traffic enforcement by the Police Department: Noted that having homes close to the pedestrian would dimi~ish the safety issue; Acknowledged that the existing open space is private property and was not meant to remain as open space; Thinks this is a good project; however, he questioned whether this was a good project for the existing' neighborhood; . ' : Item 10.a. - Page 73 ) ' 1 j Minutes: City Council Meeting Tuesday, March 14, 2006 Page6 -Noted that the proposed site plan looks different than what was presented at the Pre- Application. -Wanted assurance that the Hospital would be protected and that the residents are not impacted more than they need to be. Council Member Dickens provided the following comments: -Had five areas of concern: housing, the Overlay (hospital and medical use); traffic circulation, appropriate agriculture buffer, and open space; Referred to General Plan Update which involved comprehensive review of land use options and to redesignate properties appropriately. Noted that the subject property was zoned as Mixed Use which means it will be developed and was not meant to remain as open space; In response to safety concerns, referred to nearby County developments on the Mesa and noted that majority of traffic will be generated from those developments down through the City; _ Noted that installation of sidewalks is the property owner's responsibility; Traffic calming measures must be reviewed; cannot support putting blockades up. It is important from traffic circulation standpoint to open up circulation and not close it off; Housing and medical use: Supports more dense project on this site in order to attract hospital personnel to area; a more dense project would mean housing costs would be lower; Agricultural buffer. Noted that Ordinance 550 protects agriculture zoned property; property in question is not zoned Agriculture. He noted that the triangular piece of land is zoned Agriculture and it needs to be mitigated. If project moves forward, proposed that a zone change be prepared to redesignate that piece of property as Puqlic Facilities. Also proposed an in-lieu fee to mitigate the loss of that small parcel of agriculture land (distributed to staff a proposed formula establishing an estimated in-lieu fee which is on file in the Administrative Services Department); Pathway: Disagreed with comments regarding safety issue. Once developed, would eliminate transient issues; area would be safer, more people to observe and monitor activity. Would agree to (llOdifying the space between the buildings and the pathway as it is a bit confined as designed. Understands Hospital's need for time to develop a plan for future needs. Acknowledged that adequate space is needed for the hospital. With minor modifications, can support the project. Council Member Costello provided the following comments: -Asked how agriculture buffer is measured (from'the agricultural property boundary); Supported preserving agricultural land; however, he noted that the .07 4 acre piece of land is impossible to be farmed and there should be some sort of mitigation for it. He noted that to preserve agricultural land in other areas, higher density development must be considered to meet State housing requirements; Acknowledgecl this is a mixed use project and it is critical to protect the portion designated for future hospital/medical_ use; Does not oppose the proposed residential d_evelopment; however, must address some of the _ parking problems to ensure enough spaces are provided; Noted that a portion of the park will remain; and a pathway will remain; Noted that whether or not Woodland goes through, police visibility is still there; Creek habitat and environment will remain protected; drainage will be improved in development process; Can support project as proposed with minor modifications; Item 10.a. - Page 74 Minutes: City Council Meeting Tuesday, March 14, 2006 Page7 -, Has mixed feelings about Woodland extension, however, he noted the stub is already there. Suggested keeping it closed in Phase 1 and reevaluate extending Woodland Drive in Phase 2. Mayor Pro Tern Guthrie provided the following comments: .,... Addressed intent of mixed use zoning· and how it relates to this project; spoke ._about opportunities for higher density residential; -Addressed the Overlay and the intent to provide for the expansion of the Hospital; -Acknowledged that CHW is on board with the proposed project and it works for them; -Expressed concern abol.!t whether the Overlay was necessary for the remaining property; Generally supports the project and noted that there is significantly less impact than it would , have been if it had been developed entirely as commercial; -Addressed traffic circulation as it relates to the Woodland extension; noted he did not think this would be a good ,connection and would not oppose keeping it closed; Addressed parking issues; -Supports the proposed pedestrian trail and did not feel it would create an unsafe environment; acknowledged that site constraints required a 12 foot pathway and suggested that a portion of the path along the creek could be eliminated to improve the site; -Agricultural buffer distance is adequate; if triangular piece is zoned Agriculture, should be mitigated. Believes the General Plan designates the property as open space. -Residential component will gener~te very little traffic (24 peak hour trips); -Expressed doubt that 120,000 square foot of office space with underground parking would ever be built du_e to construction and building expense; _ -Acknowledged 'significant improvements to drainage; not ready to sha,re costs 90/1 O; Suggested removing the Overlay from the Development Code; favors alternative with deed restriction; -Generally supportive of project with minor modifications. Mayor Ferrara displayed th-e previous conceptual site plan presented at the Planning Commission's Pre-Application review and noted that the site plans are significantly different as it relates to the residential and hospital/medical office layouts as well as open space. 1 Mayor Ferrara provided the_ following comments: Number one priority is to ensure that Arroyo Grande Community Hospital expands where they can remain viable and provide adequate healthcare services to the South County; Not opposed to the residential density; although he preferred the original configuration versus the conceptual design being presented tonight; -Would like to have provided direct housing support (workforce housing) for a Hospital expansion; however, the timing of the Hospital componenf makes that impossible; and noted that the City's housing goals are aligned with the principles of smart growth. Envisioned the project being built together to encourage workforce housing in order to reduce certain impacts such as additional traffic generation. , Drainage: Would not approve any project in such close proximity to the creek that does' not have some form of on-site, retention; stated that for a project of this size, porous pavers are not sufficient in h!3avy rains; Circulation: Acknowl~dged existing stub and street configuration; noted City's goal is to improve circulation segments in the City; if Woodland is extended, ingress and egress onto Fair Oaks would benefit the residents; once project is fully developed, can use traffic calming devices if necessary. Item 10.a. - Page 75 i . ~ Minutes: City Council Meeting Tuesday, March 14, 2006 PageB -No issue with agricultural buffers. Acknowledged that concerns express~d by Council Member Dickens were valid; -Concerned about current site plan and does not think the square footage (120,000 sq.ft.) of proposed f1ospital expansion is viable; prefers surface parking instead of subterranean parking; · -Prefers original conceptual site design with less mass; favors this type of project in 1his area, however, not supportive of current configuration and mixed use proportion of project; -Not supportive of proposed mitigation for drainage. Council discussion ensued regarding drainage. Ken Chacone, p~oject civil engineer, discussed site constraints, including elevation changes, and how it WC!S determined to adequately address drainage for the project in an environmentally friendly m~mner. , Mayor Ferrara referred to. the completion of an Alternative Study for Zone 111 A and suggested that staff circulate the Study to the Council and the applicant for review as it relates to drainage and impacts to the creek. He also recommended that before making a determination on this project, that the City receive direct feedback from the Department of Fish & Game, Salmon· Enhancement, and the Resource Conservation District. Following further discussion, Mayor Ferrara suggested a continuance in order -to seek a conceptual site plan that is closer to what was originally presented, and to see a modified strategy on the drainage issue as it relates to the creek. He reiterated that he has no problem with the project concept, however, he was not in favor of the current design or the proposed mitigation measures and conditions as it relates to drainage. Council Member Dickens moved to continue consideration of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 05-003 and Planned Unit Development No. 05-007 for a Phased, Mixed-Use Development Located on Fair Oaks Avenue East of Arroyo Grande Community Hpspita1;· Applied for by Central Coast R~al Estate Development, to provide the applicant adequate time to address concerns raised by the Council. Council Member Arnold seconded the motion. - Discussion ensued and consensus was reached that the motion included seeking direct interaction with Fish and Game, Resource and Conservation District and Salmon Enhancement as it relates to drainage and potential impacts to the creek; as well as clarifying that the' concerns to be, addressed i~clude parking, open space, review of the D-Overlay as it relates to the lack of a Hospital Facilities Plan and mixed use proportion and square footage requirements; and consideration of agricultural .land mitigation. The motion carried on the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Dickens, Arnold, Costello, Guthrie, Ferrara None None Mayor Ferrara called a break at 10:24 p.m. The Council reconvened at 10:42 p.m. Item 10.a. - Page 76 Minutes: City Council Meeting Tuesday, September 26, 2006 Page 7 David Murray, representing Caltrans District 5, gave a presentation that covered threeyFincipal concerns relating to the Dalidio Ranch Initiative, including traffic circulation, hydro 9y, and the cost of the Prado Road Interchange. Council questions of Mr. DeCarli and Mr. Murray ensued about Service {LOS) F; concern about existing traffic conditions Los Osos Valley Road and anticipated impacts to Los Osos Valley Road, MadonnafaOad, and Highway 101 if the initiative passes; what the process is for re-prioritizing fundi!Jg-for regional transportation projects if the initiative passes; flood mitigation mezsures if th "riifiative passes; and the proposed Prado Road Interchange Project. Action: Mayor Ferrara moved to Ja e a position to oppose Measure J based on impacts it will have on funding for other regjeflal transportation projects in the pipeline, and Council Member Costello seconded the llJPti6n. Brief discussion ensued on the methods to be used to get the word out to the publi :-e1'l the reasons why the City opposes the Measure. The motion passed on the following roll vote: Ferrara, Costello, Dickens, Guthrie, Arnold None None, 9.b. Consideration of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 05-003 and Planned Unit Development No. 05-007 for a Phased, Mixed·Use Development Located on Fair Oaks Avenue East of the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital; Applied for by Central Coast Real Estate Development. Associate Planner Heff ernon presented the staff report and stated the Planning Commission recommended the City Council adopt a Resolution approving Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 05-003 and Planned Unit Development No. 05--007 for a Mixed Use project on Fair Oaks Avenue. She stated that staff recommended additional conditions of approval as follows: 1) "Phase 2 shall be developed as medical office space with surface parking that satisfies all mixed- use development standards for the OMU District and Design Overlay OMU D-2.20, subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit and related environmental analysis", and 2) "To ensure that Phase 2 is developed pprsuant to hospital facility needs, prior to recordation of the final tract map, the applicant shall provide the City with an option to purchase agreement for the Phase 2 property, between the property owner and Catholic Healthcare West, subject to approval of the City Attorney". She also noted. alternatives for Council consideration which included approving the project as proposed after deciding on the preferred drainage solution, Woodland Street extension, and acceptance of fees for loss of non-prime agricultural land; modify as appropriate and approve the project; do not approve the project; or provide direction to staff. Staff responded to questions from Council concerning the proposed project. Mayor Ferrara opened the public hearing, inviting the applicant or representative to address the Council first. Gary Young, applicant, stated they were back from the March 14, 2006 meeting after making changes to the project as directed by the Council. He acknowledged the Development Code Amendment previously approved by the Council that would allow the proposed use on the property. He noted they .had met on site with the various regulato!"Y agencies concerning environmental issues on the site. He reviewed the revised drainage plan; reviewed changes to Item 10.a. - Page 77 Minutes: City Council Meeting Tuesday, September 26, 2006 PageB the project including changes to the pedestrian path at the north end of the project, and movement of three buildings back from the pedestrian path; amended the traffic study; noted that Arroyo Grande Community Hospital wants to maximize square footage for future expansion; confirmed that-a streambed alteration permit has been submitted to the California Department of Fish and Game which is pending; agreed with the proposed mitigation fee for the loss of. non- prime agricultural soils; confirmed that four parcels exist at the request of Catholic Healthcare West for a future plan; clarified that the other parcels eannot be sold off individually due to the Planned Unit Development configuration; confirmed that the ·porous pavers had been eliminated as directed by the Council and stamped concrete would be used instead; confirmed that there would be no detention basin, but the project would include bioswales; and confirmed that the proposed conceptual design for Phase 2 includes surface parking. Mr. Young responded to questions from Council regarding the proposed bioswales as it relates to drainage. David Foote, on behalf of the applicant, explained an arborist report and tree protection plan was included in the staff report and confirmed that a survey and evaluation had been conducted on all the trees located on the property. Mayor Ferrara invited comments from those in the audience who wished to be heard on the matter. · Bardhyll Nushi, Cerro Vista Circle, expressed concern with the proposed extension of Woodland Drive and spoke in opposition to a mixed·use project going through the process with only a single use and not a comprehensive design for the entire site. He referred to S. Alpine Street and displayed several photos showing the existing termination of Woodlar)d Drive, the narrowness of the road, no sidewalks, children having to play in the street, and opposed the extension of Woodland Drive. He appreciated the efforts the applicant has made to widen the bike and pedestrian path, but still thinks the buildings are closer than originally proposed. He referred to the proposed barricade and stated there was a paved area that should be maximized to include curbed parking spaces and some .vehicle/pedestrian ,access and landscaping while still maintaining the emergency access. Barbara Washington, Cerro Vista Circle, expressed concern with drainage impacts behind her property. She. displayed photos, suggested adding more trees, and noted the narrow width of the street and lack of sidewalks. Colleen Nushi, Cerro Vista Circle, spoke in opposition to the Woodland Drive extension and expressed concern for pedestrian and children safety. Mayor Ferrara called for a tecess at 10:45 p.m. The Council reconvened at 10:50 p.m. Li~a Moylan, Vice-President for Patient Care Services at Arroyo Grande Community Hospital, read a letter from Rick Castro, Hospital President, into the record (on file in the Administrative Services Department), supporting the proposed project. She personally supported the proposed project and emphasized the need for a housing_ component near the hospital to aid in their recruitment efforts for medical professionals. She noted the Hospital needs time for an in-depth study to determine the future medical needs of the community. Arlene Rowan, S. Alpine, expressed concern about increases in traffic and opposed the Woodland Drive extension. She also expressed concern with the lack of existing sidewalks in the area. Item 10.a. - Page 78 Minutes: City Council Meeting Tuesday, September 26, 2006 Upon hearing no further publi~ comments, Mayor Ferrara closed the public hearing. -Council Member Arnold provided the following comments: With regard to the traffic issue, not extending Woodland Drive equals poor planning; Page9 -Believes there are mitigation measure to address traffic concerns, including speed humps, bulbouts, stop signs, and/or increased· Police enforcement; noted that the existing stub-out was put there with the intention to extend the street; Believed that the proposed project had been improved; Expressed concern with parking; however, he acknowledged that development standards have been met: Stated that "Woodland should be 40 foot wide with speed humps and bu I bouts; would provide additional parking; Noted that there are mature eucalyptus trees on the Phase 2 site; would like to see planti'ng of street trees today (along the west side of Woodland} to mitigate the loss of trees that would come down on the property in 10 or 20 years; Expressed concern with the driveways; should include more decorative concrete instead of plain asphalt; Suggested that stucco be sand or smooth; Expressed concern with the creek bank; need to survey the condition of the creek bank; Noted that condition #1 O and #58 need to match concerning hours of operation; Include condition regarding build out as one project in Phase 1; Include mitigation on S. Alpine for traffic calming. Council Member Dickens provided the following comments: Noted that condition #11 O requires Phase 2 to be developed as medical office space with surface parking that satisfies all mixed use development standards for the Office Mixed Use district and design overlay; -Appreciates applicant's willingness to offer a mitigation fee for the loss of agricultural land on the • I site; Disagrees with staffs analysis regarding the .074 acre piece of land; should be looked at as an agricultural piece of property and be identified and mitigated accordingly; Suggested adding a mitigation measure 2.2 stating that the applicant shall mitigate the loss of non-prime farmland at a ratio of 1 :1 or the applicant shall pay an in-lieu fee as specified by ttie City; ' Stated it is in the City's best interest to extend Woodland Drive to the north without the gate/knox box and eliminate condition #8; not necessary to install traffic calming devices; Noted that porous pavers had been eliminated; supports use of stamped concrete; Supports enlarged pedestrian walkway; Referred to water quality issues as it relates to the drainage; supports proposal; Supports the projects with minor modifications as suggested; Supports widening WOOdland Drive now to allow additional parking. Council Member Costello provided the following comments: -Questioned whether Woodland Drive needs to go through at this time; hO\yever, recommended widening now for additional parking spaces, leaving as a blocked street, and reconsider extending the street in Phase 2; Supported removal of porous pavers and using stamped concrete instead; . Supported Council Member Dickens's suggestion to add formal mitigation measure for the .agricultural land; Item 10.a. - Page 79 Minutes: City Council Meeting Tuesday, September 26, 2006 -Suggested being mindful in how the outflow is being directed; needs to be fixed; -Supports the project; however, recommended keeping the street blocked. Mayor Pro T em Guthrie provided the following comments: Page 10 -Number one concern was the mixed use split (75%/25%) and supports the change in the General Plan language; Drainage proposal is a good plan: Supported change to pedestrian path entrance: Supported agricultural land mitigation; supports proposed buff er; Would see a solution to the erosion problem on the creek bank; Questioned that the Woodland Drive extension will be a significant circulation improvement: does not oppose opening; however, suggested formally studying and reviewing after 18 months to determine traffic impacts; Expressed more concern about increase in traffic when the commercial component is built; Supported widening of the road; · Supported the project. Mayor Ferrara provided the following comments: • Is proponent of through circulation to facilitate flow of traffic; however, this is not one of those instances; Ref erred to traffic study and noted that the Level of Service deals primarily with the number of traffic trips and does not address safety issues. -Does not favor increasing traffic in this neighborhood at this time; could open up as experiment in Phase 2; -Would not favor road extension without traffic calming devices such as speed humps; -Supported standard street width for Woodland Drive; -Supported installation of knox-box at gate now; Lack. of existence of adequate sidewalks is a constraint throughout-this area;• Supports drainage plan; ref erred to outfall and recommended examining condition and stability of bank where the pipe comes out and goes back in; -Supports adding ·1anguage for agricultural mitigation as recommended by Council Member Dickens; -Likes stamped concrete and limiting use of asphalt; -Supports project as recommended by the Planning Commission; -Cannot support opening up Woodland Drive. - Action: _Council Member Costello moved to adopt a Resolution, as follows, "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, INSTRUCTING THE DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES TO FILE A NOTICE OF DETERMINATION, AND APPROVING VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP CASE NO. 05-003 AND PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CASE NO. 05a007, APPLIED FOR BY CENTRAL COAST REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT FOR PROPERTY LCOATED ON FAIR OAKS AVENUE (EAST OF ARROYO GRANDE COMMUNITY.t:IOSPITAL)", as amended to include language recommended by Council Member_ Dickens that the applicant shall mitigate the loss of non-prime agricultural soils at a 1:1 ratio or . paying an in-lieu fee as determined by the City; include language that Woodland Drive shall be fully constructed with sidewalks; 'and include special conditions as recommended by staff. Mayor Pro Tern Guthrie. seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll-call vote: Item 10.a. - Page 80 . . I ~, Minutes: City Council Meeting Tuesday, September 26, 2006 Page 11 AYES: -NOES: Costello, Guthrie, Dickens, Arnold, Ferrara None "ABSENT: None 12. Cl OUNCIL REPORTS a. MA1iYTONY M. FERRARA: (1) S Luis Obispo Council of Governments/San ~uis -Obispo Regional· Transit Aut ~rity_ (SLOCOG/SLORTA). Held Executive Board Meeting to set agenda for next rrt~etmg. (2) South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District (SSLOCSD). Reported on the Distri 's Rate Study and proposed service charge 'and connection fee increase. (3) Other. None. b. MAYOR PRO TEM JIM G JHRIE: (1) County Water· R ources Advisory Committee (WRAC). Discussed establishing actual agn ultural water use; ~ome ·concern expressed by C_ounty regarding the Memorand ~f Understanding as it relates to funding; discussed County development of Con ervation Element. (2) Other. Attended the South Co nty Area Transit (SCAT) meeting as the Alternate: agency is in good financial shap~· there has been a growth in ridership; agency was successful in receiving a gra for purchase of a hybrid bus; and currently preparing a grant application for bus elter improvements. c. COUNC.IL MEMBER Jl,M DICKENS: d. (1) South County Area Transit (SCAT). Ma r Pro Tern Guthrie attended as the Alternate (see report above). (2) . South County Youth Coalition. No report. (3) Other. None. COUNCIL MEMBER JOE COSTELLO: . (1) Zone 3 Water Advisory Board. No report. (2) Air Pollution Control District (APCD). No report. Meets (3) Fire Oversight Committee. No report. (4) Fire Consolidation Oversight Committee. No report . (5) Other. None. e: COUNCIL MEMBER ED ARNOLD: . . (1) Integrated Waste Management Authority Board (IWMA). No rep rt. (2) California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (CJPIA). No repo('t. (3) Economic Vitality Corporation (EVC). No report. Meets tomorrow. (4) Other. Reported on training sessions attended at the League of Califo ia Cities Annual Conference relating to the California Environmental Quality Act city.wide wireless systems; and Mean Small Towns Be Cool?". Item 10.a. - Page 81 INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION --~:{~:~Ix·" i~~~~w lio.!;Me~er"lS-002 and Conditional Use Permit 15-006 NorthW~~~~~C~rner of Fair Oaks Avenue and Woodland Drive ·-:~· October 2015 ATIACHMENT7 Item 10.a. - Page 82 " --:~'1>._'V'.'}".• , ~~ THIS PAGE:11s INTl3Nffil©NALLY Bt'AINK .. Item 10.a. - Page 83 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVt. LJtCLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 Project: Lot Merger 15-002 and Conditional Use Permit 15-006 Lead Agency: City of Arroyo Grande Document Availability: • City of Arroyo Grande Community Development Department 300 East Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 October 2015 Proj:ct :::::::·•~oyogrande.orgL ,. #(~' The proposed project is the second phase of a pr!'lxi:i~(fsly approved, pha·se:ai:mixed-use project. Phase I •'!l:,'·r~'i\:~-.,~ ••• r~ ... ,~ .... ~. of the project has been constructed (residentia'lt:p"~yelopment, Walnut GroV:~J.h .. The proposed project consists of merging four (4) existing lots into on~·::(~}~~~q~ of apprqximately 1d3~~~~._square-feet for the construction of an approximately 45,000 square-fooC~~t~~~stq.W,~~fErty-five footT4~J~);:;t;~ll medical office building with 182 surface parking spaces~~::·-·. ·~r~~::~;::::~;:~;::::Y-··:~:~:~::;:: Summa~ Document Preparation: ~~~~ . Pursuant to Section 21084:.,i-p,,M!:!~ Californicl':~;i;:hyironm·en~a'.l~uality-A¢1;{;:+he City of Arroyo Grande (the City) has independently:if.~~1:~(;i;=~m~:l').d analyze"iH~b.e lnit~~:ffs?My~ci.pp rvi"iWgated Negative Declaration for .,/',;':~~•'}"""~~~':;-• .,.~:·}~~~~";, "{~!./'•:•. <>:•;•:~: .. ~-~ .. ~<. ' •:J>:,~~:n:L;•-'"'<.~,, the proposed project ~~R~J.!nds thar~~~~~ docum·~g:~~~~~flect the"inq,gpendent judgment of the City. The City, as lead agency, also:'.C:qnflrms th~~'he project~mitjgation measures detailed in these documents are feasible and will be imple;;;ti'.ited as ~~t~.J.n the M"itig~~ed Negative Declaration. · ---..L~t;:;sz_ff.p,~~===·>:~·::::'.ti~~t:~~~1::~~~==1==1=~~~~' -~-~-t~_c_to_b_e_r_2_0_1_5 _______ _ 26 October 2015 Date Associate Planner Page 3 of 46 Item 10.a. - Page 84 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVC. '":CLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 Table of Contents: October 2015 lntroduction ................................................................................................................................................... 6 Introduction and Regulatory Guidance ..................................................................................................... 6 Lead Agency .............................................................................................................................................. 6 Purpose and Document Organization ....................................................................................................... 6 Summary of Findings ................................................................................................................................. 7 Pr[~~~~~:.i~,~~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~:.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~ :::i~:,o~::c:i::;~:.e:d·1.o.r.~r-oj·e-~.:::::::::::::::::::::~e:~:::::::::::::·::!~~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Other ReqUJred Public Agency Approvals ............. :·:t~;~~~ ................ ,.., ................... w:::r-:~ ................................ 9 R_elated Projects ····:·························i%'ii~~:.-············:~~~., .................. :~, ....................... 9 Environmental Checkl1st ........................ ::~·;.:-::-:::·:-:, •..................... ;~~:::·:·: ............................................................. 10 . . ·-~~:~~~~;;'.:::::~;:l~\;:r.:::.. ··::::~i~~~:'.:~... -Project Information .................................................. : ........................... ,., ..................................................... 10 . ~~~~~=~~~~--. ··~:::;::~:~~~!~:~~:R·. ~,·:~~+~~~~i:::!;;~ Environmental Factors Potentially Affecte·a:=:L ........ ::~~::~:·:·:.:-............. :·;:~~;~:'.. •.............................................. 11 Determinati~n····:··{j,,~·~·········'4'~~---·········································11 Evaluation of Env1ror:imental lmpacts: ................ :·:·;·:-:·,~~~~; ................ ::·x,~· .................................................... 12 . ·:-:::;~~1~~~~~=:'., 1~;1. ·;:;;~~lK Environmental Issues ............ , .............. ~,·-····················_, •••........................................................................... 13 i. Aest~::~:J~~itm~f:~~~~t~~~j:i:;;.:: . .":~~~i\~~~~~if ~1~l~\~~~:~~~i~~t~~~::;::.:_:~~~~}~~~; ..................................................................... 13 II. Ag~iiiilJfare and For~·s't.r;.v ResdufQf:!S ........... ::·:·~:·:?fi:~x-.. .'~: ....................................................................... 14 Ill. Affe~~···············~W&:.-::::'~}~:·······:'.'.!. ........................................................................... 15 IV. B1olog1c.al:Hesources ......... :::::~~: •........... ;~~·:·;, .......................................................................................... l9 ~==~~~~~~;~:~~ ·~~~~~ii~~:; ·g·~~:;:~>· V. Cultural Res0_urces ............... :::-;~·~ •........................................................................................................ 20 ~:;.:e,:~:::.: ~~~::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~~ VIII Hazards and Hazardous~wiaterials .................................................................................................... 25 IX Hydrology and Water Quality .............................................................................................................. 26 X. Land Use and Planning ........................................................................................................................ 29 XI. Mineral Resources .............................................................................................................................. 30 XII. Noise .................................................................................................................................................. 31 XIII. Population and Housing ................................................................................................................... 32 XIV. Public Services .................................................................................................................................. 32 Page 4 of 46 Item 10.a. - Page 85 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVI:. L.JcCLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 October 2015 XV. Recreation ......................................................................................................................................... 33 XVI. Transportation/Traffic ...................................................................................................................... 33 XVII. Utilities and Service Systems .......................................................................................................... 35 Mandatory Findings of Significance .................................................................................... : ....................... 36 Summary of Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................................... 38 References ................................................................................................................................................... 46 Documents & Maps ................................................................................................................................. 46 Page 5 of 46 Item 10.a. - Page 86 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE:: ut:CLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 Introduction Introduction and Regulatory Guidance October 2015 The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) has been prepared by the City of Arroyo Grande (the City) to evaluate the potential environmental effects of the proposed project. This document has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code §21000 et seq., and the State CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations (CCR) § 15000 et seq. An Initial Study is conducted by a lead agency to determine if~.~~~~~~~ may have a significant effect on the environment [CEQA Guidelines §15063(a)]. If there is s~,~~!M'.f!:~.!-_evidence that a project may have a significant effect on the environment, an Environmentafii:l;n'pact!ljf{~P.Ort (EIR) must be prepared, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines §15064(a). Howe'!.~faJ(fi~e lead -~g~~~-gy determines that revisions in the project plans or proposals made by or agreed ~g}~gyiii:Ke applicant miH@t~ the potentially significant effects to a less-than-significant level, a MitigatEl~~?~~g.~tive Declaration m~~W1~!=J-.prepared instead of an EIR [CEQA Guidelines §15070(b)]. The lead agen~~~~f._epares a written state~~t(~?.i::lescribing the reasons a proposed project would not have a significant eff~~t~~n_the ~nY!hrnment anc{~~~;~f~fore, why an EIR need not be prepared. This IS/MND .. :·~o.i:iforms to thi?~~~t!=l~tW~-quirements und'i~W~EQA Guidelines ~::;~gency '"~·~ ~~~,~ ,, The lead agency is the pu~H~.-.agency with~f:Jrnarv ··apj?f;g;>t;al auth'of:jfa~9ver the proposed project. In accordance with CEQA §~f~~Jm~? .. _ §15051(tii{~:), "the.::J'~~ij~~g~ncy "i»1Wmormally be an agency with general governmenta!:;RQW~~s·, .. sli~H;;R~ a city c)i;j~~puntY.Wat~iM:~l~~!f:-_an-agency with a single or limited ··~,:.~.; • ..;;•:.... J'~ .. x,.D~~~. :~:~: .. :·:~/;:~~:·~·"·.~ 0 ··~ ~~:·;~:·~· purpose." The lead age"Q.~Y:}or the p't~Hpsed proJe~}i;!~::t:he City of Arroyo Grande. The contact person for the lead ag::~ •.. ~~~~ ,~fu IVli'!tt.oew:-B~wnmg, AssoGca:t~·-P la n n er-:::;:;;::::*:·:-.. ";;;::::::~ 4~BV.:~T Arroy~;-=G:~~~~;~:~:·. ~,~~i;r~~~ih::.. ~·.~:':'.;~~i[)1¥jj}~~~-"·~'.·' -300:-E. Branch Street;:;:;::::... -~:;: .. :;.;:; ... "i:~==•,;:r,~~,;;... ~,,:~,:n:•:..:•. •,,~;; :~~~} :•J Arro.Y:o:.Grande, CA 934:zJ.t. ·::~~:::;:::_ .. ( sosr~~i~t::~o ·:::~~~!l~j\f ~:;. ·~:i~ij~~) Purpose and Dd:c#,.ment Org@~zation The purpose of this ··a:9.9~rnent .. ~~[§to evaluate the potential environmental effects of the proposed project. Mitigation me~·~tff~-?.-:-f.i~V¢;:heen identified and incorporated into the project to eliminate any potentially significant imp~2t%}~fi=f~duce them to a less-than-significant level. This document is organized as follows: • Introduction This chapter provides an introduction to the project and describes the purpose and organization of this document. • Project Description This chapter describes the reasons for the project, scope of the project, and project objectives. Page 6 of46 Item 10.a. - Page 87 / INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVI:: ut:CLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 • Environmental Setting, Potential Impacts and Mitigation Measures October 2015 This chapter identifies the significance of potential environmental impacts, explains the environmental setting for each environmental issue, and evaluates the potential impacts identified in the CEQA Environmental (Initial Study) Checklist. Mitigation measures are incorporated, where appropriate, to reduce potentially significant impacts to a less-than- significant level. • Mandatory Findings of Significance This chapter identifies and summarizes the overall significance of any potential impacts to natural and cultural resources, cumulative impacts, and .itif~~h to humans, as identified in-the Initial study. ..:::~~~?:~~r; i:~~:~\\\l~\1~:.:~i!~:~h~:~. • Summary of Mitigation Measures ··;::;:::~::·· "<:):f;:;'.:-_ 1·~:~; ... ~ 'h;~ · .. :~~:t=:~;;; . This chapter summarizes the mitigation mea~1;:tt~·~J:incorporatecff!n!-~-_the project as a result of the • • .. ~:::u:":":•~:::~•" ..-_,:,.:~: .. }:•~-~ Initial Study ··-·:·;·:·:·" ··:·:·=~·:·:- • References . ' .,..,. ·'~- This chapter identifies the references and sou·r~~:§~!{?ed.-,ifl~t'f:i~~ preparation'Hfa1:tJs IS/MN_D. It also _..0 .,~ •",r~,,• .. •,. •"• ,.•.0,.•,.•.,:;."j,•~u,_ ·~ ,•j'1/',,'"u • provides a list of those involvee:~~iJit:~b.~ preparatioln~~!fftfoocument. ·-:~~~;. . . -~~:~~~~;~:;~~~~~~~!~~:-.. ~~ ··::f:;~~@~~~}" ~-. Summary of Fmdmgs ··~::~;=:· ·-..::~;::=:~:;~;~.. ··:::;::i;~;=:·. , "\/.'•u~·v•. ,;;J'i.••,lr•ol'•,. • .. ;u~·J::",;".,' Section 3 of this document contains th~:t6nvir6~ti{ental (lniti~f;;E:t_1,1.dy) Checklist that identifies the potential environmental irrm~.!=;~?Jby enviro~-~~.r:ital i~.i~®]}'.~~:t;iq_a bri~f~~j1:1fl.JSsion of each impact resulting from implementation -~roject~4!~ "¥' In accordance with §15.Q-!i?.1(f) of tq~~CEQA Guig~.Hnes, a Mitigated Negative Declaration shall be ' ·j."'i"i.•,.n,.•o ~ ....... ,p';:, {""•".,"•~.._ prepared if the proposed priqfe.ct will::~'G"t~-~ve a sigriifi~?nt effect ori the environment after the inclusion • ' '.-.~.•.,•.•,. .;.,, .. ~~·..;:·~·.,• .?,.",.'\:~,.:•n· ~·~~~l."'ft of mitigat.Ls>.;9.~~Wo~ .. ~~IJ.[~s in ·~1:lj~~;ret~1eet:~tf~!?.~~ed Q:Qt!he available project information and the environm:ecifal~~analys'fs?;::P,r.esente(C:J1,~{fi this &fcufflent, tf.lere is no substantial evidence that, after the ,.•:•:•:::-=~~,;·M; ~ ~ ~"~.;_.,,, ... ;11;,~;:~~-~ ',!',.:":":":·~~) -".-!~~~;~:%;'~"•"~0 incorptj"~·tn:fo of .mitiga"t1a'ii)i:measu·r~$';;:~.the propCfseJ:lf·project would have a significant effect on the environrlt~~:·. It is propo;~~Wh~.t a rJiiti~~~~d Negati~e Declaration be adopted in accordance with the CEQA Guid"gji~~~·. ··:~~;w~t. ':-:;{ki~-. !:~sions ~,?J '%' Page 7 of 46 Item 10.a. - Page 88 ( INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVt: .. 11:CLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 Project Description Introduction October 2015 This Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) has been prepared by the City of Arroyo Grande (the City) to evaluate the potential environmental effects of the proposed project. The project site is located at the northwest corner of the Fair Oaks Avenue and Woodland Drive intersection, behind the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital. The project site consists of four (4) parcels, totaling approximately 2.38 acres. The site is surrounded on all sides by existing development: residential to the· north, east, and south and the Hospital to the west. ..xilm~ Location Aii~~if ~1~t~~~;,;,. ~·::~;~~~~~-~~;~~~~~: ·~::~::~;· Background aii~"Need for Pt,Pject The proposed proj~:6t~j~~the secori~lphase of a previously approved, phased mixed-use project. Phase I of the project has be~·~~~~~~').~tr~~~§J{walnut Grove), which includes thirty (30) physical units (forty-one (41) density equivalent un'it~}~tmf~e· Cityhouse style. Additionally, the site is covered by a Zoning Design Overlay District (D-2.20) rest'~iiitW;g development for uses that are in conjunction with the Arroyo Grande Community Ho'spital to ensure the orderly expansion of uses compatible to the hospital campus. Project Description MER 15-002 The proposed Lot Merger will merge four (4) existing lots, ranging in size from approximately 24,500 square feet to approximately 26,500 square feet, into one (1) lot totaling approximately 103,875 square feet (2.38 acres). Page 8of46 Item 10.a. - Page 89 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVI:: uECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 CUP 15-006 October 2015 The proposed Conditional Use Permit will develop the project site with an approximately 45,000 squ_are foot, three-story, forty-five foot (45') tall medical office building used for outpatient medical services to the Hospital and additional medical offices. The. CUP will additionally develop 182 surface parking spaces for the development. Other Required Public Agency Approvals No other public agency approvals are required for the proposed project. Related Projects ... ::tk;;. The proposed project is the second, commercial phase of a gre(t,1Bt1sly approved, phased mixed-use ..,. ·~=: .. -,.-.. ;,.~·.>'' project (Vesting Tentative Tract Map 05-003 and Planned !-J.r;1J~:,~~yelopment 05-007). Phase I of the project has previously been constructed (Walnut Grove). -:-~~~j:~~f~:}··~V\;q~}i::. ·~:~:~~f~ ··~~~~~i~~~~~~~:~:-~ ·~~~" .. "~",.~.-*';/~~~\~. Page 9 of 46 Item 10.a. - Page 90 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIV!:. ufCLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 Environmental Checklist Project Information Project Title: October.2015 MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 Page 10of46 Item 10.a. - Page 91 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVI: uECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected October 2015 The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at ' -least one impact that·is a "Potentially Significant Impact", as indicated by the chec;:klist on the following pages: D Aesthetics D Agricultural Resources [gj Air Quality [gj Biological Resources [gj Cultural Resources [gj Geology/Soils [gj Greenhouse Gas Emissions D Hazards & Hazardous Materials [gj Hydrology/Water Quality D Land Use/Planning D Mineral Resources [gj Noise ' D Population/Housing D Public Services D Recreation D Transportation/Traffic 0. Utilities/Service Systems [gj Mandatory Findings of Significance ~~::'::::!~~.initial evaluation: . ,~c D I find that the proposed project COULD NOT_ha~e ~Fsignificaht:f~:ffect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared ... :~;;,;:,~~{!i;F~:-·-::;:_l;jl~:;:, .. -=im:~}:.. . , ·-;%1i*\,.. . 0 · I find that, although the original scope o'f?~~h~---proposed project COUEp,;~.have had a significant effect on the environment, there, WILL NOTli"ij~~:;aignific~.Q~\~ffect becau~~;if%xisions/mitigations to the project have been mad.EJ.'.by or agreed·~:ta~~-bY.:~~S~;;'.ifpplicant. A M"tiil~~TED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be preparetl~i~i)~~~~;~;:::; ... _ ··-::~~~~~;jl)~;~i\1i;~·:-· .. w ·::~:~~~~;:::~~~~@~~:~~;,:.,_ "·<;::;@j~i, > > D I find that the proposed projecf~:l\1.IAv··:ila~~~:"<!. signifidlriffatiffect on the environment and an -<~=·~'{I>_ "·~~~~y;,:;;":" .. -~ ~" z.~ .. ;~~~~~,. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORP0t~Jts functit>'iia.kequivalen:t:will be prepared. > ,,.:;~~f:i1\~?~~~~~i~~~~:-. "{~i~~---... ~~;~. J~~t~:~:"... "'::~~~~; ' D I find that th,r;d~_tO:pose(j·::P.;,t~~ect MAY'~~:~¥,~;-~~!ilN-Poteilti~Jl¥i::?ignificant impact" or "potentially significant unle~:$.i;:,r,t:1itigated'~Tm,pact" on ·tQ.~~~:nvironmenf:"·:::"However, at least one impact has been adequately';~n~iyzed iri}~-~ ~arlier dc;a·~~ent, pursu~nt to applicable legal standards, and has l:m.~.f.h.~_ddressed:~:ij~hrnJt.i!~$l'P'fa~~m.~.asure~~~~?ed c;>n the earlier analysis, as described in the .·1,"i:-~~·~··•:b::;~:-~,,-:~:.-:R:-.~' -,, ~<~ :..:~-~~):~~~'<>,, o~,(~-, .. ".> "•'•Xf>~ .. ~ ~ .. :~ .. ····-·~~ ~ ~ .. '~ O • ~~ .. ~B;Q.:}s::;att~~~.R?$.~ts. Ai:j~~~VIRON~~~:~~b_ llW~?ACT REPORT 1s reqwred, but it must analyze .~i::?t.!'lY:ihe impacts-~notsuffidefi~i.v addresseCl.~ii;l~i:!revious documents. -:~:~~~~l~ .. :·-... -·,:;;~~~!;~~~~~~ ··::~:~M~~:::._ ~ .. ;.,..v . D I 'fif:i'tl.:,.that, althougff~l:lt:Je proposed project could have had a significant effect on the enviid"~fu~nt, because -~:@Rotenti'lriWf~significant effects have been adequately analy~ed in an "-',,_~ ..... "'.:~~~·l· ,"-_,,.R..-.,n_~, .. ' earlier EH{{l?.t<~Negative oeit~ration, pursuant to applicable standards, and have been avoided or mitigated,"l~'i~-suant to aM~~arlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upori:4Hfapropg~~~~j:proj~ct, all impacts have been avoided or mitigated to ~ less-than- significant level a~a~t:) .;-:···::ffher action is required. Matthew Downing, AICP . Associate Planner ··::-:::::::~;-;~:·· Date Page 11 of46 Item 10.a. - Page 92 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVc uECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-005 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts October 2015 1. A brief explanation is required for all answers, except "No Impact", that are adequately supported by the information sources cited. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact does not apply to the project being evaluated (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on general or project-specific factors (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must consider the whole of the project-related effects, both direct and indirect, including off-site, cumulative, construction, and operational impacts. 3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular p~.y~@al impact may occur, the checklist answers must indicate whether that impact is potentj~·1JY,'.~~1·~·nificant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Sig~jf!?~N'.~!J!Pact" is appropriate when there is sufficient evidence that a substantial or potentiallY:~.§1ft)sta·n~,(~!~.~.dverse change may occur in any of the physical conditions within the area ~;f.f.~.~~e;·a by the·:~;~~9,j~ct that cannot be mitigated below a level of significance. If there are on~:i~t]¥riore "Potentia'llY:isiRnificant Impact" entries, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is req~fl~~cl'?. ":::{~:;:;;;:;" 4. A "Mitigated Negative Declaration" (Neg~tlV~;?.[)eclaration: Less Than ... S.lgBif!cant with Mitigation Incorporated) applies where the incorporati&~):>,t_ mitig?t!~ri measures;;~~~f.JR.~_to declaration of project approval, has reducec:k~.f:l. effect from 'l;R~~~n_tr~)Jy{~·Significant lmp·~~tlii'.:to a "Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigafi~~'.@mhr:! lead agen~Wffi:~~~t describe the mitigati.~n measures and briefly explain how they reduce"t~~.:lff~~~;~9 a less th~W~lgJ;1_ificant level. 5. Earlier analyses may be used vJW~·r~, 'ptJ·g:~~9J;lJ; to the:;~ti~.r.ir.ig, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect ba!; .. ,P.een adequ~t~j~ anaiy~~iji?,~h;:~n ea~fi~'t?~tR (including a General Plan) or ~" ,.,. ,"~·~~~'~"~" .. '-"~ . ...,.=l~~ .. ~~ • .. ~x",,.'.",."~~.~.. i.~,.~" .. ~·:h"' Negative Decla,r.~~f@'.:~[~~B1. .. Guideline~~~for t~.~:=~~.IP'P.J.em.entaff&f.f· of CEQA, § 15063(c)(3){D)]. References to;£~:;f!a'rlier a·g~Lysis should·~:?~:~;!~ .. ,.<}~~~~~;:·· '•",::~;:~:~::;:;:;;;::, ;'·>:· ~"~4~ : * :.:. ·~ -· .. r :•:~~...:~~":;"~"·"·:0·{:' r '~'' :~~~x..r a) Identify the::tfa~ljer analysis:'.and state Vl;lie):e it is available for review. b) Indicate whi2m'.~ff~cts fr~i?ffl'.Jhe envir~~m~ntal checklist were adequately analyzed in the •,n,.r~•:•.•,. (';,"4~ ~),"n ~~,'4...,>'}' •,n,ur~\~,; -~~r;l!~r:·,g,9,.cument%p);J.r:s~~nt~~t9:.~}!.J:U;>licable·:;.l~gal standards, and whether these effects were .-~{l~&'iijfi~¥~i'Y:;1addressi'.mG}"~itig~t161f:~m~asu·r~g:~included in that analysis. ,?~~)?[Ioescribe tAM~f~t.lgati~miJJ.easures i~":fHf~·i:~0~-~ment that were incorporated or refined from ·~::;:~::::the earlier doc'Gffient ancf".Mt!icate to what extent they address site-specific conditions for ··::~~fii~::Rroject. ~:%i~f1~::;. ~-%~j~jib}. 6. lead ag~t)!=ies are enco"C!f;~ged to iriC;orporate references to information sources for potential impacts ·.l'ijfo:;_the checkfi~i~~:or appendix (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances, biological assessmentg}=jl~;;Reference ~fi{:~a previously prepared or outside document should include an indication of t@j~~,ge o,r.::~~g~s where the statement is substantiated. 7. A source list sho"J@:;~:~:~;~·ppended to this document. Sources used or individuals contacted should be listed in th·~:;~'6-urce list and cited in the discussion. 8. Explanation(s) of each issue should identify: a) the criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate the significance of the impact addressed by each question and b) the mitigation measures, if any, prescribed to reduce the impact below the level of significance. Page 12 of 45 Item 10.a. - Page 93 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVc uECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 Environmental Issues I. Aesthetics Environmental Setting October 2015 The project site is located along one of the City's arterial roadways (Fair Oaks Avenue). Although the site is undeveloped, it is surrounded by residential development to the east, north and south and the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital to the west. The proposed project is the second and final Phase of a previously approved mixed-use development. ,, ""'Th" Potel'.lt1a'H.v.:~;-. . Less Than .·n·X:'i'~·· · ... ,1,;::i •• ~·-S1gmficant .51gmf1cant":·~ .. ; .. :-:·;-_ . Significant No Impact . ..·:-~-. :.i:i~· act ·;~:~;~~fok:-~•th. Impact Would the project: .. ::i:~:::::;;;.. p ··11(11tJgat1on a) Have a substantial adverse affect on a scenic vist5!:1mf~~? D ":::~~~~;;___ D [8J b) Substantially damage scenic resources, inc14m~·g;·· --::~{h:;;; but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings;·::;~ft~t-D D "'':;:tf.%,_ f8l D historic buildings within a state scenic highway? "::::~1i~~~:~:;:__ .. :'.::~~~~j~~,. ·:;i:~~~%:::::- c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or ··::~;~~it\ :·'$.;~(:~::::::' D ":::{::=:::::;. D ,-.,,·.;-:~·:·-. ·-:·:~·;:131:-;.;:-· ~ quality of the site and its surroundings?.:~::;~?:~;;:;;:;:::}.-. ":~:;:.::::::r •, :.'i-·~~: ," -:·!::::~::::;;~~:-.:~ ·~=~~:~~;~~~=~~- d) Create a new source of substantiaf ·~!ig.~"Nqt;::?g)9re ·-.::;:~!:~;;~::~ .. which would adversely affect day or nighttWiie vi~~~~l:iil;.;;-. D "~\:.'.i:\:._.. D [8J D ;i:;;;:;~s. ~' \~;'· b: The projec;,tsJ_~ currently~q~pt<Jj~~~igJttd.?) skyliri'E~l~.ucalyptus trees. A Tree Survey was completed by Pleina1~3='.!~~fl~'.~.tRW? (2ci'l~l[~I~ft~~fi:m~~l%J.!o:Jndlt:~i~d that the trees are currently in poor health with nq::f~g~lar maintef.f~~.9~ perfdf~.e.d and re'c'frf.f!m~-!1ded the trees be removed as part of the project. )-,."~ •.,·.,.~~n" • ~ '"~ '»~•"'•"uu•y '"•",.'',. ~'V'. "•",.",,",.•.:',., The reiiip~J of the skyline:~~t:\:1~ wafl~i~-~µssed with"the Tree Guild of Arroyo Grande during processing of a Pre~A:~lm~ation who r~.ri~m.J.Tiend~:~:;~~!;te loss of the trees be mitigated by requiring mitigation planting of s~v!Ib~. trees at a ra"i!£t~f 2:1. ·r.~~:;applicant has included this mitigation planting as part of their project de's~f:fP.tion, and thef.~ore the p-roject will self mitigate for the loss of the existing skyline trees. Less than sigiflfiGant impacd~1~~~j~: ··=:t~~t2;;,, .. d~~@~ c: The project site is cti~-~~-N.!~Wndeveloped and contains eight (8) skyline Eucalyptus trees. Tree removal and site developm'e:fif?will alter the visual character of the vicinity. However, development standards of the Office Mixed-Use zoning district regulate building form through minimum required setbacks, maximum lot coverage and floor area ratio, and maximum allowed building size, ensuring that new development is compatible with the existing visual character of the area. Less than significant impact d: The project would create a new source of nighttime lighting in the form of parking lot lights, building lights, and illuminated signage. However, compliance with applicable Municipal Code standards in Section 16.48.090 will ensure that this new source of lighting will not adversely affect nighttime views in Page 13of46 Item 10.a. - Page 94 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVI: uECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 October 2015 the area. There are no anticipated impacts associated with daytime lighting or glare. Less than significant impact References: 2, 3, 15, 19, A II. Agriculture and Forestry Resources Environmental Setting The project site was previously used for agricultural production (fruit and nut orchard), but has been previously disturbed and graded for development of Phase I {Walnut Grove) of the Phased mixed-use project. The site does not contain prime soils according to the Ca!ifi'!.r.,nia Department of Conservation's Important Farmland Map of San Luis Obispo County, nor is th~.::1:it~'.~~'rty currently designated or zoned for agricultural use. ..;:i~~~:=f@f" , ... :~j~j~~jjW~~>:::;:ii)~:t~ii~ss Than .:.;::~:.~~.Potentially ··=-;;;:.-':·. Less Than .·:'~~~;;:;:::;;;;.5ignificant 51 ~.\!~V.E.ant Significant No Impact Would the project: ·:::!~~1~~1}?" Impact Mi~l~~~~~h. Impact a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland>::kii>r. ··:~;::~~::~ .. !,H.~.·.·.I~ > ~ L ....... ~~~.',°' Farmland of Statewide Importance {Farmland), a·s~;~~~;;:;.. ,,:;:;:m;,_ ··::;@~:;: •.. ··~~~:::};. ..;~~ .. :":·;;..~~:=:"' ··::>:!:'v shown on the maps prepared pu_r;~~,<!nt to the · .. ~=ffo.[;J~;:i:?.'.;Y D -;::§!:- Farmland Mapping and Monitoring .:-~l;~gr~m of the ::::~~~rt/' ,,. California Resources Agency, to non-agri:C·ci1tti:M!;:u_~e? -.;~;j~~~i:!:,. b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricuit:~t~.! ~~~:~ftji;:~;::;:.... D ·:::;!(~~~::,:·. D W·11· A t t t? »:·:·;·:. ':-:~·:.:·:::;.,. ·.;.;,;.: •. r ramson c con rac . ,.·.·:·:·: .... -. ·::~:;::::.. · ·::::::;:;:~:~; .. ;._ ":;;:;:;:~;., c) Conflict with existin~,;i9;n1:~~~~~f2t?.:.:~r ca use':;(~~?.n i n~~j:fl\m~~nji1~lk::::~:· . ··:~;j1}::· of, forest land (as defined in Pt.iolfa:::Hesources~~·code~:;;;;v -.·.:.:::;;~::::~:~: section 12220)g)), ti~:b'.¢.r:i,~md (as -.:~~fined by 'PWMt~;:;· "-:·:;:Y Resources Code section .. :~E~q), or iiiii:berland z~'k~a.:. D • • "..'.1·) .. ~~-s-··:. .:'f-""r;.~:"-·:~-:::::;y~ • :{~:::::~. Timberland Ri;:oductron (as ··cef.ineo.::::tl,,y,;:;:Gevernment;:::::.: .. Code sest\an~~'.$184{~Uk:;:;., ":\~j~~l~~it·"· .. »:·::*:~w~~~l~:;:;.,. \tlj~:: cl) Result:in·: the loss c)f;:::fo.riest laii·affor conversifrf.l:;!:&"f.: '\~~:~:~~:':, ~.;:~~~~: .. ~~~.·~ ·~~:~"{,:1~~>~ • n~•:n-/" forest lanc;l::to non-forest use'.?::::::;., "::0:;:.::;:; .• • .. :-.;u~•~• ;1•~ I •;~.;:~~•:•:~~ ·-~~.:~~-~-:~.,, e) Involve 'i:>~ti~r changes in th:$j;~~xisting·~$.)::wJronment D D D D D D D D D which, due t6tff1~Jr location or."1.f~~ure, co~:iWresult in conversion of F~fff.\'i?Qd to non-ai?!i'.~ltural use? * In determining whet;:;~m%:~~s to agr.fi~~~Lal resources are significant envtronmenta/ effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land 'E~'b1uatffJt~~:~flnd Site Assessment Model {1997), prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional mod~/lf&"§j'i~ in assessing impacts on agncultura/ and farmland. ~;~~=~ ~· Discussion a-e: No impacts. References: 1, 3, 4, 9 Page 14 of46 Item 10.a. - Page 95 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVc uECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 III. Air Quality Environmental Setting October 2015 San Luis Obispo County is in non-attainment status for ozone (03), respireable particulate matter (PM10) and vinyl chloride under the California Air Resource Board (CARB) standards. The County is in attainment status for all other applicable CARB standards. The proposed project consists of merging four (4) existing lots into one (1) lot of approximately 103,875 square-feet for the construction of an approximately 45,000 square-foot, three-story, forty-five foot (45') tall medical office building with 182 surface parking spaces. P t f 11 ,:::'.1:::;;;Less Than Less Than S~ e"nf. '~}t.;j.;{:;~:~Significant 1gm tcan ::y . Significant No Impact ... :<·:·:·:;:;r With Id h . lllJPll.Gt;:):..... . . . Impact Wou t e pro1ect: .,;:;;::·:::::-: .. ··:;:;;;.r,:;., M1t1gat1on a) c_onflict _with ~r obstruct implementation of th~.,:::: ... ·~~]1~~t'.J'' ·"::::.;)~~?;th.18] applicable air quality plan? .. i:::::;:;:;:;:~ ·:::~:'.:::=;; •. b) Violate any air quality standard or contrJ~w~~~~?::>· ·::::~~@;~:~:: .. substantially to an existing or projected air qt~m:v D [~f\%~... D violation? ··:~:~;*~\1~;~:~.. ... "'.:f;J;l\, ... c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase·a~U\:~h. ..::;(:i~i~~:· ":.~:Wh:::: .. any criteria pollutant for which the prfj.jij~tregion is in ··;~%m~:::~:j~jl~1f:~;,:·" ";:;:~:t~~ non-attainment under an applicable 'f~~2t~~~}f:f.. .. state "~:;:§:~~~;::c. 18] D ambient air quality standard (includij;jg.; ·rel~~-~Jng -;:;~;'.~j:.;:: ... emissions which exceed quantitative th'f~~~oid~:::;¥~~~i::;::~:-.·. ··:::::~:lf\::~ .. ozone pre cursors)? -:»:~:::::~~m=:::::e:·. \~}?:'.;:.. . ... ,,~::~~~j~*i~~;%;:;.,, .,. :;;~~~~i~:=. d) Expose sensitive recepio'fs::tu~:substantial pollutant~;:::~'.::i:;;~$:~,::::~~:;:~:·:·.· ··:::::·A CO n Cent ra ti 0 n S? ~~ji\~~j~f ~ir:· • -·.;\m~t ·:::~~~1~~~:=~ll~~~i(~fJjY []:;:~~~]~j~jf i~'.o 18] e) Create objectionablef:~q:pprs affect(ng a substaQ.ti~l b f I ? ":-;~~::::~::;.~ :~==:~~~' ~:~:~~~~=-:,. num er o peop e. ··:i-:::~::::.. ..~;::~;;:., •• .,.,.,_ ·~::::::::: D D D D D D D D D A=~=;i~~£j~~j~j~~i~It:;:;:; .. ,. '··=:=~~~~j)i~~I~~~i~:~~H~i~~~~~~~~~;:==~·:·.. ·~::j~m~~~·-. * Where ay.SJ.~lf:z."fiLe;·itJifligf)]flW,r;ice criterirj?..,e,,~tab/1shed liY,'.fM;:aP,pltci:ible air quality management or air pollution control distnct may be r;4[(@f6n to make the~'WJ.~~~rmin~tifi~~~~:,. ····::~*>].~~;~~~:::· , Discu~:;r~~~ll~:!:~:-. ·.,c:;t~~i~t~l~\;~::.. ·::~:'.%i;'.;~t:::.. ...:,. a-d: Constn.ici).Qi:l. impacts have:;frfa:ently oe.~V,,:.estimated for two (2) similarly sized projects in the City using the most':t~gg,nt CalEEMod::~~irJputer rrlodel by Air Pollution Control District (APCD) staff. Based on the estimation~%~~nstruction Jfi'~':operational phase impacts will likely be less than significant when typical mitigation m~'~§°~t~~ are i~~1Q'.tied in the project. The proposed project will also generate short- term emissions during c~~it:.~~~.~I~~~ Implementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce these impacts to a less thari''%!i!;!fflcant level. Less than significant with mitigation Construction Phase Emissions MM 111-1: On-road diesel vehicles' shall comply with Section 2485 of Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations. This regulation limits idling from diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicles with gross vehicular weight ratings of more than 10,000 pounds and licensed for operation on highways. It applies to California and non-California based vehicles. In general the regulation specifies that drivers of said vehicles: • Shall not idle the vehicle's primary diesel engine for greater than 5 minutes at any location. Page 15 of 46 Item 10.a. - Page 96 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVI:: uECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 October 2015 • Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system (APS) to power a heater, air conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on that vehicle during sleeping or resting in a sleeper berth for greater that 5 minutes at any location when within 1,000 feet of a restricted area. MM 111-2: Off-road diesel equipment shall comply with the 5 minute idling restriction identified in Section 2449(d)(2) of the California Air Resources Board's In-Use Off-Road Diesel regulation. MM 111-3: Signs must be posted in the designated queuing areas and job sites to remind drivers and operators of the State's 5 minute idling limit. ".~:;:~J\)~~~~1:~. MM 111-4: The project applicant shall comply with.4f:i:¢se more restrictive requirements to minimize impacts to nearby sensitive receptors (adjaQ'~·~krre:~!dential development): • Staging and queuing areas shall not be lc;>d!~~::~itWfMi~lQOO feet of sensitive receptors; • Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitlt.~.:receptors shiiii~'.f.1.9t be permitted; • Use of alternative fueled equipme.n{fr$f~~-~ommended; a~·at\::.:-. • Signs that specify no idling areas ·*W~f be posted and enfor2~:a}~t:>the site. ;:;;;~~;,;~)i~i:::.:,. ..§;~:::,, ··o:;:~~j{fa::~·- MM 111-5: The following standard mitigation··,:'rrf~a.su~~~~:;t_~r constructiorf;~;~~yipment shall be implemented to reduce the R_Q'.~h:~NOx, and di~~~gi;P.~rflHilate matter (DPMY;~missions during • • ·::~;::::::=~~:=:..~~~~>-. . ··~==~:~:::~··~-con struct1 on of the project: ·~:~~:;.:·:·;:~:=:~::;:·:·. '.'.:;:;:;:::: .. • Maintain all constructi~~~)::~-~;t:m~.~nt in pr~W~~f;::·;:tune according to manufacturer's • • • • • ·,.:::1=~=:-·~!·~::~~:~~~~~;.;; .. ~ 'J' ;:,:,;:~::~:~ .. spec1fi cat10 ns. »;·:·:·:·. v.;.;.,.;.;.; .. ;· ··:·:.:·:·.-. I ~:!:::::~: "•""~1:~~=.~~::f:,;... ~ ·~:_'.;-;~~:~:> • Fuel all qff~fQ:a·r.hfl.nd portaBWk~9iesel ·~f~W~:rn9 equYIJm~nt with ARB certified motor vehicle;:cfl~~~ff(}~1if~on-taxed J~f:Sion su1t~iil~·~fofause off:'.~oad); ~.;..~::;):;:.:;·-.>, ~:::;:;:~j·~ ~~;;:<~·-'~~: .. ~·~·:·:.:.i:~··· ~;;~:~H .... ~ ~·~"~"-· Use dl~s~)..construct(~f:l:-equipme'ftt@~~ting ARB's'Tier 2 certified engines or cleaner off- road he.~U~~~.1;1ty dies~j{~ngines, a~·~;:~~rnply with the State Off-Road Regulation; ... Vs~ on-ro~H:~~~av.yt~~~W:~r::µcks th~W~-rrieet the ARB's 2007 or cleaner certification ~~~·~•:•:a:a:a; .. ~ .. :~•:".-... :.~•:a;.},. ,-:•;•;.~~ 0~0"'{:.~~~,.~~:•:.>:•~ .. ;.~ •4~.-, •: .. :";;..~ .. :'< .. ;:;i;~::~~:;;::=s:t_~j.l_tlar.c;l_ for oii?toaa··~nea\/y~(:{Uty, diesel:;!engines, and comply with the State On-Road .j::i;i~!j~~f ::::·~-~R~iu1~t(~~!.:::: .. _ ··:=\fof~.:-.. --.. ::=~~~~H~~~l~~:)':! ·~::::·· ·::;~y;~K. Constructicif.i\bx trud<'.if:ig:.companies 'With fleets that do not have engines in .their fleet ·-:::::!;j;t;: ... that meet th~-~%ngine -~t~~~?rds identified in the above two measures (e.g. captive or ·.;:;q~~;]\lox exempt ar~-~~~1-~ets) rri~y~pe eligible by proving alternative compliance; -~~lfl2.!!-and off-r~~~~giesel eq~lpment shall not idle for more than 5 minutes. Signs shall be·~~-p~~!~d in the@~signated queuing areas and or job sites to remind drivers and operatif~~fqfthe.~[ff.)Jnute idling limit; • • • • • • Diesel id.iWig;~wJffiif.)~1:,ooo feet of sensitive receptors is not permitted; Staging and~~@~a1·~g areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors; Electrify equipment when feasible; Substitute gasoline-powered in place of diesel-powered equipment, where feasible; and Use alternatively fueled construction equipment on-site where feasible, such as compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane or biodiesel. MM 111-6: The project shall implement the following mitigation measures to manage fugitive dust emissions such that they do not exceed the APCD's 20% opacity limit (APCD Rule 401) or prompt nuisance violations (APCD Rule 402): • Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible; Page 16 of 46 Item 10.a. - Page 97 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVI:. uECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 October 2015 • Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site and from exceeding the APCD's limit of 20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in any 60 minute period. Increased watering frequency would be required when wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed (non-potable) water shall be used; • All dirt stock pile areas shall be sprayed daily and covered with tarps or other dust • • • • • • • • barriers as needed; Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans shall be implemented as soon as possible, following completion of any soil disturbing activities; .. ~:~~- Exposed ground areas that are planned to be re~!?.£~~:3 at dates greater than one month after initial grading shall be sown with a fast .. g~f:i.hl~ating, non-invasive, grass seed and watered until vegetation is established; .. ::::~M~~;~;:;~:;!\:-. All disturbed soil areas not subject to r!;V~~~~~·tio~:::·~Ho\,.!ld be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or;,_Gi~b"~r methods ~·p:~-~pyed in advance by the APCD; All roadways, driveways, sidewalJ~~}\~ft'' to be paved shiiUt9.:,.be completed as soon as possible. In addition, building S~(_should be laid as sooX~~~;~possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are u~~~h::.. . :::::::.. ":::.:~~I~~:; .. "·"~,~~,n0•0 1 "~",'~;,•,•-· -<.-:r,•u'V'."~ Vehicle speed for all construction venfr~fo~ shal!~rfot exceed 15 rflp:ti.::.on any unpaved surface at the construc:t16:n·;site· "·::;;~l:~~i~;~~?:if~~ '·~::~::::· •':.~; .. ",,~;:;:~:,.~·:~:-.-,•, -I "::;~:·:~::;:::,.• All trucks hauling dirt, sana~::~'SG:iJ, or other ldo~e::-materials are to be covered or should maintain at least two fe~t~f,,f~~~;~~~rtj (minim .. l'.itri\]Y:E;?.rtical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accord~n~e witW=eAA.~::~!'!ction :#f~;J,'4; Install w~-~~t~W.:~~.b~rs where··~~ .. ~i,cles e~!~'.t~b~:.~?'it uW~:~y.ed roads onto streets, or wash .~?,", "~" ,•,•.,•u• •,•.,•,.• "."~":>~ "'~",,' • -.-.~,u • .-." 0 ~,',"•"°'}'••u".'' "•"~',."-".,",/'nJ -,. " off trucks;·~r:fa ec'.fU!P..tti.ent leavmg;:tbe ~1.~~~:f·· ·-··::::;;;:::::~: .. :;.;- Swee~~~tt~ets at th~t?end of ea:~m[~~9~~:lf visibl~'-:f6W material is carried onto adjacent ~ ... :·~:=:j·~·,.. ~:~.,=~:~: ··~-:~::;;:~:· paved roa#s;:Water s.~~l~epers shaWQ'.~:::1,1sed with reclaimed water and roads shall be pre- .. w!'.!tted pri~l~fG::swe.e~JHg:;w_hen feasi'itih, ,•.,.{~~:·!·:~;~•:•:•,...,,.. ·::z.~·~·:·:" ... b~':.-v .. ·:·~·:::·:~,. .. ,, .. ;&:~:·~"~.;:.;.: .. .,,.. ·:·~·.•;f::;,. • .. ::~;:~;~~~:i%~~1J#i.f:lg ... of all ·r~~_Uijfea mitr~~ii;>.JJ me~~fes shall be included on grading and building ~;;f ~~j~~p.:~::::-·-· -~I~ ~~;:-~:~~~:b~~':· ;;:::~~fah., '··:-;~~%~j~)!i:il~i}: :::;:·· ··::t~=~.:.. The contra~(j~,or builder shall design.ate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive ............ :, .;............ . ....... ~~· ":'.~:!\=~~::.:: ... dust emissio'fls~fund enni}·ace the implementation of the measures as necessary to ·.::~%~minimize dust <:::~'%'.b::Jplaint~~=~~~~duce visible emissions below the APCD's limit of 20% ··:5ij~:(i:ity for great~f}£han 3 ~·i-~utes in any 60 minute period. Their duties shall include h~lm:~Y.?. and weJR~f:id periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telepHci~~ .... num~.~~f~f such persons shall be provided to the APCD Compliance Division •>,.<·,,~····~ ... ,~ .. :;.· ......... .,,~ prior to the~:~tflf:ti_o'fany grading, earthwork or demolition. ··:~::;~i~@~r, MM 111-7: Prior to any constru.ction activities on the site, the project proponent shall contact the APCD Engineering Division to obtain all necessary permits for portable equipment used during the construction and operational phases of the project. Typical equipment requiring a permit includes, but is not limited to, the following: • Diesel engines; • Portable generators and equipment with engines that are 50 horsepower or greater; • Electrical generation plants or the use of standby generators; and • Portable plants (e.g. aggregate plant, asphalt batch plant, concrete batch plant, etc.) Page 17 of 46 Item 10.a. - Page 98 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVI: uECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 October 2015 MM 111-8: Prior to any grading activities, the project sponsor shall ensure that a geologic evaluation is conducted to determine if naturally occurring asbestos (NOA} is present within the area that will be disturbed. If NOA is not present, an exemption request must be filed with the APCD. If NOA is found at the site, the applicant must comply with all requirements outlined in the Air Resource Board (ARB} Air Toxics Control Measure (ATCM} for Construction, Grading, Quarrying and Surface Mining Operations. MM 111-9: Burning of vegetative material on the development site shall be prohibited. MM 111-10: Should hydrocarbon-contaminated soil be.d:!ncountered during construction activities, the APCD shall be notified within forty-eightA4~}::~:tiours of such contaminated soil being discovered to determine if an APCD permit ,ifff;~~·uired. In addition, the following measures shall be implemented immediately after c0,&t~fulhated soil is discovered: • Covers on storage piles shall be maint~.irf~~Jf~ p·l~g~j~~l all times in areas not actively involved in soil addition or removal. .·:~:;::~.:1:::, ··:~~~:i@;.,._ Contaminated soil shall be co.¥~~gtj:~;:·with at lea~l~;~~~i~.·-(6} inches of packed, a:~x .. :~~"'~'iir:,.~ "•:·:·>~ :~~' • ·uncontaminated soil or other T~~'!tfa.bon-permeable barrief'W.\!~h as plastic tarp. No headspace shall be allowed where'\/~·PP.r~ could ac_Gumulate. "~:i~%h .. Covered piles shall be designed in s~:e!fj\~:·:~av.~.~~i1;td eliminate ~:f~¥.9.n due to wind or water. No openings in~ijgf-~overs are pe.~il{~it~~:;:~~::=·· ··:;:;~i~;? • During soil excavation:·=:~~~:f~!~~b~.!.' not be ~~l~i:~po such a degree as to cause a public nuisance. '\tb: .. ,.~~~;~~\~t;~~:1':-. ··::~~~~:;~~j;L • • Clean soil must be segregate"i:l::from'i:entar:ninated som:.;-_ O~erational Phase Emi~!!~+, '~ M~$&.:._~t" MM 111-11: The:i:~.f;~Ject prope:iJ~~.nt shall c'c:;B;~e}:~:afo with ari'i:f~btain all necessary equipment and operation permits}~~h.9.t are re~frnred by APC~J:~p-ypical equipment requiring such permits includes, but is not11i"ff.):j~~d ~g.}Jti.~;{.gJJowing: ·:~:~j~~k. • .. :::::;:;N~~~~Q.!~ gen~?~t~f:~~'~W~~~UfpJ:D.ent ~ifWengines that are 50 hp or greater; -·:<~:· z~::;·!~~ .. ~~-.. ~.-....: .. ~·:·:~=~~ >:•.-, "·:·~·:•:n:•:·· . -~·n:~-:-:~:•:n:•. -'.:•:·:·~· ', ,.~~~~l~;:::;~-· Electri6ij!;g~_neratH:,i.f:j;plants or tli~~~$.~~c;>fStandby generators; 'r~;~~~j~;~;;,., Boilers; ···:i~~;?:~~j;}:::.. '·::\~~J'.~:;;:. ""~::~:;::;::· • ··::~~4i;\). Internal comti'~:~tJ.!Jn engfiI~~i. • ·.,·::~~~ff!S~erilization un'fii(~tusing ~ttWl~ne oxide and incinerator(s); and • ":G~g!=lneration tad!Ji1:es. -.:-- ··::t~tt::.. . l~m~ e: Operation of the '~G9~mp1ersJ_~:li1~portion of the proposed project may create objectionable odors affecting adjacent residefit$~i:~fl.c?5N~ver, operation of the commercial portion of the proposed project will not constitute a significant·:.1·~$=fi'ct through implementation of typical mitigation measures. Less than significant with mitigation MM 111-12: Operation of any commercial building with a loading area shall include the establishment of a 'no idle' zone for diesel-powered delivery vehicles. Vehicle idling shall be minimized to the maximum extent feasible using the following techniques: • Each delivery vehicle's engine shall be shut off immediately after arrival in the loading dock or loading area, unless the vehicle is actively maneuvering. • The scheduling of deliveries shall be staggered to the maximum extent feasible. Page 18 of 46 Item 10.a. - Page 99 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVI:: LJECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 October 2015 • Vehicle operators shall be made aware of the 'no idle' zone, including notification by letter to all delivery companies. Copies of the letters shall be sent to the City's Community Development Department. • -Prominently lettered signs-shall be posted in the receiving dock area to remind drivers to shut off their engines. • Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors is not permitted. • Use of alternative-fueled vehicles is recommended whenever possible. • Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors. ;:.e~::::gi::I ~~:::~:: A•tlt Environmental Setting :~::;;::$;:;:-· "::;~i;;,;~; .• The project site is a remainder infill parcel in an area S?.f:~~ptii"resident1~h~.~d public facility development that has been disturbed with previous grading act!¥J~'i.~f" The site confalfj~,eight-(8) skyline Eucalyptus trees that are proposed to be removed as part of:{~~:ji'.J~velopment. The u-rifi'~r~!orv vegetation is mostly ruderal grasses. A tree survey was performed on tn~;~ite by Pleinaire Design G·t~.lJR.(2015). ':;~\i:~}~\ij~~::}, ,._:.l!f;ii/f~~; Less Than ··::~;~~l~~~~i~?::~. . q'~.f.~_:_:_1~.:~: .. _~·.~,. ~!I· 5~~~nt ~;~~~ No lmp•ct Would the pro1ect: -. -.w ..... .,. <>:-.:;'.::;:.... Mitigation a) Have a sµbstantial adverse effect, eithJ~;;~),recliy~~df:~:;~;.... "·:;:;~;b:k through habitat modificati9n;::~f:! .. ~ny specie~:~lentifiecf:~~;;:\1~~;;:::... :·;·:~~:~~;~:, .. as a sensitive, candid~k~e?t::·;~~~~/.~L.status ;~~f:i~s !.~f£ljij;~~~;::5:~;~~::::,:.~. -~:::~b loca I or regio na I pla rt5::i.;r:io I icies c:i'K~~egu lations ·~,~~~:a''~t:~:·· ···~::;:~1;;::::::, ~~'l.~"·~t:, I "~»'.~,' I "~',.'~"u"i''•":~ •• ~. '",'." the California Departm·efih~f Fish il@. Game of:.~~~~~· US F. h d W 0 ldl"f 5 ·.; .... ;.;~ :-:·X·' y·:-~·:•. . . 1s an 1 1 e erv1ce; .. ;;~~. ..;:;·1:::;: •. ,....... ·-:,::;~<:-. b) Have a .?.t;i!i~~tl~J~Ladve~~~[~'@~~~5~~~li.v;;:fipariah1faL habitat or:;bifi~f·~~fiiltiij:ei::natur~H8ii"mmunityl~~fftified ';~:r A"·~~:~,:_.,,~~~:·~·Y ~,_..~:~;..:1,,:<>it•,• ~, -·~:·:-:·~~n.. ~-1e:·~"~";~~"~'•"• ~ in 1oca1~§Wegiona1 plansFR~1J~_ies, or~:f:~g .. ulations, a·r.~by'.: . the Calif~·t.nia Department.;'3'.f~~f.ish a'nff:1tame or the • •d:~:~:·1 :~n • • • .... :~:~:~~:~~·-'"~"~-:-~·~:::~.,. U.S. Fish anchW1ldltfe Service? ·:;::~..::::. ··::~::.::: ... "~<i}~..;;~91 ' ~,,~,,.}:.·;<, ··~·=~"'j>-}. c) Have a stf~s~a_ntial adverse::t~'.ffect on·:~:federally protected wetla~:~~~*;r;i~ defined ~i~i~~404 of the Clean Water Act (including~:?~.j)t~ not limi~@ho, marsh, vernal '.".-~ iV' =,.•;;'~~·,,~~· pool, coastal, etc.) tnrq'.!-!g!i sUf.~ . .Gt removal, filling, hydrological interruption, ·gt,;~tH~Wmeans? d) Interfere substantially wifii*l:he movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances · protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? D D D D D D D D D D D D D Page 19 of 46 Item 10.a. - Page 100 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVI:. uECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Discussion a-c, e, f: No impacts. D _,-- October 2015 D D d: The skyline Eucalyptus trees on the site are prime habitat for nesting raptors and removal of the trees during the nesting season could have a significant impact upon them. However, mitigation measures can be implemented to reduce this impact to level~):#f:~:'.!ess than significant. Less than significant with mitigation. ..>';i~;~;j~iff' .. dJ~~:~~~~;1:;~~~1s;;.. MM IV-1: To avoid impacts to nesting birds, constf:fi~~fO-n aG~i~i_ties shall occur outside of nesting ·-;~·=·:·' ·~·:·;;:,:-. bird breeding season, which is approximately Febr:uaty-August;;:;;:;L .. /\~~i;::r· "'.;=:~ij'.\i~'~:: ... MM IV-2: If construction is scheduled to;.'if/,qafir within the nesting oi~a~:l;>reeding season, then no more than two weeks prior to initiation df'.tg·~<?und disturbance, a n~~tirtg~:~ird pre-construction survey shall be conducted by a qualified bio'f6gfa~ withi~~:#~~:disturbanc~'ifgj'i>,tprint. If no active nests are observed, no furth%::'..Qlitigation is ~~qbJr;m:J~'.~~W1l'~ctive raptor ri~~fa. are found, the biologist shall prepare and sUQbWh:fm City appr'dii~t::;~·· monitoring plan, outlining adequate t ct. f th t ~~:~~;~;~::·:~:M~::::::,.-. ·:·::~~~; .. ;:~;·, pro e IOnS Or e neS S. ·1·Z·7'-v,;.,.;.,,.;,, ·•:;i;,,.;;,, :~!;:,::~:~:~::~~\, ~,;,;:,;;:• .. ::·.··',,,·,···=': .. !:.:.:_:,: .. :.•'.~,:.:.:: .. '-~, :::;;j~i;(.'~ ·::::~f~iifi:. :-., '-... ' ' Environmental SettiD.~g~;~~~~;:r~~ ·~:::H:::~. ~~~:~~i,:~.~f- "};~::;~=~·~ .:.:~~~~· ·~':[.;~::::~ The project site is located m:;~_:q_ ar~~Jl'.i)~~§IXJ~ally occ't!~!-~d by the Obispeno Chumash and is situated at ,. ;,",.,.,"'_ u,,,•,,r,. .,".> ",•~·~,; -·~~~',",~,.~~"'•" •"•'•,.~"1" •1;"-•,,. •~,,;;~•,•,,. the south~~ni:::'~J:fg~:~~:qf.:.CA-SLO;:~i).~;:~:~ '-'rlr'eftt~.£;!,f;i,c habJ~.~J;ion site. In 1990, archeological testing was perforn:i,~.~iJ~f~tl1·~-.,~~~r.t;'ij~~n bourm~~~Y,, which""~~~~~J.~q. p·~historic and historic archaeological materials that h~ij:~~~en mixed ari'i~Jit~~!~cat~~·::~Y:}Prior gradi-~l{~t the site (Singer and Atwood). Additionally, a second c'ci'1~mrn1 resources as~~~filnent ~m?hs.1:1bsurface testing was performed (Gust and Van Wyke, 2005) (Attachmen·t~;~h:~which also re~~~!f:!d marn~j~lthat was mixed and or relocated from other areas as a result of grad;rigW'~liW;~' W ~t:~:: 5~:~"~ ;~~~' No lmp•ot Would the proje_ct: "':::;~~~:;:' Mitigation a)_. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § D [8J D D 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to D [8J D D § 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic D [8J D D feature? Page 20 of 46 Item 10.a. - Page 101 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVI:. LJECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Discussion D October 2015 D D a-d: The presence of isolated prehistoric cultural materials indicates the potential for significa'nt impacts to cultural resources should more intact or substantial deposits be present within the project site. Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce these impacts to a less than significant level. Less than significant with mitigation MM V-1: A qualified archaeologist shall be retained to monitor all grading activities. The monitor shall work closely with construction crews i.l")::.~fol.ose proximity to earth moving equipment in order to investigate and evaluate exposed~:ffi~¥~rials immediately upon exposure and prior to disturbance. A daily log shall be mai11t~f@~~·.~py the monitor to record when and where earth-moving activities take place wJ~fil~:;::.-:m:~)i,:)P.roject area, as well as the presence/absence of archaeological materiC!!~~=~·~n'Yfie moniHft-e~· matrix. In the event that prehistoric cultural materials· or historic .. ,omtiMal materials -~~~_i§}:encountered, work in the "";H~~>.l,:•;',~'>~I; ·~~;:,-~.;: ;;•" immediate vicinity of the finds shall be~'.~~pended and the arcfia·~olqgist allowed to quickly ---~"},: },.''~, V1 ;.~;;;;•:'.-~q record, collect, and analyze any significanf~re&purces encountered. Tfie:i'tiljent and the Cit\' shall be notified should resources meeting C'E"f:ii:\l~:~ignifi~i!I~~~·-standard~:~~~~~;:;:.discovered. The archaeologist shall work as qui.9.~~x.as possible t6;~~~~m_ifa~~~mption of cons'f"~~Gtion activities. It is preferred that location data:~~f~flb.q~.,~e recorde·a~1~~:lf:ig a hand-held global p·asitioning system receiver (GPSr). ·-,Following the"f.j:~;i~;·;~l~J:i~.is work, :m~fa:i.ualified archaeologist shall prepare a final monitoring/mitigation repo~;~that''i'Mi)b~.~ a des2fl-~tiQn of the methods used, materials recovered, and the .xesults of hisiri'tk or p~~i:~JS:tQric an~:i~~f~-:.Df those materials. The final •"(;.o1V•y>b·~-~4,.z. •,:,t,•,-n ".,.!'~"•'N:•"~'~·..,,, "n"'~"~·:•,f.,•_ archaeologicai m$nFt~r1!'Jgf.i:nitigation''~~~p_ort P.r~:P.~r~~;·1QY thec~·ualified archaeologist shall be accepted by f~;~2~6~~·~m~~iipevelop~~filt:.:~J~~~t~r,,pf1B:,~t~~? submittal to the repository and issuance of any:~~l.r..~.1 occupa·~~Y for the ·p,~~~~ct. A copy shall be provided to the Community Development DireHi~~~'..for ret~l:l'fion in the p'~9J.~ct file. ,.;.;:;:M:::;::;:::~~:::.; .. , .,,.=~~~l~~1~j~~=·d~§~~:!~;~i~1tM~::~;:.... ···~~!;~\~~~~::. MM~;i\'i.~~:;:,tfit.iuman rema1ns::are enC<;i@"ift:ered 8ufing earth-disturbing activities, all work in the .:t,~~:~j~:~;nt ar~~:·»~'K~lb~.op {~:;~:9.!ately ~·~H~[~~~;;;s~~ Luis Obispo County Coroner's office shall be ·"notified. If the rem'a'ihs are "Heihmined to be Native American in origin, the Native American H~'.t-it~M-Commissio~:~~:~J,L be ~cit~fJ;&:g>.and will identify the Most Likely Descendent, who will be consulfecl;;:for recommer'iaations for'tteatment of the discovered remains. . ·~;=~~~~Ii:1;:~~::::.:.. ·:~jf ~~;.;:.: .. References. 15, 16, B·.,.:_:;:~:.... .:::;'>;:. VI. Geology an~ S~;i:~;):~;~~~'.;:,:::::~~~~~;~~f Environmental Setting ~ ~~:;~~~=~:~~~~:-~ .:;~~:-~ In general, the topography of the site slopes to the southeast at slopes ranging from 7% to 14%. The southeast corner of the site is approximately thirty feet (30') below the northwest corner of the site in elevation. Near surface soils generally consist of clayey and silty sands to a depth of 4-5 feet in a slightly moist state and in a loose to medium-dense condition. Page 21of46 Item 10.a. - Page 102 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVI:. LJECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map, issued by the State Geologist for the area, or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.) Potentially Significant Impact ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? . . .1&::~~~:-_ iii) Seismic-related ground failure, mclud1r:ig!'.}~'>' ~~~~~~:::::;::l:~i::i~i:::s:::,;,::::!~\W,1*; Less Than Significant with Mitigation D or that would become unstable, as ··~;~;f.t;~Uihof the -··;:;;/,: .. _ project and potentially result in ori~~~;~~.q·~·':c~;rl~~sit~ [j:~\fs;..:~:,.. D landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, li~~~~fa~tici't\h::~;::; .. _ ·:~:~jJ~h or collapse? ,::~:i~!~~iH~;~~='-:-~~~~1;j~~t ":'.'.}~~~l~~fa::~::.... "':;:iti}~;;: d) Be located on expansiV:etsOit"as::aefined in Table rn:~:::;:;:~~:-;--v,:~::~~,;:::h.. · ~-:~:J:•~"~..::\-' ~..,':.•::•~"[,>~ "•~~,'•.n,,0 .,:.~"A~Q:O:":>' , d"~J:•:: .. :•~·~"~',, ~ 1-B of the Uniform ~~~·µ1Jding Cod(:f;::(:1994}, crea.tj@;r" D "' ... ;::~:):r D substantial risks to life ~·~~PfCJ>.perty? --~~j~: ":(~~it( e) Have soils incapable ot~ijg,~uat~J'y~i~m:m9rting t"ti~~~:::. use of sep~l~:?$~~'.uk$;;.;.Qr al1~~f.t'~t1ff~~~.:::x~~t~~i;;:qi-spos~t%~~~::.. 0 .,~,:•,tt" ~.;._:-:.~: .. :~~,?,,'\,:'._,~ .. :<~:~:-~ .. :·=~~· .. ' ,:-..~~~·;.>:=:-~ .... , ..... :,:,.~·=-~-;, .. ~.-'< ,·~"~" systems;~::::Where sewer.5:%~;;:are not:'~~:a:vailable 'f6f,;::tthe ~;.-... ~~~~·= .. ~<·:"~ -""~ .. }~"X·;;._~ O:z.~~;. -. ~~ .. ~~·~·,>-:--~·;,:· disposah:of.;waste water? '-;::)::i:.:,,._ ···:'.~'.:::=:. ····-:.~;-:. D October 2015 Less Than Significant No Impact Impact D D D D D Discuss;:~~·;~~l~rc~~::., _ ··:;;i:jj~~\~~~t::: ":t'.;'.\~i~~;~t$, ... a: A geotechri"iGa'l;:cinvestigation O:·W:he projecr::site was performed by GSI Soils, Inc. (2015) (Attachment C}. This investigMfg.Q concluded~if~at the project site is suitable for the proposed project if the recommendations cm~'(ajned in t@:~}eport are incorporated into the project plans and specifications. Implementation of the.:¥'~~1owi.Qg;i~ltigation measure will reduce any potential impacts to a less than significant level. Less tha~·:§lg~'ffft~'~t with mitigation ··:~:~~:~===~ MM Vl-1: The recommendations provided in the geotechnical investigation report prepared by GSI Soils, Inc dated June 22, 2015 shall be incorporated-into the project plans and specifications. Final improvement plans submitted to the City shall be accompanied by a letter of certification from the civil engineer that the plans are in conformance with the geotechnical investigation report and all applicable Codes and Ordinances. b-e: No impacts. References: C, D Page 22 of46 Item 10.a. - Page 103 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVl:. OECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Environmental Setting October 2015 The project site is located adjacent to an existing public facility and residential development, in a zoning district predominated by office uses. Would the project: Potentially Less Than Significant Significant with Impact Mitigation a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant effect on the environment? ~,,) § b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation .. ;:;;;;~~~@:\{:>:, adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of <:;~f~;E::j· ··:,:;;;g;~~::.. ~ Less Than Significant No Impact Impact D D D D :i:::::: gases? ,,, ···· 't'~}h" a-b: Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions are said io:~[~sµlt in an increase in the:;;~!=!ft:h's average surface temperature. This is commonly referred to as gl~61ih~wc;irming,:/.{)Wjie rise in ·g·i~:~aJ temperature is associated with long-term changes in_p[:~~ipitation, te;:n~t~~M:t~~K:;;ifnd patterns, a~·a~e~her elements of the earth's climate system. This is a"~~:~@:C?:Wfl as climate?c·~~vge. These changes are now thought to be broadly attributed to GHG emissi&q~;·;:·:fl~~~t,.1,1,larly thos·€~:f~h'.li.ssions that result from the human production and use of fossil fuels. ~~~{::.. ··=~~:t~;ig:::;,.:. ''.o'!:i1fa~:;:; • . ·;-~;:;;;;:~;~.;;'~-·:,::~;~~\ ·-:·:::::i;:~1~i~~~1~~~~::h.. ··:::~:1:$i~rfa~:·. The passage o~ ~B3~!:lt@~g~{!~~W!_a Globar·~~~fmin·~-~:~~jY£I~:p.\~~ (t<il06), recognized the ne_ed ~o reduce GHG em1ss1on.s:a.qi:I set the}g~!'lenhouse gcl$';.~m~~srons re'd!'.J~:l:!on goal for the State of California into law. The law req.tfl·~~~:-~hat by 2'q~p, State e·~!~]¥i:i"~ must be·:·f~duced to 1990 levels. This is to be accomplished by reducin·g:~2~eenhou¥~~1 gas emissff)g~;-Jrom significant sources via regulation, market mechanisms, .. ;.:(ii;tq,.,q.tJler act~V~J. ... ;:S1'.H:li~~~l!e~:t legis\"~fiqn (e.g., SB97-Greenhouse Gas Emissions bill) directed t9.~:fg~nf&'gUi&.~!~;;~es~·at£~~J:6~-~~~fTc.&i!~M~.d·~:~~lop statewide thresholds. ·~#:~lf:i . '": ::;:~!;;:;%:~;., »:;:~:~~k:::~ ' ., ·::;~:+::~;;:,::§; In Marc1i;21112, the San Luis:;~l!Ji~po Coi;iM!Y Air Pollution Control District (APCD) approved thresholds for GHG emi;~l~h::!!'Tlpacts, and rn~~~·-thre~h~J~.s have been incorporated in the APCD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook. '.lf~.9R.determined "'iiti~t a tier~Wii!>rocess for residential/commercial land use projects was the most appro"j)'f:ffit~ and effect&~ approach for assessing the GHG emission impacts. The tiered approach includes tii~l~:;methodsA~j~y of which can be used for any given project: ;::;::~:~;\::~:-_.,;::f ~~~1r • Qualitative GHG Rea.t:1e:tiO'n Strategies (e.g. Climate Action Plans): A qualitative threshold that is consistent with AB 3l1s:2~ping Plan measures and goals; or, . • Bright-Line Threshold: Numerical value to determine the significance of a project's annual GHG emissions; or, • Efficiency-Based Threshold: Assesses the GHG impacts of a project on an emissions per capita basis. For most projects the Bright-Line Threshold of 1,150 Metric Tons C02/year (MT C02e/yr) will be the most applicable threshold. In addition to the residential/commercial threshold options proposed above, Page 23 of 46 Item 10.a. - Page 104 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE: utCLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 October 2015 a bright-line numerical value threshold of 10,000 MT C02e/yr was adopted for stationary source (industrial) projects. It should be noted that projects that generate less than the above mentioned thresholds will also participate in emission reductions because air emissions, including GHGs, are under the purview of the California Air Resources Board (or other regulatory agencies) and will be "regulated" either by CARB, the Federal Government, or other entities. For example, new vehicles will be subject to increased fuel economy standards and emission reductions, large and small appliances will be subject to more strict emissions standards, and energy delivered to consumers will increasingly come from renewable sources. Other programs that are intended to reduce th~;_overall GHG emissions include Low Carbon Fuel Standards, Renewable Portfolio standards and the Cl~ii:~~Car standards. As a result, even the emissions that result from projects that produce fewer em_i_s~ifiri~· than the threshold will be subject to emission reductions. __ . ~;~~~~;;t~~if;tf:~f~:\\~l~i~~~~~~~·--- Under CEQA, an individual project's GHG emissions w.UEge,nerally nofre~ult in direct significant impacts. This is because the climate change issue is glob~J~~:J:Qirl~~t~re. However~,;~DJ!,D.dividual project could be found to contribute to a potentially significant cr\;(tfr.tilative impact. Project~;'.*.bat have GHG emissions above the noted thresholds may be considered cuirti;ffa:tively considerable anci"?~:gl:ijre mitigation. ··:::::;~j~j~~:~'.:~-,.;:;t~;~f.1\¥ -:;~i:;~~;~~~~i:;:;_, The Air Pollution Control District (AP~!~}J1as establishetl;~:f;J'iJ~ig~tion measures to re:<J.r:ice project-level GHG emissions. Implementation of 'l~'@f~!lowing mitig~tiQ.ff;:;measure is consistent with the City's ... :,: ... ~~:-: ~~" .. z~:3:·~ :~~~~ ~,.y~z.;; .. ,, Climate Action Plan and will reduce this if.ti;Ratt~t9:~.~1.ess than sig~ifj~ant level. Less than significant with mitigation d!i~· ''"'~\k~ ·~%~~ MM Vll-1: All_ .pq~~trtfc-tr~b.:-~Plans sha!l}:r.efle.ct;::jJ?e'·;19_llp~ing 'GHG-reducing measures where applicable. f?'.r(9{;fo issul~f~ of buildif;lg,;;p~fffilts, tti'~;;·:!pf::Qject sponsor shall submit impact reduction cal~Gi~hi;:i_ns bas~~j~jfon these--::·%¢~-~ures to th·~· APCD for review and approval, incorporating the.'fJ{i~wing ~~~sures: ·::;fih -:'::J;~~~~~iM~~~::~;fa.;-. -\\;:~~~~~~~::~1;~i~~i~~~m::;~t#~~~;~~:~:~::::~.. ·::~~~it-: ,_.,:~i~H%f::··'rrltCYrt>~t~.l~ outdi;ig:~;'.~lectricat'=:(;!~!l~.ts. to~-encourage the use of electric appliances and ·~;;wr~·: too1s. ···::~i\\fa:>-··::;.~~~t.·;. -·-::;.';:~:~?;- ···:::(;::::~-. Provide shad~~Kr:f:!e plant~tjg_in parking lots to reduce evaporative emissions from parked -·-~~~;;!~}:y_ehicles. DesigW;~hpuld pfb'fig~ 50% tree coverage within 10 years of construction using . -·,~;Lq\r~._ROG emitti~g~:~Jbw mai~t~:~ance native drought resistant trees. • r.J'6if(.~~!dential woq,¥~urning appliances. • Provla~::'$~mploye,~B(bckers and showers. One shower and 5 lockers for every 25 ~-·~n,',):;'.->, ,.~~··"•~~,.~~,. employees~~~e-.r:~:ci@mmended. • Trusses for::_~~gf~~facing portions of roofs shall be designed to handle dead weight loads of standard ii>"lar-heated water and photovoltaic panels. Roof design shall include sufficient south-facing roof surface, based on structures size and use, to accommodate adequate solar panels. For south facing roof pitches, the closest standard roof pitch to the ideal average solar exposure shall be used. • Increase the building energy rating by 20% above Title 24 requirements. Measures used to reach the 20% rating cannot be double counted. • Plant drought tolerant, native shade trees along southern exposures of buildings to reduce energy used to cool buildings in summer. Page 24 of 46 Item 10.a. - Page 105 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVC. LJtCLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 /....-- October 2015 • Utilize green building materials (materials which are resource efficient, recycled, and sustainable) that are available locally if possible. • Install high efficiency heating and cooling systems. • Design building to include roof overhangs that are sufficient to block the high summer sun, but not the lower winter sun, from penetrating south facing windows (passive solar design). • Utilize high efficiency gas or solar water heaters. • Utilize built-in energy efficient appliances (i.e. Energy Star®). • Utilize double-paned windows . Utilize low energy street lights (i.e. sodium). .-::f~j~} Utilize energy efficient interior lighting. ·~·.w.w ~~:::,::;,~ ~~~·:·~ • • • Install energy-reducing programmable thermostats::" Use roofing material with a solar reflecta~.~~~~:~~=mi~uneeting the EPA/DOE Energy Star® rating to reduce summer cooling needs.•::::::·-:::~:~:::·· "':::f2;!~l;~:: .. • Eliminate high water consumptiol').::~!~j~a~cape (e.g., "Wi~hl~ and lawns) in residential .,,•"J'~'••4u•'•"•n ~='"~~,~., .. ,.~. • design. Use native plants that do;t~~~~f:equire watering and'ai:e:'.Jow ROG emitting. Provide on-site bicycle parking ·.Mlh.:)>hort term (racks) a~a::~J~f;!g term (lockers, or a locked room with standard racks lri~:~:~.ccess llm1t~d to bicy~W~t;~~qnly) to meet peak • season maximum derl}~Qd. One bik~·::;;,~RL~Ji~~~~~;~per 10 vehic'l~Y,~filployee space is re comm en.de d. ·~~~Jj~j~~~}~ih.. ·\:~~~~1~M::::·· -·.:·:·· • Require the installation·~~9J~:e:l~t';tf;J!=_al hookups·~t5·:1.oading docks and the connection of trucks equipped with ei·~~\r.ic~f::ig'.9.<?:k.(Jps to ~;ilmJnate the need to operate diesel- . ·~~~~:,~ ·~~:t~:~~r .. ~~·:~.~~ ' '"J,:•:,,:~tr~', powered TRU~ at the loadmg;'.Qpcks. ·:~:~;;;~::;~:~:· ··=::~:;;;;:~. Provide .,S,~~WJ.~~~~~Race in g~:f$.~~ for ~~~~J~~;~RD.d bi2W!e trailers, or covered racks I .,/}!·~·:·~ ~·~·~·· . : • ··~{·~~~~· ; .. ,:.., • • ".-.. ,.:·~·~ • ··~~ ·~·:·:~: .. :·!=-~,"l:•:·:-;·}~•:I>' • locker.s:to::serv1cethe~i;es1dent1al::t:m1ts~:~:~:::$::·· ··~·='.::;:2:;:~::~ •. ;:;:;~::~~~:~-·-=:-:::~:'::~ ~:i:·:~~~D=~~.;:;:~~~::~· v~::~~:::,:;~:- • Provide~hH?e-phase··~J~~trical stub};!@:rs·for electric\iehicle charging stations. ::,:;;;j~~'~ Environmental setting . .,:~::;::~::,,. ··:::::;:'.i;:>. The project·::§1t~;~!~. not known t~~~~~.Rtain ·h~:~~f:2S or hazardous materials, nor are these materials located in the immedia"t~·~J.c;inity of the p·r.~j~ct site. ":·:-· Would th• proj•tt "') a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and/or accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials, substances, or waste into the environment? Potentially Significant Impact D D Less Than Significant with Mitigation D D Less Than Significant Impact D D No Impact Page 25 of 46 Item 10.a. - Page 106 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVc. uECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites, compiled pursuant to Government Code §65962.5, and, as a result, create a significant hazard to_the public or environment? e) Be located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of D D D D D D t~f ~ri~~~~f ;~~§:::~:~:::~::::~:!~: )(, D :~~~;h:, ~~~:i~gr~~~: i~r~j:;e:;e:;zard for p1' 'D ·<;~~ .. :_;·~:~_:: ..... :':·.·~.:···.;:_:·:·.=·.:.;._ D g) Impair implementation of or physically int~tf~re ; with. an adopted emergency response plan~::\%:~T:.;._ D D D emergency evacuation plan? -~~i@~t.. ..;:~4t "::q~Ji;!1ii~.;.~_=.~.:~-·:· h) Expose people or structures to a ~jgr@cant risk of ·:·::~t~~:;::~t~il{:'· · · loss, injury, or death from wildland·'.~{l;~~~t~jj!~fJ.~ding "=::;@j~l;;;;_ .. _ areas where wildlands are adjacent to urij~nlzetl~ar:eas -::~·q ..... , .. . . . . ·::~;~:: '"~~·~:~·~;',.~~~~~~;~/ ·~~.;:;:;;~~~-~~ or where residences are intermixed with w1l.QJ_cinds?·:·::::;:~:~t.:::::~·-. ··::?;::~~:; .. ~i:_c~,ss~~~mpacts. ~\ ~~' b: The potential for naturaltY:':occurri.ng~-asbestos (NO~his addressed in Section Ill Air Quality. Refere"Jll~,~#Jt~~~\, IX Hyd·r.~~pgy and Wate~f.Quahty,;;~;;~:~:-. ..,. D D October 2015 Environ;:~~!t~etting ''.::~~~~l~{.~~~1h ··~::~~~(i~i~~~ij~}: The project site~i$1:lqcated within ·t@~.incorporated City Limits of Arroyo Grande. The City provides water ...... ·.x,. • ......... service, which corisisfs .. of water frQm\groundwater and Lopez Lake. The site itself is undeveloped, which results in a minimai'W*'.(?~_nt of s~i~water runoff. The project site is not located within a flood zone. The project site is appr~·~-m~;t~~¥J!9,B' from Arroyo Grande Creek. ··:~~~i~~~ili~::::·· Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Potentially Significant Impact D Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact D No Impact D Page 26 of 46 Item 10.a. - Page 107 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVt uECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level that would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial on-or off-site erosion or siltation? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through alteration of the _ D D course of a stream or river, or substantially increase;;;~:}::;. D the rate or amount of surface runoff in a ma.r:i·d~~:i::?:-· which would result in on-or off-site flooding? ·:ij@i:;:;: D e) Create or contribute runoff water which ~8Jith. exc~ed the capacity of exist~ng o~ plan~~-d storn:~at~f.~~~~~;}t-J=tl~ii~lk> [8J drainage systems or provide subst~:t:f.~tiilJ add1t1onal ··:::;:;:;:;:~::::iHi'.: f ff? ':'°~~ .. ::=~~~::":~: ~·~ -"·~:;:~~~:~:~~:;> ;~~~~~~a0ntia~1l~u~::r~~:o w~ter quality? ~\~~j~~;~:~'.~:j~f~~i~?~k:.;.,,._ ·-:d~\1ilk:•, ... g) Place housing within a 100-year flood H¥.~rd ·=:w~~t::·;;,: .. -. '<:::::ff%L .. as mapped on a federal )~t~_q_c;l,. .. Hazard BoUQ~ary or~·:::~H%;;illl ";;;~;~f;;:[] :~~n~a~~~r~:~? Ratiif ~pp.i~~~ floo~$~{~\;?~~ ~' h) Place structures that'would impedei>r redirect ftc•oa 9,•;·}~o~~,, >;'•~~~'~' :•~·~\•;~ flows within a 100-year floof!:~h~_zard,'.~f~:~.?...... · :~~~'.\:. i) Expose p_e,c;ipi:~:~P.r:~~t_ru ctu r·~:~;~~Q.:~~~~~Jgri1f(q~tn,Jisk df:tb. ,.".,', '~"~',,•~>!"J",,~,.~d''J/'.,• ,~oJ.,";/']'~~,.~., ' v.!', ",."',.~~"?• '.,""»' .>.,<,•.= 'n "'~';.> '• ~~ "d~•,. loss, inj4rf¥:}::pr;;aeatf'i::ttG>'.mJloodiTig}~Jr1cluding'f.f9:o:i?Jxig '::::*: D resulti~~~ftb~ the failu~~:;5f.:ii.Jeve1/~ti.aam? -.~:;:::t;::::; .. "' ·.~~:~""':' ,-);.~;~~~;=·~ ~H.~{·~~~~ '• ',I j) Result ifiBi~u,ndation by seTd~·~}-tsunaml~·:~<;>X mudflow? D D D D D October 2015 D D D D D D D D D D D D D iscussi o ~ ;::,tt;~~j~~;~~~:::;:,. '~::~j~li!~\j~;'.;. '\~~~~;~~~~~,~ a, c-e: The proje'Etf:i.~ required td~~~mply with the City's Post Construction Stormwater Requirements, which require the ~lt~~to retain t~~~;g5th percentile of a 24 hour storm event for projects adding more 4n~ '~"I•~ ~";b 4'~"" '};{;' • than 15,000 square-feet:~\?Hr1P~-~i-~.i:is surfaces. Additionally, the project will include areas dedicated to permeable pavers arouncWlb:~i~!~Pfoposed building. The implementation of permeable pavers was reviewed by GSI Soils, Inc. (20!5) and recommendations for the installation of permeable pavers were indicated in the report. Implementation of these recommendations will result in impacts being reduced to a level of less than significant. Less than significant with mitigation MM IX-1: The conclusions and recommendations provided in the Permeable Paver Plan Review prepared by GSI Soils, Inc. dated August 27, 2015 shall be incorporated into the project plans and specifications (Attachment D). Final improvement plans -submitted to the City shall be accompanied by a letter of certification from the civil engineer that the plans are in conformance with the soils report and the Permeable Paver Plan Review. Page 27 of46 Item 10.a. - Page 108 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE: ..1t.CLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 October 2015 b: The proposed project is not anticipated to deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge since the project will comply with the City's Post Construction Stormwater Requirements. Discussion of water supply is covered in Section XVII Utilities and Service Systems. Less than significant impact f: The State Water Quality Control Board requires municipalities, via the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit, to minimize negative impacts on aquatic ecosystems and degradation of water quality to the maximum extent practicable. Permittees must implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) that reduce pollutants in storm water runoff to the technology-based standard of Maximum Extent Practicable {MEP) to protect water quCJJity. The goals of post-construction BMPs are to prevent and control erosion and sedimentationJ:;?P.'.~~iiide source control of potential pollutants, control and treat runoff, and protect ··wetland~:=:·:.~6&?.;··~ater quality resources. Post- ~<._:.;-.:"~.,:i.~,··, construction BMPs are required to achieve stormwatE:lf:~~-'.{:W'al!W. standards through site-planning measures. Vegetative swales or other biofilters are rec&mWl~nd~ij~;ia.~ the preferred choice for post- construction BMPs for all projects with suitable landscfo]·~ -~·reas be~-~il~~.:these measures are relatively economical and require limited maintenance. _,E~}j~$rojects where .,l~rj~.~cape based treatment is impracticable, or insufficient to meet required d~~~:r criteria, other post-clj:~~~.r.uction BMPs should be incorporated. All post-construction BMPs must b~~.f!:i~J~tained to,._operate effiii°G:~!~~ly. Implementation of the BMPs listed below will reduce the potential m:~~~.cts tq;~W~~er quality to"'~Wfo~s than significant level. Less than significant with mitigation.... "~:::;~:~~::::~:;:~:;l~~?;. · "·\;~j~:> ·;~:w{@~b::::;;. ..:::1i1'.;~\r: .. MM IX-Z: The following BMPs sh~f1l:pe·:1rroo·r;porated info~lle. project: ·::qj~~~::. '"·::~:::;:~~i~11t~~S;:.... ~:~~~f ~@;~:·., • Roof Downspot1LSystem. Dii'~9!. roof d·ra'i.Q~;;iJ'_q. pervioU,$~~.reas to allow infiltration prior H't-.~~· ·~ .·~~-~~~~ ... -d~~~-·-~ • .;.~.·-~~ ~ .. ::.,._ ..... ~ ... ..-.. ~.<; ·~-..> • -~-·.•,,•,•, to dischcif.gipg~C:FWa.~er bodies"Qt:;the rp~n!~fpa!~$~.o~rn drain system. :W~:~i~:t ·-:~!~~ir;~.:';., ·-:~~i;~t;J;~~~i~~~:f. .. <::~=:q~:.:.: • Run-oWeontrol. Maihtain post-development peak runoff rate and average volume of runoff at l~-\i~ls_,that ~f;:L~irnilar to p~~~~evelopment levels . .. '.::~;:.;~:~;aim~jjt&~::;~: ;.. . ·.:;~tr~~~;:*iI~~~~w::·::'.~::=~~:::i~~1;1~j~ii=~~::·:·. "\~fa- .~;~;;::J:::::::~::~--Tal)ellng::;and Mafo:tenance of"StOf.m -.Drain Facilities. Label new storm drain inlets with ~;~:~~;W'.;.:· "No DurTipffa~:-::-Dr~l~·$}l;P Ocean''.l<51~1ert the public to the destination of stormwater ":.:tih::;.. and to prev'~ti~f9.irect ;:11ii!l~rge of pollutants into the storm drain. · .. :·::.:;Wk::~. ;~~~~~@i:. "-:::=~i~~~~~~:;: • ··;·Xl:ehicle/Equipme'iit"(Cleaning~-:~commercial/industrial facilities or multi-family residential de\@qpments of ~Q\mits or greater should either provide a covered, bermed area for wasKf~'.g\~ctivitie~;~qfiidiscourage vehicle/equipment washing by removing hose bibs and installi~-g~~fgns_.;1:i'ffi~ibiting such uses. Vehicle/equipment washing areas shall be paved designed t'ci~~P.t~t~~t run-on or run off from the area, and plumbed to drain to the • ~..:'.<-~-~ sanitary sewer: • Common Area Litter Control. Implement trash management and litter control for commercial and industrial projects or large-scale residential developments to prevent litter and debris from being carried to water bodies or the storm drain system. • Food Service Facilities. If food service facilities are included in the project, design food service facilities (including restaurants and grocery stores) to have a sink or other area for cleaning floor mats, containers, and equipments that is connected to a grease Page 28 of46 Item 10.a. - Page 109 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVt uECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 October 2015 interceptor prior to discharging to the sanitary sewer system. The cleaning area should be large enough to clean the largest mat or piece of equipment to be cleaned. • Refuse Areas. Trash compactors, enclosures and dumpster areas shall be covered and protected from roof and surface drainage. Install a self-contained drainage system that discharges to the sanitary sewer if water cannot be diverted from the areas. • Outdoor Storage Controls. Oils, fu~ls, solvents, coolants, and other chemicals stored outdoors shall be in containers and protected from drainage by secondary containment structures such as berms, liners, vaults or roof cover.s._and/or drain to the sanitary sewer system. Bulk materials stored outdoors shall ~.l~~~jt~e protected from drainage with ber~s and covers. Process equipment stor~~:Ei~¥ff~ors shall be inspected for proper function and leaks, stored on impermeable}~6#~t~s:.and covered. Implement a regular program of sweeping and litter contra,! ·~R~~;;tlev~l~~~;?f! spill cleanup plan for storage a re as. ·.·:::::t~!:1;if (;~]~;)~ . ·,:,:~~[}~;~;~~:~t::.-. • Cleaning, Maintenance and Prei;'Cessing Controls. Areas·~;;u~~d for washing, steam cleaning, maintenance, repair or··;~pf.ecessing shall have i~'pgt:meable surfaces and containment berms, roof covers, re'e~~~ed wa:t@~~ash facility,":~~~ ... discharge to the sanitary sewer. Dischalges to the sanifcf@:~~~W-~'r may require pr~¥Matment systems and/or approval of an THff~~t~~.h"Yaste discti~f.~~~permit. ·.:,~~i.fo:::.··:~%~W:::i:.,:;.,. .,., .. :;w)::i1.::; .. • Loading Dock Controls. DeijgD loa"diqg~'.:dg_cks to IJe:ifS;c:>,vered, surrounded by berms or curbs, o~·:''~c;>)'.i:~~fl,J_Cted to pn~~ent &~'[~~:g~;:·~pnto ···:&_(]~~rom the area. Position roof downsed:~l~~::.r&:;tit~e:c;:t stormv:l:i[~{ a~~-~}f.iBffi~~e.,.load"i°Hg area. Water from loading dock ~ri~:~'~hall b~=::a.~~.ined to tti~~~a:Hita:i\i sew~t:~~~aiverted and collected for ultimate ... ~. ,• ~; :" ,,_, ,. .;~~ ~j:" •• ~ ... ::~-:.~·~::: .. ~ ~ > discharge:·1~\?1:,,the sanit~;r;.y sewer. D.~~.f skirts between the trailers and the building shall be installe'Ci:~tR~:wev~.#~i;~~~£~ure of i·~~:~:~.!"Jg activities to rain . .. :::lN;}mm~M~~~;:::,.·. ···::~f~~~~~[l~Wf~~~·:::·~::~:::~~~~~~~:::::: .. -. ""~~t;~~:, , .. f~~i~~i:f::.-··sfre'ettRar:king LCft?i:sweeping:·:;;:~tP.:I~l~meht a program to regularly sweep streets, ~fl::;;., sidewalks;~:~tj~g_._parkl.ngr:r:.!~ts to preV~nt the accumulation of litter and debris. Debris <'_-,.~ .. ~,,"' <'u~~~~,,~~;..~. '",~,,'~'~" .. '-. '5::;::.::'.::~·-resulting frortj'_::;~r~ssure-~i'*~~,hing should be trapped and collected to prevent entry into ··:~(::;~tJ:1e storm draiW~lv.stem. '\Xl~~ti water containing any cleaning agent or degreaser shall ··~tM:.~ollected and·:~Wt>harged t!b.the sanitary sewer. :~fe::~::a;: ~~~,,,, X. Land Use and Planning Environmental Setting The project site is designated as Mixed-Use (MU) in the City's Land Use Element and zoned Office Mixed-Use (OMU) with the D-2.20 overlay. The proposed type and scale of development is consistent with the MU land use category, OMU zoning district, and D-2.20 overlay as required in Subsection 16.44.020.D.10 of the Municipal Code. Page 29 of 46 Item 10.a. - Page 110 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE LltCLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with the applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of any agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, a general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or Potentially Significant Impact D D mitigating an environmental effect? ··· c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? Discussion a, c: No impacts. .::f6~1;j;~~~) October 2015 Less Than Less Than Significant with Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact D D lZJ D D D D b: Th~ proposed project is located in an overlay d!~]i'..i.ct that limits land uses·-t~;l!h.<?se in conjunction with the orderly development of the Arroyo Grande ·:e~ttu:riunity Ho.~pital. The"':Jff~-8osed medical office building will be leased by the Hospital and is in conf6tm~nce .Vlf.itt.i:'.,the use rest~fet!ons of the overlay district. No impact ··:,:~i~~~~)~;~;~~Jijtjj;~?-· ·::::~f~~jj~~ References: 1, 2, 4, 15 '<.'lf$~~~.:l.~_,j_:t::_.:~_-.:;_:;;_._:··_ .. :·_.:·.:.'; XI. Mineral Resourc~;{$~~~~~{;~~:::~:-. __ .:· __ _ The project site does n'G>~:icmntain an\i.§lfr1own mine'iaj~resources. .·.;;:~,:-- : ... ".-." .. -····.-~ ~,.~,~:~_:i_,;_ ... ~:_( ___ ,i,:\.' .. '~_··j __ : __ ;~.-.:'..:_,,·•-.·:.1·1.:L_~-;~,~-~'::r_::_:··:: __ :_::,:·.='·.:· ••• :"::'":;.::· ••• '~_.::···.,:··_:~:l:.i·.'.:;,·!.~::;:-\.~.:i~.·:):\.:_.: ___ :;~.t~o1~t~e·1Pnf·~tc1~anllyt .-::::i~i~j~;~~~f ~~j1f ;;;mi~~~t:;~~%::., . -. --.. . -, ... ; .. Would tb.emroiect. w1 ..... •• ·_.;.; .. ;-:.,·. ···.·:«·:-; a) Resu~lt~:fi~:~1~e loss of av~fi~:~.\tW o(~\~;~.ewn mine·~~-1 resource tllaHis .. or would be MMilue to iHetregion and "·~-<~~~-~..... ...:~:~~~;-; '->~~:~:~:~~ the residents i:if;~the state? "";:;~:t ·:'::;:;::: D?:~=;~~. ~,,_~ .. :r:";~= ~ b) Result in tlie~~~~·loss of avaff~b11ity of a locally important minerai"::~i=s:E:iurce reco:~~'t:Y site delineated on a local general pla~~:;~ke_cific,pJ~ijfor other land use p I a n? ·::::!.;~;;~]l~~~\j1)~j~!;?·;; . Discussion a-b: No impacts. References: 5 D D Less Than Significant with Mitigation D D Less Than Significant No Impact Impact D D Page 30 of 46 Item 10.a. - Page 111 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVc: uECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 XII. Noise Environmental Setting October 2015 The project site is surrounded by a public facility use to the west and residential uses to the north, east, and south. The proposed project includes an approximately 45,000 square-foot,· three-story medical office building. Potentially Less Than Less Than Significant Significant Significant No Impact with Impact . Impact Would the project: .. :::::~ ... M1t1gat1on ~~;:;~~f :f~~Eh~::;~:~~iEC:~:~~I ;:~:,·~~ ~' ,~:~,,. D b) Generate or expose people to excess1y_e .. i.:~;~:;:;;: ·::~:i{: .... ,,., ........... ·.· D .,..t!J. ground borne vibrations or ground borne noise lev~!~~;:t;;~? · ··,::~~~>,. c) Create a substantial permanent increase in antm~(it .. ,,~:~N;~;>.. noise levels in the vicinity of the project (above leV:g:i,~;... D D "<;;:~\k.: .. ~ . h h . )""' ;,~,;;; .. ;·:·,, ... :~~;~ .. :,:.:.~.".:},;·,·~.:~. d·~·:·:,z·,. wit out t e project r ··;:::::::~:-. .··· . . ··:;::::;-.;:,._ d) ·create a substantial temporary or p.~f,i9.,dic increase ".::;~~t~1~~:i~im~:r ··:,::iifj;;:;· in ambient noise levels in the vicinity ciif~~t~~}R_r:oject, in ":'.r!]t: D ~ ' ~.,,~,~~;u.¥~ ".,,:Q~":":..,,~~., _ "?X..:',~r excess of noise levels existing without the.:p:r;9je6~~'.:=:~:,.. ··~::i:i·:;:::.:. e) Be located within an airport land use pi~~~Q,r, ~~M~t;;:;.,. ~:3:::.;~;~h .. •,,.;~:,.}:~. 4~·.~,:~:~:. .. :•,\,;~ ",.';..';,y.~~·~ such a plan has not been adw:te.<;I, within tw'Qfmiles of ·qi:~;:;::t~~-. "~::l:::~~:-.. •J<f>~·~ ·:~>~l>;,~: .. :;~,~~~~D_,,~.. .. ... :::,~:~~"-~· ;.>~J=~= .. ~· ;~:-~,n~=:i-B,. -= d:•'}~"-" a public airport or pu~!!~.::u~$e':aitP.9rit? If so, wepJ~ th~ij:]~~*~f·"6J.:::;.;;;-.... ":-=o . "' ~·='·~·;; '~" .~~·= . . ·-~::..;.;-: .. ~ -. ·".:·:~.:.~"-~'::::.~;.~;o;.·.·:='" ~:·: ::-; ·>~J~;·' project expose peopl~.:~:·:~es1dmg ·o:~'.~~~orkmg 'I!t~~O~~t:·· .. ,.,<::;::t: project area to excessiv~~:n~Jse levels?;;:~?;~~ ':ti::~~f·:.. · •-..•"d" .•.k,. ,"j; ... ",}' ·.·,·~ ..... ,. f) Be in the vicinity of a pr.W~~.e air:~t~i.P})f so, woi:il#~~; .. the project :·~~~~i~:meople ~~§i"~!n~i~~~:;Wi):~~m.R.Jn th~:)%:, D -~';'".~'i'~"~'';,..;'~'·:~=,,.. .. : .. :~:~,j ~~ .. :-~ ', J ",.:.:-.~~~<i-/-• .. _,.,·~-; .. ~"~",:}/•~D:--._ ·~~· ~~= .. ~o> project a.i:.ea:.~g;·excessi~e:.noise leV.~~7 · .... ::::;~~;.;~l,N. ·::;~~: D D D D D D D Discu!~'·. ·-:~;·~;:::;~:.li~b:.:. ··;:;~~\ii@t;:;'-;., .. ,;~~;&?jj~f a: Resid~%t(~1::and hospital ·-J~}~:?~re ~J:~1f~~red to be noise sensitive. Construction of the proposed project will g~~~r@te temporar\j:;:mQ!se imp~·~s; however, the days and times of construction activities shall be limited --p~facity standarci~~~;i:§rherefare, this temporary increase is not anticipated to exceed the City's thresholds fd~=;g~s.e. Less th~ff~ignificant impact ··.:~;?j@g~;-,_ . .<;;;;~]l~J~~;. b & d: Construction of rn:~~~~9.jJosed project will generate temporary groundborne vibrations and increase ambient noise leveiS}IB'3wever, the days and times of construction activities shall be limited per City standards. Therefore, this temporary increase is not anticipated to exceed the City's thresholds for noise. Less than significant impact c: Operation of the proposed project will create a permanent increase in ambient noise levels; however, this permanent increase is not anticipated to exceed the City's thresholds for noise in Municipal Code Chapter 9.16. Less than significant impact ~-f: No impacts. Page 31of46 Item 10.a. - Page 112 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIV~ uECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 References: 1, 2, 3, 15 XIII. Population and Housing Environmental Setting /-·' October 2015 The project site is vacant. The property to the east of the project site is Phase I of the mixed-use project and has been constructed with a 30-unit Cityhouse development. Less Than Potentially Significant Significant .. with Impact .<'.,·;::. Would the project: A:'.:'.;;.fJ)llit1gat1on :~~:~~~:~I~F~~~;~~~:~~:~o~;;~~P~:.~E~=~ ,,~\~ D extension of roads or other infrastructure)? .. ::~;'::;::., ._,. "~:;~~;;~::. b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housin~~~~i'.}' ··:q~h::-. Less Than Significant Impact D D necessitating the construction of replacement hc;>;8:~j:~:g'"· D [j:;~:;;k:.: .. elsewhere? ···:::{iik~.; ··:::~)~it;:,_ No Impact c) Displace substantial numbers of people~:~:;~::;-_ -:ifb ·:::'.~:~;;::;., necessitating the construction of repl~·l?-~ment housing··.:~~~il~t\:Gl]iW>;. D ··:qfu;j. ~ Discussion a-c: No impacts. References: 1, 4, 15 ~tf~'t,~ XIV. Public Services':~~;:;::;;:;. :;;;:·~:,; 1'•'7~::~~~~~}~~ .~;:;~~:;~::~ ~ ~ ~ Public s~~i¢es:'·to··1Jief;1t:J:r.~j~ct site:;~t~. readily 'pf.:!;?vi~.~.d oy::the City of Arroyo Grande, the Five Cities Fire Author#Q:~;~·hd the Luci~-'~bScho~P6rstrict (LMsBf~~;;:~l· ,.,,, '''~*~ Would the project: "·:~::::;::::.. ;:::::'::·: a) Result in signifi~~~~t'.~;i"environrri~Ktal impacts from construction associateci'"~Wt~hJli~:j~;rovision of new or physically altered govern~~W~~j1~facilities, or the need for new or physically altered gti°~ernmental facilities, to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks? Other public facilities? Potentially Significant Impact D D D D D D Less Than S1gnif1cant with Mitigation D D D D D D Less Than S1gnif1cant Impact ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ No Impact D D D D D D Page 32 of 46 Item 10.a. - Page 113 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE oECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 Discussion October 2015 a: The construction of an approximately 45,000 square-foot medical office building will not impact . performance objectives due to being designed to accommodate all emergency response vehicles on the site and will not place a demand on existing school and park facilities. Less than significant impact References: 5, 15, XV. Recreation Environmental Setting The project includes the construction of an approximately 45,00Q,,;~_quare-foot medical office building that is not anticipated to impact recreation facilities within the CitVWJ~~·-· ,ff\)i~;i)ir\i~iL~, Less Than .J?,qtei:rtrally<.:::;:;:;-. . . Less Than . . '::·:···. . ····:.:'.$.1gn1f1ca nt Would the project: .. ;{fj~;\il:~i~~i~}'T~~~~tnt ··;::~~~!.?:-~ SrT~i~~~nt No Impact a) Increase the use of existing neighborhooq.;~afld ·-;~:~:~tk regional parks or other recreational facilities, such;~~~.L ··:<:1~Jt=.- substantial physical deterioration of the facility woJ1C:fo!h.. D _.7{:;:,:.:.:. D "':~:i~~;~~::::.:~ occur or be accelerated? ~=~;~·[:;;~·: ..... b) Include recreational facilities o,r;::.;:~:·r:.eq_yjre the construction or expansion of recreation'~i~if~-~ifffH~s:~that might have an adverse physical e#~~~:;-. ~·ir~~:ij,h~;.'""· environment? Discussion a, b: No Impact References: 5~ l~ ...... .. -,, .. ::1,(:~~~;~~::~-~~;~:~:::::;~-;.' XVI. T~anijp'ortation~:U.:raftk:::~:~:i~:;;. '·:~::;~~~:~::;::~.· . ·=:~mt:;'.,. . "-.::~.<n:~;;;. ~<:i~~:h:~:-··-:::::;::~:.;:; .. D D Environ~t::~~l Setting ·:-.:~::~~::~-"·:'.:~:~::;:;-. . The projecf~i~~::i.s located at iH~foprthwe~~;~.c:irner of Fair Oaks Avenue and Woodland Drive, which is a two-way stop-~i'r,\ler:.section and ··~P.P..roximaUiy' 1,000 feet from Fair Oaks Avenue and South Halcyon Road, which is a ~1~&Jized inters~~tf~n. -~:=~~~~~;:~~;:-A~~~\i~ Would the project: ··\:~'.:i:;:::, ... :~d~~~~:r· ·:;.;:j~~ilf~;- a) Cause a substantial increase in traffic, in relation to existing traffic and the capacity of the street system (i.e., a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, individually or cumulatively, the level of service standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Potentially Significant Impact D D Less Than S1gnif1cant with Mit1gat1on D D Less Than Sign iflca nt Impact No Impact D D Page 33 of 46 Item 10.a. - Page 114 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVC:. uECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 c) Cause a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location, that results in substantial safety risks? d) Contain a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or a dangerous intersection) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment) that would substantially increase hazards? D D October 2015 D D D D e) Result in inadequate emergency access? D D !Z1 D f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? D D lZI D g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs :i:::::cy~I~;:;!~; transportation (e.g., bus ;1(. D D 0 a-b: A Traffic and Circulation Study was prepared ~Y:§~ahtec (2015}}):i.r.id evaluated the operation of fourteen (14) intersections in the vicinity of the prqj_~~fi~~J.\ttachment Ef':if~~tsting AM and PM peak-hour traffic volumes were collected by Stantec specifi~M~#br this study. The e·~1~lqg AM and PM peak-hour intersection levels of service and delays currentl/~p~r;~te within acceptable 1i"~H~~(LOS C or better). '::::tit~]~:;:~. .;;[.jilt~~~. : .. :;;~~~~~;;~;.. The study utilized the trip generation pate data derived;\~1ii:nn:;:tJ~le:::1nstitute of Transf9pJ;tation Engineers ,;;..;.~~f,.""r",,,".,-~ •,,•~''':,l~~~~.~ .... , .. ,~-"l>M I .>?"~ (ITE) Generation Manual 9th Edition, c~~§J~!~nt with the ·"t;tl~lf Draft Traffic Impact Study Guidelines. Applying the ITE trip generation rates t6i~~t!iJt~J~.~t land use~%tfi~ .. project is anticipated to generate 96 new AM peak hour trips and 144 new PM"p~~.k h~TINt:ifl?· '··t:~;J;:~:'.:. <<·~~:':·:·;·.. '-:;~~~fil~::., 'l'·::::;.f:~·~~l?j~~:;;_:;-. \~~~jj)l;.; .. To evaluate the potenti~hfffqJ.@f~lmpacts, the~ffi:pject tr._<!ffl~£~91.u.mes were distributed to the study area intersections and th.~t/!i1fe.~sedi"S·~~~;::[evels of';(~~ryi~-~~~!·~~r~"::;~i{~i:Jt<;µlated for each of the five (5) development scenari~~~~l~'G:luding: .,~:j~;[~fa ··~:%~~~~~!:~~;:-·-;~}!;~· I ·~,X .. :·:~·. :~~·~·: ~ -·~V:i.};' • Existing Conditions:,:~:,::. ·.=:~,:,;; "~~:'::·,. ,: .. ~~::r:~;.<: .. '~::~:::::~~i>"u:\.=.t~ ~ "r':~:~::7=:-,, • Existing:·plus.f>roject C:dfiElitio'ifa"'':;:;:;:;:;~::::,:·. ··~~;:;:;;-.., • .§.~;~;~~~~m~g~~~,W-~ ns~:,::1~~~l~~~i~i~t· '" ., ... ~=,:;:~~~~;~i~~t;~r~::;:.;;: .. ·:"(~~::: • ~~:Shc>'rt-Term plus'P:r:pj~ct Coiitlitions; and -.·.:~:~:~;:;'.;. • .. Etm.ulative plus p~jj~;~,:Conciifi6:D~, · .. ";;~;~~~~~[~~;:=:·. \M~L ":::(~11~~~~:;. Based on this ·~lf:l~Jysis, the traffi~@~udy showed that the addition of project traffic did not significantly change the existlWg~~!t;ttersection 11t~~ls of service and does not result in a significant increase in peak- hour delays. No p't~J~.!':! specifig~~i_jgnificant impacts were identified for the development scenarios eva I u a ted. "\~?~~~~;;i~~i~~~~!!1~i~l .-, The Traffic and Circulation Stuoy also reviewed impacts to the circulation system as a result of removing an existing emergency gate on Woodland Drive just north of the project site, as required to be reviewed during entitlement of Phase I of the mixed-use project. According to the Study, removal of the barricade would not result in adverse changes to the existing intersection levels of service; however, the study did note that traffic through the existing neighborhood north of the project site would see some increased vehicular trips but not to such a degree as to constitute a significant impact. Less than significant impact c-d: No impacts. e: Complete emergency access for the project is provided. Less than significant impact Page 34 of 46 Item 10.a. - Page 115 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATM:·uECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 October 2015 f: Parking requirements by land use are identified in Municipal Code Section 16.56.060. The proposed development requires 180 spaces. The proposed project will include 184 spaces, including seven (7) accessible spaces and three (3) motorcycle spaces, which count toward the Municipal Code parking requirements. Less than significant impact g: No impacts. References: 1, 13, 15, E :=:n:::: :::grvice Systems ~~~*~'' The project site is located within the incorporated City LimlW~af·~r.~Q.!i'P Grande. Utilities will be served by both the City and other regional entities. ··;:~;:;:::·· ··::'.%~~~::;:;.. · -;"~:~:=:;:~~";.• ·!~:::~=.~~~;~~ '-.~~:-.:~~,:~~ ... Lesfl:l:ian. ·:·:·Z·i. Less Than 'f S1gnif1cant;.~~J.·., 'fi S1gn1 1cant. with .. ,;:;i;~:;;~1gn1 1cant No Impact Impact ,1:'.~=~·. • ··~::;:;;{Jmpact ~fi§t;~~~~·:;;~~ab~:~:~;~.,~~~ '•it:'' M't~"°" ~i b) Require or result in the construction cif;}J;i.ew w~t~-f:<;... ··,:~;;::'.~'\. • • • }~"=~~=~ • ',~;,',}~'·~..;n~·~ •',;~~·~·:·~~~-, or wastewater treatment f.ac1ht1es or exp.a·As1on of>>;~:K;!::::-.0 '<:::;:~:~:::;.[] existing fa ci I it i es? .-:<i'~;~f ;~\~~{~j~~j~~~~~~~}::). ':;1~~~~h. . <~~:~~:i~i!)]ij%~~:~~~~:::::. ..... "::~~~~~::; Wo u Id the co nstrudiotJ:i·· of tne·s·e\. facilities ~'::fa use::·:;~;'.:'. 0 ·::::;?;:;~;;:::~::,. significant environme~·ra:.jJ~:~~cts? ~,:~\~[~\ :~:~lj'.i~~i?:·· ·.· .. ::::~;· D c) Require or result in the'::~.Q!;IStruc~JM gf new stO"f:J;i\:: .. water drair:i_ag~.~::.:f9.~Jlities af.~~~~~'5B~H:~!6~~;~:g-h .. ~xistiri~jit.. D fa ci 1 ities ?::;:f ?NV· ·:;:y:~::::~*i;~i'.\lih::: :;;.. ·::::~j~@~~r ·····:;::::w~~~liiJ'.~~~;;~ ... "'.:~t;~f d) Have:;S:uffident water~;stij;mlies available to ser\leltt:ie> --.: .. :~~:{":'r '>"(:~,J ~·~:.~~.. \•~•: .. ;<' --·...:,~." • project 'fr0'm. existing entitle.ments afttf~;·:r.esources or are new o?~~f.!~pded entitlerrl:~~ti1~ .. neeci~·&fa:::;. e) Result in"~~_\;~:tj.etermination}~{~y the ~~~ewater treatment pro~t8~f:;~::that served:~;;Q:r. may serve the project, that it h~~=~:;;j~~-quate ca~~~lty to service the project's anticipated· ... :'ai§:j:p.~nd,.:;~~fljjf addition to the ,,~·.;.~,.~;" .... ~~~ ~:~:~;~; ~ provider's existing commitrtrnn~~J:~~-- f) Be served by a landfill "W.lth sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations as they relate to solid waste? Discussion D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D a-b, e: Wastewater generated by the proposed project will be treated by the South County Sanitation District, which has adequate capacity to accommodate the increase. Less than significant impact Page 35 of46 Item 10.a. - Page 116 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE uECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 October 2015 c: The project site will be required to comply with the City's Post Construction Stormwater Requirements, which require the site to retain the 95th percentile of a 24 hour storm event for projects adding more than 15,000 square-feet of imper\tious surfaces. This can be accommodated on site and does not necessitate the construction of new drainage facilities. Less than significant impact d: The 2012 Water System Master Plan provides water demand factors based on land use. The project site is located in the Mixed-Use Land Use category, which has a demand factor of 1,788 gallons per day per acre (gpd/acre). The project site is 2.38 acres, which results in water demand of 4,255.44 gpd. This amount of demand is covered by existing resources in the projected build-out population of 20,000 residents and constitutes 0.1% of the City's allocated supply. Addit\c;rnally, all new development in the City is required to either implement a water neutralization progr<.1:r:il:i~~'.l:~pay a water neutralization fee to offset increased water demand generated by the developme,13£t~~m~refore, there are sufficient water supplies available to serve the project. However, in light of'6ff~.i:ciifhdrought conditions and uncertainty ,."~o~~:",~·=•"-V '>'.!Ii:-',:"~"~·~ of future water supply, the following mitigation measdl:~~::·are '"f.!;!~g:\,l,i_red. Less than significant with mitigation •'"/!,"'" "''!${\~ .. MM XVll-1: The following water conserva~i_<?'.~~-measures shall be incotp9r:ated into the project: • Landscaping shall be native, droug.ht~~Rl~rant plant~ only. ":~;'.;/1%~:;.,_ • No turf shall be allowed to be installe·a~:tl[t~~l~ndsc;:~p~th1reas. ·-:·:::::j~i~:;-;-_ • All landscaped areas ~-fil~Y .• J:>e irrigatectli~i,r;rgj~'.~~M~ip irrigation sy;f~ffi, include smart irrigation controllers, ~'~~n~:~~e:,_q. dedicated ·"i~:Hascape water meter. Utilize low-flow fixtures lfiat·-~i~i%-ize water ~~~~(L Such fixtures shall include, but not ·:::.;:&:~:· .. ~'~",,~;~~=·~~:;,~·~ ' i;r.~;:}~· • be limited to, low flow sho"'f:~r{lead5~.t·i&1i1:t~r savingt(?.Jl~~s, instant water heaters, and hot . '1-' . ~::::::;;; ····::::~::::::;;:., ··:':::::::·;;, water rec1r.m:1 atu:ig systems ··::::::::.. ;:,:::::::::;:::;._ -.::~:::.::;: .~::.ti~];;~~~}~9:;~::~:i~1~~~t~.;:,. -;:~::~iij~~... .-;~if ~~~~::~:·::::t~~~)H;~;:: .. ,. ··:;:,:=:, f-g: The proposed pi':OJEi'C't will be ·'sef\Ved by th"eJ.Co'ichCanyon t.:a'r.it;!Jill, which has adequate permitted capacity to serve the prdJ~~t~-Less th~~i~'.§ignificandM~~ct -· Mandatory Findings of Significance Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than S1gnif1cant With M1t1gat1on Less Than S1gnif1cant Impact No Impact Page 36 of 46 Item 10.a. - Page 117 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVI:: uECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 a) Substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species; cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels; threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community; substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare or threatened species; or eliminate examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? D b) Have the potential to achieve short-term .,;._ D ~~:~~i~~~~i~~~!f ::~:;~0:;~~~~:~;;:~;;~:;; ,ts!::~ 0 D "Cumulatively considerable" means that the:{i;~::~:; ··:-:-· ·~:~:!i~~~!k:-. incremental effects of an individual project .. ;:;~f-@:y·· D "ls!'"" [gj ~;~~~~a~~7.~; ~~;=~~~0o~0~t~:,nc~r~:n~~'~r;, ~~1~~l.:~.·,_-.·.~_'.'--::,:_.:·::.-::_· __ :-,',:_.::,:-. and the effects of possible future projects. _·<:;~;-i:;~~k-. ,.·:~i~i~;;;j~J;J::. :~·: __ d? Ca us~ substan~ial. adverse effects o,_~J~:Mill.~.n beings, "<:~~~~~~lif~r~:~· D [gj either directly or indirectly? "{::::·;·:::~:::;:;;;.,,__ "·:::~:;:::~-- October 2015 D D D Discussion "·)fl~j~[i:;~::~~)~:i~~i~;~~b;~i::K,.. -··~;:~1;~:~ilf~i~;;:;. a: The project site contai11.~~ .. ~~_isting skyline=~tl=!es tli'at~~iJJ;.:~e reni·~~~-rj-as part of the project. While these trees can be habit~ti1fgf:;~~~~Jng raptors}l{~_plemeµ#ff~n:~9:f..the ~~6posed mitigation measures will not result in significa~~~~fup~·cts ~-~~~QSl~-~ed with°t~~~-~~~.~~~~~;fno·~:~Mihess than significant impact ·-:;t~iii\::-. '•(1f!it: ··::~~:~~~?;~ . ···:;~ b: There are no short-tetm·-.envirorii:riental goals;·~!!ither in the project description or the identified mitigation rrg~a.~JJR~..S., that $iit~.P.-~.-~·tm~~~~::~q_ the d'i~~~antage of long-term environmental goals. No lmpact,~1,f~C~\&.'~~ .,,~~ c: The pr<;'ij;lpsed project is"c~j.i~Jstenf\itii.~11 the City's General Plan as it relates to future growth, both in general t~r=~~.;,and specific~'iW{]z~;'a$ it ~~:i~~e-~ to the project site. While the proposed project will cumulatively\J~r:~!'lse traffic a~'fj'.~~-~mand"'.ffu'~~public services and utilities, with implementation of the proposed mitig~t1:9h, .. measures, '~W~_yvill not result in any cumulatively considerable environmental impacts. Less than slgftificant impc:itt:~~ d: With implementa~~~i~{j~i.!~~t~~~lf~:~posed mitigation measures, the proposed project will not cause substantial adverse effects a·ri~~fitiman beings, either directly or indirectly. Less than significant impact Page 37 of46 Item 10.a. - Page 118 -~,, INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVt: tJECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 October 2015 Summary of Mitigation Measures Construction Phase Emissions MM 111-1: On-road diesel vehicles shall comply with Section 2485 of Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations. This regulation limits idling from diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicles with gross vehicular weight ratings of more than 10,000 pounds and licensed for operation on highways. It applies to California and non-California based vehicles. In general the regulation specifies that drivers of said vehicles: • Shall not idle the vehicle's primary diesel engine for greater than 5 minutes at any • location. 1·::i':·. Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary pow~r:f.$~~fem (APS) to power a heater, air conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on th~f~~hicle during sleeping or resting in a sleeper berth for greater that 5 minutes.:af;~iW;;mC;~tion when within 1,000 feet of a ~ ... ~ ... : .. };~~·:·-·~: .. ,;,.z":·c restricted area. <~;:;:::·· "':·::~:;;:;::-. ..... : ... <$~~-.~~~-;~~~.~ '·~"~ ·:·;;,.~-:~~ .<;=~~ .. ~~~;~:~~:~;:~ ·~ ::?~~~~~~:~~~;~ - MM 111-2: Off-road diesel equipment shall::cip~ff,lply with the 5 min·i:1te:6Jdling restriction identified in Section 2449(d)(2) of the California Air~~¥~~rces Board's In-Use Off~Rq~d Diesel regulation . . ,::;:t~~:.: .. ;~:::.. ..;:;.::::,... .,~:·::w~~~\- M M 111-3: Signs must be postetj .. in the designifti:~tfaq~~1:1.ihg/areas and job s"itM~'YJ remind drivers and operators of the State's 5 {ff!~:~~~ idling limit."~=t~~t~~:~~~~w-:· ··::~;:;::· ·~:~~~~il~~~:~tjlt:;::;:; .. _ ··~tr~~~~:\ .. MM 111-4: The project applican"tfi:~~jff:::9~ffiR~X with n:i:~~-~:·:-more restrictive requirements to minimize impacts to nearby sensitiv~~t:~ceptoi:~;;(~i:gj~cent resm~.ritial development): • Staging a.~r;ti9~~'.?.~.i.gg areas sh~T!)~ot be i'9'.~~t~~;·y..iithi~.¥{~~.O feet of sensitive receptors; • Diesel,,Jd.f'jH~~Wi¥fii~i1;:poo feet ~:.fj§c~n~.i~i~g~~~~pt~~K~'-?Jlalf~ot be permitted; ~~H'"'<""~"' .... ~ .. -~ .... ,, ·".-...... ,,,... ., ...... ,,~ ....... ,. Use ol1ht~rnative fJ'~.i~.d equipme~i=i\~~f.ecomme~i:(eCf; and Signs th~t:~B~.~ify no @l~g areas ~;~f~~e posted and enforced at the site . • • ' ;·'J~.~:;,::;::·:·.-." ;.;~ii~%:~:; .. ,_.4il~j}{@~~~~~:=:~;;;.,, '·:;~~~~j~):::·, M,l\'{:}l:OJS:;:~~:f;b~;A.ollowin·g::~~tanaarff·::~J~ifil!tion :,m:~asures for construction equipment shall be .ifh'.~iih'.i-~nt~·~ttij~1;t~tj.uce TH~j~~pG, No~::::~f~'.~J~!~~~I particulate matter (DPM) emissions during ·~;~&bstruction of th·g::pfoject: ·,:;;~:~~~~:;~;. "";~::·~;:·· .·,:~:j~i~!i%'.:: .. Maintain alr~~:~hstru~t13~:k~~-quipment in proper tune according to manufacturer's • • • ·"~:::i~~~g;_cifications; "\~~jfa ··\~~~:: Fuel:,,,all off-road iaild portable diesel powered equipment with ARB certified motor vefii6J~~diesel fue1ttW~n-taxed version suitable for use off-road); Use di~~~:l:constr:.Litt1'~n equipment meeting ARB's Tier 2 certified engines or cleaner off- ,,..,·,~·:~:·:·. A"~>:.;:-,:.-~~:~~- roa d heavy;f.\:j:~!M~:!:!iesel engines, and comply with the State Off-Road Regulation; Use on-roa .. tttfi~~vy-duty trucks that meet the ARB's 2007 or cleaner certification standard for on-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State On-Road Regulation; • Construction or trucking companies with fleets that do not have engines in their fleet that meet the engine standards identified in the above two measures (e.g. captive or NOx exempt area fleets) may be eligible by proving alternative compliance; • All on-and off-road diesel equipment shall not idle for more than 5 minutes. Signs shall be posted in the designated queuing areas and or job sites to remind drivers and operators of the 5 minute idling limit; • Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors is not permitted; Page 38 of 46 Item 10.a. - Page 119 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE: uECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 October 2015 • Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors; • Electrify equipment when feasible; • Substitute gasoline-powered in place of diesel-powered equipment, where feasible; and • Use alternatively fueled construction equipment on-site where feasible, such as compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane or biodiesel. MM 111-6: The project shall implement the following mitigation measures to manage fugitive dust emissions such that they do not exceed the APCD's 20% opacity limit (APCD Rule 401) or prompt nuisance violations (APCD Rule 402): • Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where po~~jple; • Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in suffic!E!:~~f,~iJantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site and from exceeding the ABQ:f.\)'.1-t limit of 20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in any 60 minute period. 11),!{f.~~;~g~·'.;~!ltering frequency would be required when wind speeds exceed 15 r:npm~~;R~clai'AA~~~{.non-potable) water shall be • • • • • used; .. A'.~{~}-"::::!W~~:::-_ All dirt stock pile areas shall be SIJ.rat~ir:t:J·~ily and coveretiith._tarps or other dust • •:::~~~:~~:.:;•;:•~ "•::~~:~~~'..:"n~ barriers as needed· ·::;:: .. ;.:·:· .. · ·.;'.'.:.~'.~:-: .. I ,~~~~:~~:~:~. ' ·:·:":~~~.=~;;;A~ Permanent dust control measures ii:le;i\tified in the-~CJpproved proje9t::revegetation and landscape plans shall bf!.implemented~:~~J~~1;m.~{·~~~sible, followi~~~~~~rnpletion of any • • • • • • ,...-;:~,:~:· ~~~ '-':p:,,;~~·:•}1•:'~' .. ~:n;,. ~·::i-" ~~~,~~~~:~;- SO I I disturbing act1v1t1e.SJi.::;::~:::.;-. ·-1~::!i::::~~;::'.'.:· '-:<·- Exposed ground areas th*~~Y~~@.l.aJ1ned to b~;l~Wfl_rked at dates greater than one month after initial grading shall .b"Ei1sp~.~M-~i:i.~ti .. a fast gefw.iin~ting, non-invasive, grass seed and ·~=~~· .. ~:... '<~::,~ ... :"~~ .. ;..~, ''i·~·':•:•:::·;\ watered until vegetation is e_st:ablishetU;:;:;::~·:·.__ "~i;i~;·:;:h_ '"'" r .. ". ~~~~:v:~ .. ,..~,,~·: .. ~>:·~·~ . ".,x~; .. ~'~";;. All distur.b:em~o1U~r.:eas not suoJ~.ct to revM~t'cf~.ipn shcl"ujq*be stabilized using approved chem.!~~:i/~¢if6T~~¥s;;Jute nettiij~;?.0~ :C?:th~t':r::;:~{~:~pg1pp.~oved in advance by the APCD; ,,.. .... , •.•»\', '• ~· .;,~.·~,,_ ~ ,",~,,;·,•v "~"~")" ,,~,·.·~' '~:•, ·~",,n.' .. ~ All roao~~ys, driveW~Y:-S.1 sidewall<~~~~~!?:f·t:o be paveef·:Should be completed as soon as possible~':q:~~9dition;!~6'~ilding pads~~~:c;iuld be laid as soon as possible after grading .. unless seedi~g~~or soil~~ffiT.ltrers are us~;dti~;~ .. ' ..;,;~~;~::~::;:::;~:~-:-~~ .. -, ;:;::~:;~"' ~ .. :.:-: .~$ ::.::·~ .;~:.: .. ~'::~~~::::~~~!·~· .. ·., \,~·~:~~;:. ~-::;:f~j;:~~:!~~)1.~{i!~:l.$~i~.Reed fOr:;~~~~onsfruGt;!.e~.;~Y;.~.~iCl~~~?hall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved .-:::.:;~:~;;:;.::, · surfacehit~the consl~i:it::tion site:-··=:~~;~::;·:i:::~". ·-· ~£~~~:f:~-: -•,..,,;;;~:;;:;;~: ~;;:~~.,:;,:~;:~' I ~.'(~~~~;: >" ' ·:~~~~;'.:.:. All trucks na!;iJipg dirt>s~M, soil, or ol:her loose materials are to be covered or should -·::.:1fa::'.:. maintain at l~a~:two fe-~i~~f::freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load ··:::r~~?~r:Jd top of trail~f;}~i}:i accord~:a:ee with eve Section 23'114; • • ··1~~all wheel wasff~·f:S where ;ehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off~~ey~~-s and equJ~ibent leaving the site; Sweep·:~!.f~.~ts at;:!"tiWend of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved ro~:ci'~~WY.~t~fsweepers shall be used with reclaimed water and roads shall be pre- wetted prio·r::tQm.Neeping when feasible; • A listing of all required mitigation measures shall be included on grading and building plans; and, • The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below the APCD's limit of 20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in any 60 minute period. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork or demolition. Page 39 of 46 Item 10.a. - Page 120 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVc uECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 October 2015 MM 111-7: Prior to any construction activities on the site, the project proponent shall contact the APCD Engineering Division to obtain all necessary permits for portable equipment used during the construction and operational phases of the project. Typical equip111ent requiring a permit includes, but is not limited to, the following: • Diesel engines; • Portable generators and equipment with engines that are 50 horsepower or greater; • Electrical generation plants or the use of standby generators; and • Portable plants (e.g. aggregate plant, asphalt batch plant, concrete batch plant, etc.) . ...:=:::~:;::;~~. MM 111-8: Prior to any grading activities, the project:;~i?.S?'nsor shall ensure that a geologic evaluation is conducted to determine if naturally occ~i;fjBg:;:gsbestos (NOA) is present within the area that will be disturbed. If NOA is not present, .. aB";~~~tn-ption request must be filed with the APCD. If NOA is found at the site, the applicant_ M~~~$'.f~o~~~i~~~ith all requirements outlined in the Air Resource Board (ARB) Air Toxics Cq~.~t~I: Measure (A~eMJ for Construction, Grading, Quarrying and Surface Mining Operations . ..:::~~f?V ··::~~~~~~:;;,,, ·=~;~!)~;~[. «:::~~~=:~=!:::~ "" MM 111-9: Burning of vegetative material on:t~.~:-~evelopm,e;r:1,t site shall 0¢iP.:i:9hibited. ~' "·::;~~l~~~::::.. ;::i;~t~i1~:. ··::;~l1:l{~:::: .. MM 111-10: Should hydroc1~ir;f!Pn:-contaminatetl:~~~~!ilh!:·oe encountered dti'ring construction activities, the APCD shall be ri'q~lfl~~~wi_thin forty-"~tgfo;..(48) hours of such contaminated soil being discovered to determine"Wif~:,a.rf~:~:~.GP _permit ·rn:;:;.~~~uired. In addition, the following measures shall be implemented i~·:h3~diat-~N~~:ti~_conta~·mjf.tecd soil is discovered: • Covers Ol');:~~j)j:~g~-piles shaW~~ mai~t~:j~i:P::iin pla~~i~hall times in areas not actively i nvo l~;~.~J~~:~&f:~tj~'.~tl.~.n or re ni~~~I: .. }:~il1~1~f~:}:;j~;i~1~i:~~i:5;>., '::~,~"' • Conta[i:J@3ted soW~:S:ball be Cl!i\i~i::eir· with a"t'-~~~least six (6) inches of packed, uncont~lrifo.~.!ed soil1~r' other TP·~:~~Lron-permeable barrier such as plastic tarp. No headspace"'s@![,be .~!!9~~<;1~.:where van~,r:s could accumulate. • .A·A'.?*[fifgf~~~~:~,,pile~::~~~!i'.~:~·~;;;a·~~1g?J~~-~-1~-su·g~~~-way as to eliminate erosion due to wind or ..;;::~:::::~:::i?"-· wateff·~:~ii\i:o:~o penifl"gS::rf.l the cove'rs:~:t;e,,1perni itted. t~:=:~~:~~! .:~· ·..:-.;~;,~::;~~"~~ · .. :;:;:~:~~>~ · .. ·~:;~:~~:~~;!i' ·"';!.i~:~:::.. During soil~:~~t;;~vatiol:'mpdors shall no·fbe evident to such a degree as to cause a public "'::;~ii\h:;., nuisance. ··:·;~\~~~~~~~~:·: ·~:·:~~;~;~~~~~h. • ·:::g~~l,ean soil musf'~g~~gregafe!i.~rom contaminated soil. ··::::~;~~~!~~~:;:;:, ·~~f~;~~~;' ·.;.;.· Operational Phase ·Rmissions :~~:~(:'.~ MM 111-11: T~::-£~p):-~ject p~~~:~:nent shall coordinate with and obtain all necessary equipment and operation per~lii~f~!h~fi~~~f~· required by APCD. Typical equipment requiring such permits includes, but is not'iftJ,fff~H to, the following: '•':»·~~ • Portable generators and equipment with engines that are 50 hp or greater; • Electrical generation plants or the use of standby generators; • Boilers; • Internal combustion engines; • Sterilization unit(s) using ethylene oxide and incinerator(s); and • Cogeneration facilities. Page 40 of 46 Item 10.a. - Page 121 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVf: DECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 October 2015 Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: Developer City of Arroyo Grande -CDD, Public Works Dept., Building Division, Engineering Division Prior to issuance of Grading Permit and during construction MM 111-12: Operation of any commercial building with a load.ing area shall include the establishment of a 'no idle' zone for diesel-powered delivery vehicles. Vehicle idling shall be minimized to the maximum extent feasible using the following techniques: • Each delivery vehicle's engine shall be shut off immediately after arrival in the loading • • • • • • dock or loading area, unless the vehicle is actively m(!\)euvering. The scheduling of deliveries shall be staggered to.+~~~~aximum extent feasible . Vehicle operators shall be made aware of the~;~~:~~fi'dle' zone, including notification by letter to all delivery companies. Copies_.:·~fti~~~}'.!~tters shall ·be sent to the City's Community Development Department.,. ·=:~~;~:;::::·· ·-~;:ij:~~~~::~:_ Prominently lettered signs shall be p,p{~~,l:l i.n the re~~i~Jn~ ... dock area to remind drivers • • .. ~,,"J'~''.~;,~~,.~.~ ·~~,.,,~~~~n' • to shut off their engines. ..:;!;;::::::::;;:;:· --=~~,:::::::-;;. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet o(~~~~Hive receptors is not pJf.WJ)~ted . Use of alternative-fueled vehicles i~::~~~qr,nmende~.?\'Yhenever pJ~~l~l;E? . Staging and queuing areas shall not b~'lG:g~ed .wtf~~iH;l,000 feet ol~~P$Jtive receptors . Responsible Party: ~~~~~!; ~~: ~' Monitoring Agency: Ci~~~l;or:~i;\{[~:¥.t_GrandE!\?fjfS,pD, Public Works Dept., Building Divi~!,~_tt, Engiti~~;r:!.m~ Division~~;;i~:.:. Timing:.::l@f~iJ1~)~i~~1~~::.:, Prior11llssuanc-~f~J{$.:~~.~ing P·e:~ffilt and during construction 41t}::·-T '··:·:;3;:.:i>,... :'.:::~~~;~;;;:., .. l;~~~;~i:5~::---:-:::~::~~i~it;;.:i~;:~.. .,.. MM IV-1: To a:Yqj.p impacts·t~f~esting birq;5:~9!;!nstruction 'adivities shall occur outside of nesting bird breeding s~~:s~!'h which i{:~pproximat~W:~~~bruary-August. ••• ,.;.;.:•%-:·.· -. ":::~{;i~~~~;:-.... ~:;~i~~~~;~~t~r;;:~~~:~~~.,. ' -~~!i f~l(:~·:;. MMYl~:~{:~~@gi;>nstructi6n)~~-~·~-clietltil~a}~g:2ccur.:~J;~hin the nesting bird breeding season, then no .'m~W·than.tWti~~;~~.e.ks p'rf~i~m. initiati·a:iW~f:~:g~pJ°iia disturbance, a nesting bird pre-construction ·::r~~~vey shall be 26ficihcted b'VR<i:~+ialified b"l'cfi~~ist within the disturbance footprint. If no active ~<~~~~.,~,.~~, -...:,;:J:,~~~v~"~ 1o:;i~u~,.;~~r~ ne'st.~-;-;<~re observed, "'f.i!4}tfurther::;_p:ii,t,igation is required. If active raptor nests are found, the biolci"gt~t..shall prepare~%-~fl sub;Ti~'.~f~r City approval a monitoring plan, outlining adequate protect1"~$s:for the nests::~~it:~. ::~·· '~::~~~i~~~~::... Ji1f !~\~;; Respcfn~ipje Part}i~~~;:;;;: Monito~lrlgi~g~r,i"~~t· Timing: '\~:~~1i\~~~:r:··- Developer City of Arroyo Grande -CDD, Public Works Dept. Prior to issuance of Grading Permit and during construction MM V-1: A qualified archaeologist shall be retained to monitor all grading activities. The monitor shall work closely with construction crews in close proximity to earth moving equipment in order to investigate and evaluate exposed materials-immediately upon exposure and prior to disturbance. A daily log shall be maintained by the monitor to record when and where earth-moving activities take place within the project area, as well as the presence/absence of archaeological materials in the monitored matrix. 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 Page 41of46 Item 10.a. - Page 122 ,r· INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE: uECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 October 2015 record, collect, and analyze any significant resources encountered. The client and the City shall be notified should resources meeting CEQA significance standards be discovered. The archaeologist shall work as quickly as possible to permit resumption of construction activities. It is preferred that location data of finds be recorded using a hand-held global positioning system receiver (GPSr). Following the field analysis work, the qualified archaeologist shall prepare 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 f'.laterials. 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 copy sh?ll be provided to the Community Development Director for retention in the project file. .-.di~f;~;;. __ lj@:ifY:-' MM V-2: If human remains are encountered duri1Jg·~e:anff.J;,disturbing activities, all work in the adjacent area shall stop immediately and the San~~gfiito81~~~~-County Coroner's office shall be notified. If the remains are determined to be:if:Nati~e Amerlta:~;:?in origin, the Native American Heritage Commission shall be notified anc:f;:~~ifffi~l~ntify the Mo;ttfR¢JY Descendent, who will be consulted for recommendations for treatffi~Bfof the discovered rerii~fris. Responsible Party: Develope·;::<~;;~~;;~jt,:-. ..:·!<~~L~ ··::;:~~;\~;;~~~~:~~=~:- Monitoring Agency: ~:~:§IJ:y_ __ of Arroyo ·-·G·~~b.£@~fa;i~'Engineering Div'f:~l'g-fi; Public Works ··~.:.;..;:···=·=<·"· ~::::::~::-~;::: .; .. q~f'Hl.IJtment -.:::~~~;-: .. ;,. Timing: -!iff~:r:=ti{~H~~.~ance ot"·:~%g~ading permit and during grading _.·::~:~@;~~:;:~:::~;-adiY:~~~~:~ ·-:·:::;;;~ifi]i)~j~~~~~~lj~~~~=:::., ·--.::=:~~ij)1i1~;~;~~~~~;-_ MM Vl-1: The _r:_~~-9.nfrne·r.i:~.C:l~ions provi~~9 in JM-~~gedt~-t.h.r:i.ical rrivestigation report prepared by GSI Soils, Inc d.~t~:tf'June iiJ~~;l.5 shall ti~nti_~:Q=fip6rated .. lht~f#Je project plans and specifications. {..',~.~,,.,> ·~·,,~-",·· "\~.~.·.r• .. ~,,,,~~,,' • ·-~ Final improverrieiit::i:ilans subffii.tted to the;~Gi\y shall be accompanied by a letter of certification from the civil englfl:~-~[ tha~JB~~-:P.l~ns are 'l~:fi~pnformance with the geotechnical investigation re8.e.tt·r.~.mt~~~b~pplica·m~~~~~~~~~~m~J(@.~9..!.Qanc~~m~t .. :::=i~ili~~~t:is.:~:-:.:-::~=~~f.:;i~i3?i.~~;:~ .. _ ·-:~:~:;;:iK ,.,~·~::'.~:1~~?='.b:; .•. ·:1:~;~:;· -~~:,:,~~?. Responsi 6le:;P.arty: "'::;;;'.~;::.:,,Deve lope r•·:·~;:;l~~;:;. ~~~~~~::~~•, ---.;~"~,-:~:n~~~ ~,,:~:~~<~:--~ ""~'.'.:!;:~::~.. Monitoring'Ag~ncv: ··::i:qw of Arroyo Grande -Engineering Division; Public Works --~:'~~~~b.. ·-:~;~f~~t, D'~~~-ment ·.-:::miJJ;i_ing: · \~~~j;~ Prio'r::to issuance of a Grading Permit ">;;~l~l~~:'\., l~:;~;k MM Vll-1: A:lt;~~:c;;onstructili!:)};plans shall reflect the following GHG-reducing measures where applicable. P~i~f~~to i~sn~m~e of building permits, the project sponsor shall submit impact reduction calcul~"titjij~j~~~~:~-ed on these measures to the APCD for review and approval, incorporating the foli°b"~lng measures: • Incorporate outdoor electrical outlets to encourage the use of electric appliances and tools. • Provide shade tree planting in parking lots to reduce evaporative emissions from parked vehicles. Design should provide 50% tree coverage within 10 years of construction using low ROG emitting, low maintenance native drought resistant trees. • No residential· wood burning appliances. • Provide employee lockers and showers. One shower and 5 lockers for every 25 employees are recommended. Page 42 of 46 Item 10.a. - Page 123 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATM: LJECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 October 2015 • Trusses for south-facing portions of roofs shall be designed to handle dead weight loads of standard solar-heated water and photovoltaic panels. Roof design shall include sufficient south-facing roof surface, based on structures size and use, to accommodate adequate solar panels. For south facing roof pitches, the closest standard roof pitch to the ideal average solar exposure shall be used. • Increase the building energy rating by 20% above Title 24 requirements. Measures used to reach the 20% rating cannot be double counted. • • • • • • • • • • • • • Plant drought tolerant, native shade trees along southern exposures of buildings to reduce energy used to cool buildings in summer. Utilize green building materials (materials which ~r;e resource efficient, recycled, and sustainable) that are available locally if possible .. ·:~ii@~~~/;: .. Install high efficiency heating and cooling syst£;?mlf!;;:' Design building to include roof overhangs..:~ff~tt~:~~:~~ufficient to block the high summer sun, but not the lower winter sun, fron1p~ii~¥~~ting::~~·!:!t_h facing windows (passive solar design l. ..ifi~i~f:. ":::~~ir~~;;:.: .. Utilize high efficiency gas or solarN;/~tef heaters. ··:.:;:~:j;~::, . Utilize built-in energy efficient ap~:!l~hces (i.e. Energy Star®).·-::;:{~;~~' Utilize double-paned windows. ··::;?~:{;:::.. .;)!.~:~-. ··:·:t~~i;;;~ .. • • • • "•;;.::~~Si, .;~;~:~5:··:·:~:~:~. ·~~~~~::$~~, Utilize low energy street hghts (1.e. sodium:);; .. .:;::::::~;;;;~:::::· -.:.~::;:;:;~ •. Utilize energy efficien~ti·Bi~-~io,r lighting.' '-:,:~~~j~~~~j:i'.jf'". "{:::· Install energy-reducing"Wt~~f~~rm~ble therr~·~:~t~ts . '!,•"~",,•;., •,,"4':,c: .. :•Jo~~:•,'. n~~,>~•t'.>~·n Use roofing material with'~\solar·;·tgfl~gance val'lii~~:~rrieeting the EPA/DOE Energy Star® rating to red1,1_ce summer cd:iiJl.DE ne~ti'~\j~~r~~:;. _ -::.~:i~j~~~':· • .~n;Q~n'{-.')-~-~ ",c,.~~-.... , ,.,,~~· .. ~-~.,.,"• "n"•"~•,-,n= Eliminat~.;;*}:)'ig});~~®,~ter consurrff:!~ion lar:i,d;~-~~:P:~·:.;fe.g., 'pl~~hts and lawns) in residential desigp~(:0iifr'iati~~~:~~l~r.its that ci"6'..?~o.t,r:~~t1~:~ :-~~~f:Jng and are low ROG emitting. ":--;.,,..~ ~n;'•' ···:~~,:~}.r ',~ .. ;~:< .. ;:~ .. : .. :·~·~"~";"· ~ ··~""':,1·~ .... ·" Provide:~:~i:ksite bicycJ~;; parking D'Q]ti;'.fshort term {'racks) and long term (lockers, or a locked rd~i!?:::'!"ith st~'.~dard racks ·::~~'.9. access limited to bicyclist only) to meet peak .. ~,::::~~~~gn maxin!'.i:i.rn .. ::Q~~~:~-~·;:'.,~,gne bik~P::Rack space per 10 vehicle/employee space is .. ~:{1~;j1j;'.:~;~;~f.€t&l1im:r.,r.d e d-~::~~~~~~:~~\t·'-'~ -. ""':'.:::j:~Jil~ltt~:~;;.-, ":;~~i~;~;;;. ' ·~~~{::?:·-Require::~h~:1JnstaltatJ~r,J of elecfi"ici~}:~nookups at loading docks and the connection of "::;:~f~:~:;., trucks eq'~'j'~~!;d witWn~J~ctrical ho(jkups to eliminate the need to operate diesel- ·-.::(%h.,powered TRU~~~i~.he lo~:cii!Jg·;.~ocks. • .,)·::~;;gr,9vide storag~:~~'f!ace in ·-g~}.iige for bicycle and bicycle trailers, or covered racks / la~Rers to service .. Hm. residential units. • Pr;O~~~;three-phalJi~lectrical stub outs for electric vehicle charging stations . "'(;;:~:~j~~t~:>-.. ;.::dl1]~~j;j:' Responsiol~.~~R~~y.: Monitoring Ag~:n·cy: Timing: Developer City of Arroyo Grande -CDD; Building Division; APCD Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit or Building Permit MM IX-1: The conclusions and recommendations provided in the Permeable Paver Plan-Review prepared by GSI Soils, Inc. dated August 27, 2015 shall be incorporated into the project plans and specifications. Final improvement plans submitted to the City shall be accompanied by a letter of certification from the civil engineer that the plans are in conformance with the soils report and the Permeable Paver Plan Review. MM IX-2: The following BMPs shall be incorporated into the project: Page 43 of 46 Item 10.a. - Page 124 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE: uECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 October 2015 • Roof Downspout System. Direct roof drains to pervious areas to allow infiltration prior to discharging to water bodies or the municipal storm drain system. • Run-off Control. Maintain post-development peak· runoff rate and average volume of runoff at levels that are similar to pre-development levels. • Labeling and Maintenance of Storm Drain Facilities. Label new storm drain inlets with "No Dumping -Drains to Ocean" to alert the public to the destination of stormwater and to prevent direct discharge of pollutants into th.~·,storm drain. Vehicle/Equipment Cleaning. Commercial/irn;l,,i;l.~~~i!~~j~~-cilities or multi-family residential developments of 50 units or greater should;~Wii~·~;pJovide a covered, bermed area for • • • "'~~·.".,~,,-~",. .. ,' ...... ~. ~·-~ .~_ washing activities or discourage vehicle/eq'Ql'p'menP~~ .. ~hing by removing hose bibs and installing signs prohibiting such uses,.:;~f\1,~hicle/equip~~n~;.washing areas shall be paved designed to prevent run-on or r:1:1-~~;}6fr from the area;·::~F .. ~;:,plumbed to drain to the . ~~:~~~:=~~:J~· ~.:<~= :~~~:~~::~~ sanitary sewer. ·"'~ .. ;._,.·,:-. -.:·:·:·.·~·-· ·-:~~:l~~~~j;;~·~:::.._ . .<:::.:}.. ·.::.::.I~~~~~1~~~k. Common Area Litter Control. lmplem:~m--_ tr~~.l}~~~,management ang~;~:Ji~ter control for commercial and indu~t~1~h.P.rojects or la.fi,~Bs~1~'"residential develophlents to prevent litter and debris from b~ii]·g;~iffi'tr;!ed to wate?~:~~~i~s or the storm drain system. -:~i~\j)h;·:;::~~;~iljf ~~?;:;:;.;-. ··::t~fa~~i:\::;-,, Food Service Facilities. If fo"Q'~.senii'Ce~f:Clci!ities arei:~P,~l_t,1ded in the project, design food service f~~.!!~l~§~~(,tvcluding r~~l~,,!;lrants···~iliW~g-~@.~ery ~Wf~:~,) to have a sink or other area ""'"' """'°"'' • .<,,,, ............. ," , for cl~.~.h.l,tig''.·flao~~:iill.9ts, conta!.f;!.~rs,_.::~.oe::~-e·cfuTf?~W..~-!:!ts that is connected to a grease intertep~or prior to'.~d,j_~charging tcf~t$:~:;5'anitary se:viePsystem. The cleaning area should be larg~:~-~.Q:ygh to cl~~f~ the large~~~@.~t or piece of equipment to be cleaned . . ·.···'""··-.. , ··;:~~t~===:·. ...;.il~s;~!;~~~:;:~~~r::::: .. --·:::~~It .. • . .:·~~::~:i:;:~;iR'efuse,Areas. ·-r.:r.:a·s0;:;.Efffffpffofoir~, enclosi~r:es and dumpster areas shall be covered and .•:·) ~,,, :.~;\>=-·-· • ~-~~~~ •"~"•'-" »~' " -~~~;:..: .. ~·~ .. : .. ;" ~"'-:'.'..:;;:1:·~·~ ·~· .. ", ~~:,,:·:,. ... .. ::~:;~fa;?·:·· protec:t~·q::-f_r:om roof:1!i!,nd surfac·ef~~~i,8ag·e·. Install a self-contained drainage system that ,;~jtf discharg~~;:~~}1;t1e sa-~i%:W sewer it'\%~f~r cannot be diverted from the areas. ·c:.;~~~~)i:\, .. , \j~~~~:;.. '.~:;;~:j~k:;:; .. • ··:::;j~=:D.utdoor Storaiife::~:Gontrols·:··;:;~JJs, fuels, solvents, coolants, and other chemicals stored ···-:d~t~oors shall b~:rftfa:ontain~:~s and protected from drainage by secondary containment stf:t'.fGti},res such as~~~rms, liners, vaults or roof covers and/or drain to the sanitary sewer syst~!Wt~~:Bulk mat~~lals stored outdoors shall also be protected from drainage with berms ~·~~;;~9.Y~~'.~~?.f'Process equipment stored outdoors shall be inspected for proper function a~'Hiii~~~s, stored on impermeable surfaces and covered. Implement a regular program of s;eeping and litter control and develop a spill cleanup plan for storage areas. • Cleaning, Maintenance and Processing Controls. Areas used for washing, steam cleaning, maintenance, repair or processing shall have impermeable surfaces and containment berms, roof covers, recycled water wash facility, and discharge to the sanitary sewer. Discharges to the sanitary sewer may require pretreatment systems and/or approval of an industrial waste discharge permit. Page 44 of 46 Item 10.a. - Page 125 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE uECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 October 2015 • Loading Dock Controls. Design loading docks to be covered, surrounded by berms or curbs, or constructed to prevent drainage onto or from the area. Position roof downspouts to direct stormwater away from the loading area. Water from loading dock areas shall be drained to the sanitary sewer, or diverted and collected for ultimate discharge to the sanitary sewer. Door skirts between the trailers and the building shall be installed to prevent exposure of loading activities to rain. • Street/Parking Lot Sweeping: Implement a program to regularly sweep streets, sidewalks and parking lots to prevent the accumulation of litter and debris. Debris resulting from pressure washing should be trapped1:c.t.nd collected to prevent entry into the storm drain system. Wash water containing:1~'.~~*cteaning agent or degreaser shall be collected and discharged to the sanitary sew~fii:~;:;::/ · {~~;~[ il~ji~;~;~~;\~~~;i),_ Developer ··:·:·:·>:·:·· .... .,:i:-N:·. •'~";' ~ .. -:::~:Y ·~:~::~~::::~:~~ City of Arro.Y:~iif§;rande -CD0.~~~~pgineering Division; Building Division .. ;dlil}~i(il'.;~;:" ··::;~~~~~::1k-\ _ Prior to is~~:~Qce of a Building Permrn:~?~=~~)0~ ... Responsible Party: Monitoring Agency: Timing: "·'.::i~@\~;-_ ?,;.:;,:-"·'.·):;\j~~::;;: .. MM XVll-1: The following water conservation·m~~-sµres.;.S.l:)a:tl'.·be incorporateq;:into the project: ,..~ • '!>:.: .. ~\\:~:~~ n~:"':•:':o=~\;i.);>~,.;\ 'l•~,.=~~.,:~~ > • Landscaping shall be n.5!f.ly~.~.Jfrought-tolefif!J:~]!~if'1ts only. ":;;:~~:" • No turf shall be allowed~$~~ij!if1ngalled in la;tii~~~ped areas. • All landscaped areas shaff~ij,~J~}ig~t~i:l..,.1:1sing a d:f~~ttrJgation system, include smart irrigation controllers, and Ii'~~~-a d~&·i~#:t;~.r;l. landsc~:P~~~;~fiter meter. ~~Gfttr.,,.,.~. .. ...... ~" .... <i!~""J'~~A .o..; .... ~ .. ~h"',/',,'-,_ Utilize lo\Af~fl~W~ixtures that 'ffiJnimize wa:fe~:1:1sage. s·ucff:flxtures shall include, but not . .. ~ ".; .. ~~t:»:•:~~=·=~:-~..;; .. : ... ~·.'~r. ~~:~~-:~:H~ .., ... ~!>~f;":Q~~:-:~~·:~:i:-:•,, ~ •,.:,.:~Y'• be limJ~~t;l;)~c>;··10wif{~.yv showerfl~~gs, .W:fft¢r"sa\1lf\g1tpilets; instant water heaters, and hot ·Z·~..::O·>"~·~~..... •,,:~:~~·: .. ·:.... ..~,,;·=·~>'., K·:": 1:~.:-;~:•-' -.;,.:.}~·~·-·~·::--. water·i~!;!Circulating s~tems. ·-~~:: :~=·· -.:.:::i::t· ·~:,,~~~~i\~~t~;~. -;~~~~!]. ';;:t~~;;~.· .. Respons1ble~~iilm=.:~:?;~::;~~:·Jl>~~i:lloper "<;;;;: ... " Jf'~.l'-"~·,,. Y;;.'~~~·····4 ~'-."•"•"•~,._\,ro,n"k .. ~n:r-."\."t,•~•~-. "'~~,,;-.•~-. .. ~ ... ):"::· · ···rntQ,ring AgefiAf:~'.~~?2'1·:-·Cit\j:3:=Qt;:;~rroyc>;;~iGrande -CDD; Engineering Division; Building .. ·,·,:·:.~.::-::····:· .• ···.·.·.~~~:::»·~.,::~;·.'.;.:"~::~.::.~;.~~~iJ -~~=:~;:~;;~~ :3·= ~ ~ -K~::;:~~ ~~;: D · v 1· s··,·o~::-:n::~~:~:~~~~:-.-. ~: ;;;:;:: :=\: ' . ·-.:::.~;;~~\~~i:».-. -;~-~~~;~~::;:,. I ·:i::::f~~t .. ,,. ·- Timing: "·:::~{;~~=~: .. __ _ ·.;;;~~~;grior to iss(iance of a Building Permit "l~~'~l~~lb -.;'.=:m~f 2;:16;::, ... • '!.:~:~~ ~~~~ Page 45 of 46 Item 10.a. - Page 126 INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE LJECLARATION MER 15-002 & CUP 15-006 References Documents & Maps 1. City of Arroyo Grande General Plan 2. City of Arroyo Grande Land Use Map 3. City of Arroyo Grande Municipal Code 4. City of Arroyo Grande Zoning Map October 2015 5. Arroyo Grande Existing Settings Report & Draft Arroyo Grande Existing Settings Report (2010) 6. Arroyo Grande Urban Water Management Plan 7. Arroyo Grande Water System Master Plan (2012) 8. Arroyo Grande Wastewater Master Plan (2012) ,,:;:iirj;~I~~ 9. San Luis Obispo Important Farmland Map (California D.,~e~ffi.~-~nt of Conservation, 2006) 10. CEQA & Climate Change White Paper (CAPCOA, 20Q.~H~~~!~~l~~~~~~;L 11. Air Quality Handbook (SLO APCD, 2012) :~t~i;r:~· ·-:;;~~~t;·;. 12. Arroyo Grande Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazar.il~~fuutfgation Pl~·nlifao12) 13. Arroyo Grande Bicycle & Trails Master Plar:i::f:?9!2S ··;;;~~~:ti~:; .. 14. Arroyo Grande Climate Action Plan (20B)j~;~&t"' ···:·;;~~~;;:h. 15 . P_ro j e ct PI a n_s "<:i~i{l.l~.'.' .. :.~:... ·-;:~;1:~~~:_.j~.:~::.~.·._ 16 S I < ,.;~~~fij~~:~~~~ -. rte nspect1on "::~;::~~::.. . .,.1 ....... '-:.~~~:;::_.. 17. Initial Study/Mitigated NegatiVc~}~e.claration for G·~~:J#~QC52, SPA 14-001, vifi~ih4-001, CUP 14- 009 and DA 15-002 \~j~i~~[~~i~~:i~~~~~:~·... '-:~(j!j~~'.;: ... 18. Initial Study/Mitigated Negative El~~lara~i.9:f.1:·:~or CUP 12·..:00~,_ VAR 12-004, and AVTTM 12-001 Consul ta ti o ns ,::'·;;:;~:~;~:;;:=-:':·. "':;~1j~~lh:.··-:.:.;;~t~~i1~~~~i~t~%:-~.. '· ::;~~~~lJ~~~~j~J~;~, 19. Scott Dowlan, 1}~%@·µ11iifr~fi:~rroyo GraQ.2.~ (TG~.@:}f~~;;~~'.::~::~;{:~:-.. -. ":;:'.,. Attachments ~\)~j}f ~:::. ·-:~:;~~i!i~~~~;~; ·:w~qf~ii~J~j~\lf::=·· .. ,.,·:;j;:;::~i~j~;: A. Fair Oaks Medical'Qffice Builtj~rig Tree Surve.V,.R,P.leinaire Design Group, 2015) B. Updqj~Q~,<;.ultural R~~~~ff~E;!-~{~~·$¢~~mgnt and:::@J~igation Plan (Cogstone Resource Management 1 ~:fi~g9.ffsf~%~~~~w:~;;;.. ..;:::~~~1~~!1~i~:~;.:-<· ·-.. ·:·::::~~%~?ti~:~.,... ·-:~:~~j}; C .. f~:~'.9technical l'nW~-~~.!$.atiorN~~J?.S?rt (GSI Soilsi~!I.c! 2015) D. ··:·P.e:r:weable Paver F>la:n~(~s1 scif1~;:1ri~, 2015) ":·:· E. T~~·f€rc:~nd Circulatiort::Sfi1dy (St~~i~:c;, 2015) Page 46 of 46 Item 10.a. - Page 127 ATTACHMENT A Fair Oaks Medical Office Building Tree Survey Fair Oaks & Woodland Drive; Arroyo Grande CA PREPARED FOR: Mr. John Will 2640 Industrial Parkway Suite 100 Santa Maria, CA 93455 PREPARED BY: PLEINAIRE DESIGN GROUP - LANDSCAPE AllCHlTECTURE WATER 1vLANAGEMENT CONSTRUCTION MGMT ARBOlUCULTURE DATE: September 3, 2015 • w 2615 SKYWAY DRIVE, SUITE B Ill SANTAMARIA, CA 93455-14141 ~ T: 805.349 9695 F. 805.928.4689 m Item 10.a. - Page 128 September 3, 2015 Fair Oaks Medical Office Building TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY AND ASSIGNMENT ........................................................................................................... 3 Background .....•....................................•..........••.•.•..•..••...••.....•....•.••...•..•....•.......................•..............•..•............. 3 Purpose and Limitations ...•..........................•....••..••••..••.••••..••.•..•...•.••.................•.................................•..••......... 3 OBSERVATIONS ...................................................................................................................................... 3 Site ...•.•....••••••••••••..••••.•••.•••.•..••.•••...•••.•.••..•..•••.•..•............•.................••..•.••••...•..•...••••.••.•••••••.....•..•••••.••.•....••.••.. 3 Surroundings ..................................................................................................................................................... 3 ANALYSIS .................................................................................................................................................. 3 DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................................................. 4 CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................................................................................... 4 CERTIFICATION ...................................................................................................................................... 5 ATTACHEMENTS-SITE PHOTOS, SITE MAP Kevin J. Small PleinAire Design Group Page 2 of 5 Item 10.a. - Page 129 September 3, 2015 Fair Oaks Medical Office Building SUMMARY and ASSIGMENT Mr. John Will has retained PleinAire Design Group to review and provide opinions on the conditions of eight existing Eucalyptus trees on a parcel located at the NE corner of Fair Oaks Drive and Woodland Ave. in Arroyo Grande. The City of Arroyo Grande requires this report prior to the removal of the tree for a proposed Medical Office Building. The City staff has requested that the following issues be covered: 1. A description of the site and surrounding area. 2. Assessment of tree health 3. Assessment of tree condition 4. Raptor nesting Background I have visited the property using the site survey information provided as reference. I found this information to be accurate and reviewed the eight Eucalyptus trees and several, what appear to be volunteer stone fruit trees. The fruit trees are of no significance, in very poor condition and not subject to review as part of this report. The trees seem to be SOor more years old. The area around them has become more developed and they are on what has become an infill parcel zoned for con:1.mercial development. Purpose and Limitations The purpose of this report is to is limited to the trees described herein and cannot be attributed to any other trees either at this site or any other. It is an unbiased statement of opinion and shall not be used as a recommendation for legal action or advice. OBSERVATIONS Site This area is a remainder infill parcel in an area of both residential and commercial development. It slopes to the south with a steep drop-off the borders Fair Oaks Avenue. I saw no evidence of nesting birds or other wildlife. The, ground has been plowed regularly for weed abatement. The soil is primarily sand which is typical of the area. Surroundings The west side is adjacent to the Arroyo Grande Hospital. To the north is an existing residential neighborhood and the east is bordered by Woodlawn and a new residential pi:oject. The south side is adjacent to Fair Oaks Ave. a major street for the city of Arroyo Grande. Kevin J. Small PleinAire Design Group Page 3 of 5 Item 10.a. - Page 130 September 3, 2015 Fair Oaks Medical Office Building ANALYSIS On April 15, 2015 at 10 am I visited the site, created an inventory and using site survey provided to me. I found the survey information to be accurate and located all of the trees noted. On September 1, 2015 I revisited the site att he request of City Staff to include comments regarding raptor nesting. I visited the site and made a visual observation of the subject trees from all sides and from within the canopy. I also did this with the aid of binoculars to get a detailed analysis of the canopy. DISCUSSION These trees are all in very poor condition. There has been no regular maintenance performed, no irrigation and in some cases seem to be secondary stump growth. There are a large number of broken branches, and branches that have the potential to break at anytime. I did not observe any active nesting or any evidence of recent nesting. This does not preclude the possibility of nesting and is typical of raptor nesting locations. CONCLUSIONS Based on my review of the site conditions and my experiences in this type of work I can provide the following opinions: 1. I recommend removal of all of the Eucalyptus trees 2. These trees are a severe hazard. I recommend that there be very limited acces~ under and around the trees. 3. There is a large extended branch the projects across the sidewalk on Fair Oaks. This branch should be removed immediately. 4. To preserve these trees would require such a large area free of targets that it would make the site unusable. 5. The trees are beyond a point where pruning and maintenance would be practical. 6. To avoid impacts to nesting birds construction shall occur outside the nesting bird breeding season, which is approximately February-August. If construction is scheduled to begin within the nesting bird breeding season, then no more than· two weeks prior to initiation of ground disturbance, a nesting bird pre-construction survey shall be conducted by an approved biologist within the disturbance footprint, including a 500- Kevin J. Small PleinAire Design Group Page 4 of 5 Item 10.a. - Page 131 September 3, 2015 Fair Oaks Medical Offic~ Building foot buffer where access is feasiblle. If no active nests are observed, no further mitigation is required. If ~active raptor nests are found the biologist shall prepare and submit for City approval a monitoring plan. ., , It is my opinion that the public would be better served by removal of these trees and that the standard replacement requirements be-followed to provide a replacement tree canopy that is more suited for the site. CERTIFICATION I, Kevin J. Small, certify that: • I have personally inspected the property, trees and surroundings referenced in this report, and have stated my findings accurately. • I have no financial interest in this property or with any party involved. Compensation for this report is not contingent on the conclusions herein. • Locations of property lines or· exact ,tree .locations; site amenities; structures or easements are assumed to be as illustrated on enclosed maps. This is a composite of information provided by the client, records of fact, and/or on-site field review. • The analysis, opinions, recommendations and opinions found in this report are founded on conimon arboricultural practices. • I am a member of the International Society of Arborists and have been involved in the practice of arboriculture for 22 years. • This report represents the independent opinion of the preparer and was conducted per the client's scope of request. The report is therefore limited to the extent described herein and to the facts available up to the date of this report. If additional information becomes available then I reserve the right to revise and amend this report in light of that information. Signed: f)wm fr <rJ Date: September 3, 2o; . Kevin J. Small PleinAire Design Group asa:J AMERICAN SOCIETY of CONSUL'flNG ARDORIST~ Page 5 of 5 Item 10.a. - Page 132 Google earth feetr-----------1000 rreters~--------------400 Item 10.a. - Page 133 Item 10.a. - Page 134 Item 10.a. - Page 135 Item 10.a. - Page 136 Item 10.a. - Page 137 : =-s=~;-~-::_·~-,:, -·-.: ~~ ' ~ -: ,---:~~1:...,7_~¢-<.~;.~,.,;-.x " , .. ·--:.. Item 10.a. - Page 138 Item 10.a. - Page 139 UPDATED CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT AND .MITIGATION PLAN FOR THE FAiR OAKS MIXED-USE PROJECT, CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA Submitted to: Central Coast Real Estate Development PO Box 730 Avila Beach, CA 93424 Prepared by: Cogstone Resource Management Inc. www .cogstone.com Main Office: 1801 Parkcourt Place,. Bldg. B, Suite 102, Santa Ana, 92701 Central Coast Office Morro Bay, Northern California Office San Francisco Authors: Sherri Gust and April Van Wyke Principal Investigator: Sherri Gust, San Luis Obispo County .Qualified Archaeologist and Paleontologist September 2005 ATTACHMENT B ~ECE~VED JUN 1 0 2015 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ~~OMi!!l~E!:_t;:'PMENT Item 10.a. - Page 140 Fair Oaks Assessment NATIONAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATA BASE (NADB) ' ' INFORMATION SHEET UPDATED CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION PLAN FOR THE FAIR OAKS MIXED-USE PROJECT, CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA Submitted to: Central Coast Real Estate Development PO Box 730 Avila Beach, CA 93424 Prepared by: Cogstone Resource Management Inc. www .cogstone.com · Main Office: 1801 Parkcourt Place, Bldg. B, Suite 102, Santa Ana, 92701 Central Coast Office Morro Bay, Northern California Office San Francisco. Authors: Sherri Gust and April Van Wyke Principal Investigator: Sherri Gust, San Luis Obispo County Qualified Archaeologist and Paleontologist September 2005 Type of Study:. Cultural Resources Assessment and Mitigation Plan Sites: CA-SL0-393 USGS Quadrangle: Oceana, Calif. 7.5 minute (1987; revised 1994) Area:· approximately 5 .5 acres Key Words: Arroyo Grande Valley, Halcyon Bay, Chumash, central coast Cogstone Resource Management lnc. Item 10.a. - Page 141 Fair Oaks Assessment TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................ N INTRODUCTION .............................................. : .......................................................................... 1 PURPOSE OF STUDY .•.• : ................................................................................................................. 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................. 2 PROJECT PERSONNEL .................................. : ................................................................................ 4 LAWS AND REGULATIONS ..................................................................................................... 4 BACKGROUND ................................................... ~ ....................................................................... 7 NATURAL SETTING ....................................................................................................................... 7 PREHISTORIC SETTING ............... : ................................................................................................. 7 Ethnography/Ethnohistory ................... ~ .................................................................................. 7 Chronology ................................................................................................... : ......................... 7 UPDATED RECORD SEARCH ............................................. , ............................................ · ....... 9 PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES ....................................................................... 14 DISCUSSION ............ · ................................. : .................................................................................. 15 MI.TIGATION PLAN ................................................................................................................. 17 QUALIFICATIONS ........................................................................................................................ 17 TESTING ........................................................... : ................................................................. ~······· 17 MONITORING ..................................... ; ....................................................................................... 18 DISCOVERIES ............................................................................................................................. 18 REFERENCES CITED .............................................................................................................. 20 APPENDIX A: ........................... ~ ................................................................................................. 21 Cogstone Resource Management Inc. ii Item 10.a. - Page 142 Fair Oaks Assessment ,LIST OF ,FIGURES . FIGURE 1. REGIONAL LOCATION MAP ............................................................................................. 1 FIGURE 2. PROJECT AREA MAP ....................................................................................................... 2 FIGURE 3. CONCEPTUAL DRAWING OF PROPOSED PROJECT ............................................................ 3 FIGURE 4. ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE PROJECT AREA ........................................................................ 15 LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1. CENTRAL COAST CULTURE SEQUENCE (JONES AND WAUGH 1995) ................................ 8 TABLE 2. ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORI;CAL PROJECTS COMPLETED WITHIN ONE MILE OF THE PROJECT AREA ........................................................................................................................... 9 Cogstone Resource Management Inc. iii Item 10.a. - Page 143 Fair Oaks Assessment EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A mixed-use development project is proposed on Fair Oaks A venue, east of the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital in Arroyo Grande, California. The City has requested an assessment of the project's potential impacts on cultural resources to meet its responsibilities as the Lead Agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The purpose of the present assessment is to update a previous study on the property in light of any new information documented subsequent to its completion, to evaluate the previous study via peer review, and to prepare a mitigation plan meeting current professional standards. Research indicates that no new archaeological sites have been documented within the project area subsequent to the previous 1990 study. A prehistoric site, CA-SL0-393, is located immediately north of the project area. One archaeological study has been conducted on a portion of site CA-SL0-393 approximately 150 m ( 492 ft.) north of the current project area subsequent to the previous study. No other archaeological studies have been documented within or adjacent to the current project area subsequent to the Singer and Atwood study which could provide additional information to further characterize the horizontal or vertical extent of site CA-SL0-393. The area tested in the 1990 study was west of the known extent of CA-SL0-3 93, despite the fact the site's southern boundary coincides with the proposed project's northeastern boundary. A mitigation plan for the proposed project includes additional testing along the project's northern boundary east of Woodland Drive and monitoring of all grading and excavation. Cogstone Resource Management Inc. iv Item 10.a. - Page 144 Faff Oaks Assessment INTRODUCTION PURPOSE OF STUDY A mixed-use development project is proposed on Fair Oaks A venue, east of the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital in Arroyo Grande, California (Figure 1). The City has requested an assessment of the project's potential impacts on culturaf resources to meet its responsibilities as the Lead Agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The purpose of the present assessment is to update a previous study on the property in light of any new information documented subsequent to its completion, to evaluate the previous study via peer review, and to prepare a mitigation plan meeting current professional standards. Ma hie www.natio Figure 1. Regional Location Map Cogstone Resource Management Inc. Item 10.a. - Page 145 Fair Oaks Assessment PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project consists of a mixed commercial-and-residential development located on a 5 .5-acre parcel on Fair Oaks A venue immediately east of the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital, Arroyo Grande (Figure 2). The project area is located in an un-sectioned portion of the Oceano, California USGS 7.5 minute topographic quadrangle. Previous land-use had been agricultural. The project is proposed with residential units nearest the creek and commercial units nearest the existing hospital (Figure 3). Note that the cunent cul de sac of Woodland Drive (immediately north of project) is removed and Woodland becomes a through street to Fair Oaks . . 5 !iOO E*S e-a Eid Ma created with TOPOI® ©2003 NatioMl Geo hie www.natio Figure 2. Project Area Map Cogstone Resource Management Inc. 2 Item 10.a. - Page 146 I I i ..J Figure 3. Conceptual Drawing of Proposed Project Cogstone Resource Management Jnc. r ~ • •· I 11 -i • Fai1 Oaks·A;se;smcnt " . 3 Item 10.a. - Page 147 Fair Oaks Assessment PROJECT PERSONNEL Cogstone Resource Management Inc. conducted the assessment. Sherri Gust served as principal investigator. She is a Registered Professional Archaeologist and a San Luis Obispo County Qualified Archaeologist. She has a M. S. in Anatomy (Evolutionary Morphology), a B. S. in Anthropology, and more than 28 years of experience in California. April Van Wyke petformed the archival research and assisted with the report. She has a B .A. in Anthropology (Archaeology) and more than nine years of experience in California archaeology. Personnel qualifications are detailed elsewhere (Appendix A). LAWS AND REGULATIONS The following discussion of applicable state laws has been excerpted and reordered from the California Department of Transportation's (CALTRANS) on-line Environmental Handbook, Exhibit 3 of Volume 2, Cultural Resources (2001). The Fair Oaks Project is subject to state and local legislation regarding cultural resources. The City of Arroyo Grande has Rules and Procedures to Implement CEQA. California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA) (PRC § Section 21000 et seq.) CEQA declares that it is state policy to "take all action necessary to provide the people of this state with ... historic environmental qualities." It further states that public or private projects financed or approved by the state are subject to environmental review by the state. All such projects, unless entitled to an exemption, may proceed only after this requirement has been satisfied. CEQA requires detailed studies that analyze the environmental effects of a proposed project. In the event that a project is determined to have a potential significant environmental effect, the act requires that alternative plans and mitigation measures be considered. CEQA includes historic and archaeological resources as integral features of the environment. If paleontological resources are identified as being within the proposed project area, the sponsoring Cogstone Resource Management Inc. 4 Item 10.a. - Page 148 Fall" Oaks Assessment agency (Caltrans or local) must take those resources into consideration when evaluating project effects. The level of consideration may vary with the import,ance of the resource. California Register of Historical Resources (PRC § 5024.1) Public Resources Code § 5024.1 establishes the California Register of Historical Resources. The register is a listing of all properties considered to be significant historical resources in the state. The California Register includes all properties listed or determined eligible for listing on the National Register, including properties evaluated under Section 106, and State Historical Landmarks from No. 770 on. The criteria for listing are the same as those of the National Register. The California Register statute specifically provides that historical resources listed, determined eligible for·listing on the California Register by the State Historical Resources Commission, or resources that meet the California Register criteria are resources which must be given consideration under CEQA (see aboye). Other resources, such as resources listed on local registers of historic registers or in local surveys, may be listed if they are determined by the State Historic Resources Commission to be significant in accordance with criteria and procedures to be adopted by the Commission and are nominated; their listing in the California Register, is not automatic. California Register of Historical Resources (PRC § 5024.1) Public Resources Code § 5024.1 establishes the California Register of Historical Resources. The register is listing of all properties con~idered to be significant.historical resources ,in the state. The California Register includes all properties listed or determined eligible for listing on the National Register, including properties evaluated under Section 106, and State Historical Landmarks from No. 770 on. The criteria for listing are the same as those of the National Register. The California Register statute specifically proYides that historical resources listed, determined eligible for listing on the California Register by the State Historical Resources Commission, or resources that meet the California Register criteria are resources which must be given consideration under CEQA (see above). Other resources, such as resources listed on local registers of historic registers or in local surveys, may be listed if they are determined by the State Cogstone Resource Management lnc. 5 Item 10.a. - Page 149 Fair Oaks Assessment Historic Resources Commission to be significant in accordance with criteria and procedures to be adopted by the Commission and are nominated; their listing in the California Register, is not automatic. Resources eligible for listing include buildings, sites, structures, objects, or historic districts that retain historic integrity and are historically significant at the local, state or national level under one or more of the following four criteria: It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States; It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history; It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master or possesses high artistic values; or It has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the nation. In addition to having significance, resources must have integrity for the period of significance. The period of significance is the date or span of time within which significant events transpired, or significant individuals made their important contributions. Integrity is the authenticity of a historical resource's physical identity as evidenced by the survival of characteristics or historic fabric that existed during the resource's period of significance. Alterations to a resource or changes in its use over time may have historical, cultural, or architectural significance. Simply, resources must retain enough of their historic character or appearance to be recognizable as historical resources and to convey the reasons for their significance. A resource that has lost its historic character or appearance may still have sufficient integrity for the California Register, if, under Criterion 4, it maintains the potential to yield significant s~ientific or historical info1mation or specific data. Cog~tone Resource Manageme11t Inc. 6 Item 10.a. - Page 150 Fair Oaks Assessment BACKGROUND NATURAL SETTING The project area is located in the·Arroyo Grande Valley immediately west of Arroyo Grande Creek and approximately 4 km (2.5 mi) east of the Pacific Ocean. Access to fresh water from Arroyo Grande' Creek was probably important to prehistoric inhabitatants. This area is adjacent to the ancient shoreline of extinct Halcyon Bay (Parker 2002:2). During mid-Holocene times, when sea-levels were higher, Halcyon Bay covered much of the Cienega and Arroyo Grande Valleys. As sea levels lowered, various types of littoral environments, from bay to estuarine and salt marsh, would have succeeded and been available to prehistoric peoples as the bay gradually silted in (Parker 2002:2-3). PREIDSTORIC SETTING Ethnography/Ethnohistory The Arroyo Grande region was occupied by Northern (Obispefio) Chumash peoples at the time of hist~ric contact. Population estimates for the Chumash in San Luis Obispo County, based on mission baptismal records, indicate that perhaps 1,400 to 2,000 people resided there at the time of Spanish assimilation. Coastal areas such as the project vicinity are thought to have supported significantly higher population densities than inland areas. Chronology The development of an accurate and widely accepted cultural chronology for the central coast region is still in progress. The Central Coast culture sequence (Table 2) proposed by Jones and Waugh (1995) has gained support by recent research in San Luis Obispo County (Woodman and Bertrando 1995). Cogstone Resource Management Inc. 7 Item 10.a. - Page 151 Fmr Oaks Asse~sment Table 1. Central Coast Culture Sequence (Jones and Waugh 1995) Early Holocene/ This includes all occupations prior to 8500 BP and follows the description of Late Paleocoastal Pleistocene/Early Holocene sites described earlier. ???-8500 BP (Before Present) Millingstone This cultural period extends from 8500 to 5500 BP, although discoveries near San Luis 8500-5500 BP Obispo may significantly push back the dates in the future (Fitzgerald 1998; Greenwood 1972). This period roughly coincides with Rogers' (1929) Oak Grove tradition and the Ex Period of the Santa Barbara Channel Sequence (Roper et al. 1997). Early Period & Apparent shifts in importance from seed processing to hunting and fishing usher in this Early/Middle cultural phase. From 5500 to 2600 BP rising sea levels and c01Tesponding environmental Period Transition changes appear to have drastically altered adaptive strategies of the indigenous inhabitants. 5500-2600 BP Occupations become more sedentary but not necessarily permanent. As noted elsewhere, long distance trade appears to increase during this time. Middle Period Social complexity and technology experienced further development during this period as 2600-1000 BP discussed above. An important occun-ence of this period along the coast was the climatic ameliorization resulting in gradual siltation of estuaries along the coast, including Morro Bay (Gallegos 1987; Jones et al. 1994; in Roper et al. 1997). Middle/Late As noted above, the period from 1000 to approximately 750 BP was one of climatic T1·ansition instability, triggering adaptive responses that eventually led, in some areas, to increased 1000-750 BP social complexity and political control. Late Period In response to climatic fluctuations, settlement at this time appears to shift from the 750-450 BP coastline to interior. This apparently reflects decreasing reliance on coastal resources, which were drastically affected by events such as El Niiio, and a growing dependence on more reliable, storable commodities such as acorns (Jones and Waugh 1995). Proto historic For about a two-hundred year period ending in 1769, coastal Native Californians Period maintained intermittent contact with European traders and pirates involved in the trans- 450-150 BP Pacific trade. This had little effect technologically, although native economies were altered by the introduction of glass trade beads. The most detrimental result of this contact was the introduction of Old World diseases leading to the decimation of the majority of the native population. Cogsto11e Resource Management Inc. 8 Item 10.a. - Page 152 Fair Oaks Assessment UPDATED RECORD SEARCH A new record search was performed at the Central Coast Information Center at the University of California, Santa Barbara, to update information presented in the previous study (Singer and Atwood 1990). A total of eight prehistoric archaeological sites are documented within a one- mile radius of the project area. Site CA-SL0-393 is currently mapped as lying immediately north of the project area. No archaeological studies have been documented adjacent to or within the current project area subsequent to the previous study by Singer and Atwood (1990). A total of 75 archaeological studies (Table 2) have been performed within a one-mile radius of the project area, including one study which included a portion of site CA-SL0-393 at 580 Cerro Vista Lane, approximately 148 m (487 ft.) north of the current project area (Conway 1999). No historic properties are documented within a half-mile radius of the project area. Table 2. Archaeological and historical projects completed within one mile of the project area Author Ref Quad Title Date Hoover,R. 57 Arroyo Archeological Resource Evaluation South County Center, 1976 Grande, San Luis Obispo County Oceana Dills, C. 99 Oceana Archeological Potential of Grande Highlands 1977 Tainter, J. 113 Oceana San Luis Obispo City Archeological Society Occasional 1971 Papers: # 3 Salvage Excavations at the Fowler Site: Some Aspects of the Social Organization of the Northern Chumash,# 4 Skeletal Analysis of 4 SL0-406 Spanne, L. 121 Oceana Supplement of Archaeological Survey Report for a 1979 Proposed Highway Widening Project: 05-SLO, P .M. 10.4/12.2, 05201-200201 by Carla Meacham, September 1979 Meacham, C. 137 Oceana An Archeological Survey of a Proposed Highway 1977 Widening Project 05-SLO-l P.M. 10.4-12.2 05201- 200201 Wallace, W; 236 Oceana, Archeological Investigations in the Arroyo Grande Creek 1985 Taylor,E. Arroyo Grande Watershed, San Luis Obispo County NE, Tar Spring Ridge Srnith,C. 240 Oceana Arroyo Grande Creek Bridge on US 101 1980 Gibson,R. 247 Oceana Arclieological Element at Environmental Impact Report 1981 for the Wilson Parcel Subdivision (APN 75-021-18-32), Arroyo Grande, CA Gibson,R. 248 Oceana Archeological element ofEnvhonmental Impact Report 1981 Cogstone Resource Management Inc. 9 Item 10.a. - Page 153 Fair Oaks Assessment Author Ref Quad Title Date for the McKay Parcel Subdivision (APN 75-021-07-29), Arrovo Grande, California Hoover,R. 273 Oceano Archaeological Evaluation Elm Street Property, Arroyo 1980 Grande Nissley, C. 293 Oceana Project 05-SL0-1-1.7 /9 .8 Nipomo Mesa (Highway I) 1973 05220-082801. Dills,C. 313 Oceana Archaeological Potential of Property at 321/327 South ' 1979 Halycon, Arroyo Grande Haversat, T.; 326 Arroyo Preliminary Archaeological Reconnaissance of Nine 1981 Breschini, G. Grande, Morro Proposed Early Warning Siren Locations in SLO County, Bay South, CA and Preliminary Archaeological Reconnaissance of Oceano, Pismo Several Additional Early Warning Beach, Port San Luis, San Luis Obispo, Cavucos Spanne,L. 330 Oceana An Extended Archaeological Survey for a Proposed 1981 Widening Project 05-SL0-1 P .M. 10 .4/l 2.2 05201- 200201 Spanne,L. 390 Oceana An Extended Archaeological Survey for a Proposed 1981 Widening Project 05-SLO-l P.M. 10.4-12.2 05201- 200201 Part II An Addendum Report On That Portion of the Project Area West of Construction Station 140 near Terra Nueva Road. Westec 459 Oceana Archaeological Monitoring of Southern California Gas 1983 Services, Inc. Company Pipeline Installation along Halcyon Road in Arroyo Grande, California Baker, S. 485 Oceana Archaeological Reconnaissance of the Oceana 1985 Substation, San Luis Obispo County, CA Dills,C. 507 Oceano Archaeological Potential of Grell Property (former Christmas tree farm) in Oceano Sawyer, W. 510 Oceana Archaeological Subsurface Test of the Don Conklin 1985 Parcel No. 47, NW Corner l 41h and Wagner Streets, Oceano. Dills, C. 511 Oceano Archaeological Monitoring of Lots 14 and 15 of Grell Christmas Tree Farm in Oceano Hampson, R.; 694 Oceana Preliminary Cultural Resources Reconnaissance of a 1985 Breschini, G. Parcel between Halcyon Road and Mulberry Lane, in Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo County, California Singer, C. 711 Oceana Letter Report: Archaeological Survey of the Grieb 1985 Property on Halcyon Road Sawyer, W. 810 Oceana Archaeological Surface Reconnaissance of the Swinging 1987 Bridge Aporoaches, Short Street, Arrovo Grande Singer, Clay 811 Oceana Archaeological Testing at the Arroyo Grande Hospital 1988 A. Expansion Site Near CA-SL0-393 Sawyer, W. 1185 Oceana Archaeological Subsurface Testing of the 4 acre 1987 Jorgensen Parcel APN-06-391-042 between Halcyon Road and Alpine Street, Arrovo Grande, California Dills, C. 1249 Oceana Letter Report: Archaeological Potential of Tierra 1989 Investments Property, Arroyo Grande Dills, C. 1285 Oceana Letter Report: Archaeological potential of added portion 1989 to Casa Tierra, Arroyo Grande Singer, C.; 1286 Oceana Cultural resources survey and impact assessment for the 1989 Cogstone Resource Management lnc. 10 Item 10.a. - Page 154 Fair Oaks Assessment Author Ref Quad Title Date Atwood,J. Arroyo Grande Community Hospital expansion site (APN 001-000-006-391-20) City of Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo County Sawyer,W. 1287 Oceana Archaeological surface reconnaissance ofTPM AG88-1989 087, 230 West Branch Street, APN 7-186-50, Arroyo Grande, California. Dills, C. 1419 Oceana Archaeological potential of project on Wilmar at 25 1 " 1990 Street, Oceano Sawyer, W. 1425 Oceano Archaeological surface reconnaissance of tentative parcel 1988 AG88-049, 1156 Grand Avenue, Arroyo Grande, CA Singer, C.; 1448 Oceana Archaeological testing for the eastward expansion of the 1990 Atwood,J. Arroyo Grande Community Hospital, San Luis Obispo Countv,CA Dills, C. 1469 Oceana Archaeological potential of Arroyo Grande Highlands, 1990 Arrovo Grande Dills, C. 1497 Oceano Archaeological potential of property at 157 Hondonada 1990 Road, Arroyo Grande Sawyer, W. 1652 Oceana Archaeological Surface Reconnaissance of the 2.736 acre 1988 Hayes Parcel, 704 Branch Mill Road, Arroyo Grande, CA Singer, C.; 1653 Oceano Cultural Resources Surveys and Impact Assessment for 1990 Atwood,J. the Vista Del Mar Project in Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo County, CA Gibson,R. 1654 Oceano Results of Phase One Archaeological Surlace Survey of 1990 the Allen Street Subdivision, Arrovo Grande, CA Singer, C. 1655 Oceano Archaeological Investigations at CA-SL0-408 in the City 1990 of Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo Countv, CA Sawyer, W. 1656 Oceano Archaeological Surface Reconnaissance of TPM AG 88-1989 224, 182 South Alpine Street, APN 06-514-022, Arroyo Grande, CA Sawyer, W. 1657 Oceano Archaeological Subsurface Testing, CA-SL0-413, St. 1989 Barnabas Episcopal Church Parcel, Tentative Tract No. 1513, APN 07-621-35-000, Traffic Way Extension, Arroyo Grande, CA Sawyer, W. 1658 Oceano Archaeological Subsurface Testing, Residential Area, St. 1988 Barnabas Episcopal Church Parcel, Tentative Tract No. 1513, APN 07-621-35-000, Traffic Way Extension, Arroyo Grande, CA Sawyer, W. 1659 Oceano Archaeological Surface Reconnaissance, Tentative Tract 1988 No. 1513, APN 07-621-35-000, Traffic Way, Arroyo Grande, CA Sawyer,W. 2220 Oceano Archaeological Subsurface Testing, Residential Area, St. 1988 Barnabas Episcopal Church Parcel, Tentative Tract No. 1513, APN 07-621-35-000, Traffic Way Extension, Arroyo Grande, California Heritage 2763 Oceano An Archaeological Surface survey of a Portion of the 1995 Discoveries Grell Site (CA-SL0-432), On Parcel 4 of CO 84-080 San Inc. Luis Obispo County, California (APN #62-302-14 & 15) Signer, C. 2820 Oceano Archaeological Investigations at CA-SL0-445 in the City 1995 of Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo Countv, California Bertrando, E. 2827 Oceana Culturai Resource Investigation of St. John's Lutheran 1995 Church APN# 075-021-040 Corner of Los Berros and Valley Roads Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo Co., CA Conway, T. 2908 Oceana Phase 1 Archaeological Survey of Property at 305 Alder 1994 Cogstone Resource Management Inc. 11 Item 10.a. - Page 155 Fair Oaks Assessment Author Ref Quad Title Date Street, (Tract 2160) Arroyo Grande, California Singer, Clay 3121 Oceano Cultural Resources Survey and impacts assessment for a 1996 A. residential property at 198 S. Alpine Street in Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo County, California [APN 006- 541-027] Hoover,R. 56 Arroyo Archaeological Evaluation of Halycon Hills Residential 1977 Grande, Development, Arroyo Grande Oceano Nissley, C. 293 Oceano Projects 05-SL0-1-1.7/9.8 Nipomo Mesa (Highway 1) 1973 052001-082801 Westec 459 Oceano Archaeological Monitoring of Southern California Gas 1983 Services, Inc Company Pipeline Installation along Halcyon Road in Arroyo Grande, California Hampson, R.; 694 Oceano Preliminary Cultural Resources Reconnaissance of a 1985 Breschini, G. Parcel between Halcyon Road and Mulbeny Lane, in Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo County, California Dills, C. 818 Oceana Letter Report: Archaeological Potential of Parcel at 305 1988 Adler, near Dodson, Arroyo Grande Dills, C. 1089 Oceano Letter Report: Archaeological Potential of the Farroll 1988 A venue Property, Arroyo Grande Dills, C. 1249 Oceano Letter Report: Archaeological Potential of Tierra 1989 Investments Property, Arrovo Grande Dills, C. 1285 Oceana Letter report: archaeological potential added portion to 1989 Casa Tierra, Arroyo Grande Sawyer, W. 1299 Oceano Archaeological smface reconnaissance of tentative parcel 1988 AG87-288, 136 Pine Street, Arroyo Grande, California Dills,C. 1415 Oceano Archaeological potential of Ramey Parcel on Maple, east 1989 of Walnut, Arrovo Grande Singer,C.; 1447 Oceano Cultural Resources survey and impact assessment for the 1990 Atwood,J. Halcyon Medical Center in Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo Countv, CA Singer, C. 1655 Oceana Archaeological Investigations at CA-SL0-408 in the City 1990 of Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo Countv, CA Sawyer, W. 1656 Oceano Archaeological Surface Reconnaissance ofTPM AG 88-1989 224, 182 South Alpine Street, APN 06-514-022, Arroyo Grande, CA Gibson,R. 1842 Oceano Results of archaeological monitoring at 495 Grand Ave, 1990 Arroyo Grande, CA Parker, J. 2312 Oceano Archeological Investigation of the Proposed Arco 1992 AM/PM Facilitv, Arrovo Grande Bertrando, E. 2827 Oceano Cultural Resource Investigation of ST. John's Lutheran 1996 Church APN # 075-021-040 CornerofLos Berros and Valley Roads Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo Co., CA Conway,T. 2908 Oceano Phase l Archaeological Survey of Property at 305 Alder 1994 Street, (Tract 2160) Arroyo Grande, California Singer, Clay 3761 Oceano Cultural Resources Survey and Impact Assessment for a 1999 Property at 121 East Branch Street in the City of Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo County, California APN 007- 192-057 Conway, Thor 3857 Oceano Phase I archaeological survey of 580 Cerro Vista, Arroyo 1999 Grande, San Luis Obispo County Singer, Clay 3979 Pismo Beach Cultural Resources Survey and Impact Assessment for a 2000 Residential Propertv on Stratford Street in the City of Cogstone Resource Manageme11t Inc. 12 Item 10.a. - Page 156 Fair Oaks Assessment Author Ref Quad Title Date Pismo Beach, San Luis Obispo County, CA Hoover, 4014 Oceano Archaeological Survey Los Berros At Century Lane near 2000 Robert Arrovo Grande, CA Parker& 4004 Oceano Cultural Resource Investigation of the Proposed Halcyon 2000 Associates Road Bike Lanes Extended Phase 1 Inspection Parker,J. 4075 Oceano Phase II Cultural Resource Testing of CA-SL0-406 for 2000 the Proposed Halcyon Road Bike Lanes Parker, John 4463 Oceano Cultural Resource Investigation of SL0-406 for the 2001 proposed Halcyon Road Bike Paths Singer, Clay A 4499 Oceano Archaeological Monitoring of Excavation for a 12" Water 2001 Pipeline in the Community of Halcyon, San Luis Obispo County, California Stevens, 4773 Oceano Archaeological Survey of a portion of Arroyo Grande 2002 Nathan Creek for the Arroyo Grande Creekside path Project, Arrovo Grande San Luis Obisoo Countv, CA Parker, John 4835 Oceano Cultural Resource Investigation of Proposed Additions to 2002 the Arrovo Grande Communitv Hospital Parking Area Cogstone Resource Management Inc. 13 Item 10.a. - Page 157 Fair Oaks Assessment PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES Very little scientific work has been done on CA-SL0-393. Instead, most of the archaeological studies have been surveys reporting prior destruction of portions of the site. This is especially notable in regard to repmts from local residents that prehistoric burials were uncovered by Alpine Street construction crews and destroyed (Sawyer 1987). In 1989 and 1990 surface collection and limited subsurface testing within the current project area was conducted (Singer and Atwood 1990). A surface examination of the property revealed small amounts of archaeological material (Singer and Atwood 1989). The subsurface testing in the form of ten backhoe trenches revealed prehistoric and/or historic cultural material, including one human cranial fragment, to a maximum depth of 80 cm below surface, with a maximum trench depth of 250 cm (Singer and Atwood 1990:10-12, 22-25). The investigator interpreted the prehistoric cultural material a's re- deposited material (presumably from adjacent areas of site CA-SL0-393 to the northeast) based on the stratigraphic sequence observed in the trench profiles (Singer and Atwood 1990: 14). Based on these results and other evidence of extensive disturbance observed on the property in general (including grading, agricultural activities, and structure removal), the Singer and Atwood study concluded that the likelihood of intact site deposits on the property was low. Some potential for deeply buried deposits was considered, therefore archaeological monitoring of grading, excavation, and tree removal during construction was recommended, as well as Native American consultation (Singer and Atwood 1990:15). Aside from one skull fragment in the disturbed portion of the 1990 testing, no human remains have been documented on the hospital grounds or the current project parcel. Cogstone Resource Management Inc. 14 Item 10.a. - Page 158 Fair Oaks Assessment DISCUSSION The mapped extent of site CA-SL0-393 was east of Woodland Drive and for a considerable extent northward (Figure 4 ). Since this area is almost entirely developed, most of the site has probably been impacted. We have mapped the project area and the previously tested area onto the same map for contrast. The area subjected to archaeological testing in 1990 is shown as a small red rectangle inside the large turquoise rectangle of the project area (Figure 4). Readers will note that the tested (red) rectangle is west of the known extent of CA-SL0-393. Evidence indicates that the Singer and Atwood (1990) conclusions that they discovered only sediments displaced from the site were correct. IL C:===t=:EEH"'3::::3l;"'1::::i===~ Printed from TOPOI ©2001 National.Geo www.to o.com Figure 4. Archaeology of the Project Area Cogstone Resource Management luc. 15 Item 10.a. - Page 159 Fair Oaks Assessment According to the archival research, subsequent to the 1990 study, only one archaeological study has been conducted on any portion of site CA-SL0-393. A survey was conducted at 580 CeITo Vista Lane, approximately 150 m (492 ft.) north of the cmwnt project area, which confirmed the presence of extensive shell midden to a depth of approximately 5 feet (Conway 1999). No other archaeological studies have been documented within or adjacent to the current project area subsequent to the Singer and Atwood study which could provide additional information to further characterize the horizontal or vertical extent of site CA-SL0-393. CuITent professional standards of practice in archaeology require further testing in the project area immediately south of the known site boundaries and east of Woodland Drive. In addition, the recommendation for an archaeological monitor during all grading and excavation is confirmed. Cogs tone Resource Management lnc. 16 Item 10.a. - Page 160 Fair Oaks Assessment MITIGATION PLAN QUALIFICATIONS A qualified archaeological principal investigator will be retained to conduct testing, supervise monitoring and determine the need for possible subsequent data,recovery studies. The principal investigator will be responsible to insure current professional standards are met, to prepare a monthly letter report for submission to the client and the City of Arroyo Grande and to prepare a final report for submission to the client, the City of Arroyo Grande and the California Historic Resource Information System (at UC Santa Barbara). The principal investigator will select only archaeologists meeting the State Office of Historic Preservation's requirement of possession of a minimum of a bachelor's degree in anthropology or archaeology and two years of local archaeological experience. The principal investigator will retain, on call, a Native American monitor of Obispefio Chumash heritage to minimize delays should resources meeting CEQA significance standards be discovered. TESTING The principal investigator and qualified archaeologists will conduct test excavations in the area immediately south of the known boundaries of CA-SL0-393. Testing should consist of a minimum of four mechanically excavated six foot long trenches (using a backhoe with a three foot bucket for one day) placed parallel to the northern project boundary east of Woodland Drive. The trenches should be excavated in approximately 15 centimeter (6 inch) levels with dirt from each level of each trench placed in a separate and well labeled location. Two five gallon buckets of dirt, randomly selected, should be screened from each level of each trench to determine if cultural materials are present. Vertical excavation should continue until two consecutive levels are negative for cultural materials. All trenches should be profiled by a geoarchaeologist using current professional standards to determine if the deposits are intact or disturbed. If positive cultural materials are encountered in intact deposits, then all of the dirt from those levels should be screened and evaluated. The principal investigator will determine if any intact deposits meet significance criteria under CEQA and make further recommendations as Cogstone Resource Management Inc. 17 Item 10.a. - Page 161 Fair Oaks Assessment necessary. MONITORING Monitoring of construction activities associated with excavation of native soils functions to ensure that subsurface archaeological materials will be identified and recovered. Monitoring thus functions to mitigate impacts of construction excavation in order to preserve and/or extract the maximum scientific value of the resources per the intent of CEQA. Construction monitoring entails the presence of a qualified archaeological monitor during excavation of native sediments. The monitor works closely with construction crews in close proximity to earth moving equipment in order to investigate and evaluate exposed materials immediately upon exposure and prior to disturbance. A daily log is maintained by the monitor to record when and where earth moving activities take place within the project area, as well as the presence/absence of archaeological materials in the monitored matrix. DISCOVERIES Isolated archaeological materials are evaluated and removed by the monitor with a minimum amount of delay to the machine operators. Evaluation of features or other more substantive deposits may require temporary diversion of equipment and presence of a Native American monitor of Obispefio Chumash heritage. The client and the City will be notified should resources meeting CEQA significance standards be discovered. The archaeologist will work as quickly as possible to permit resumption of construction activities. Location data of finds is recorded using a hand-held global positioning system (GPS) receiver. The presence of human remains requires compliance with Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, Section 5097 .98 of the Public Resources Code (Chapter 1492, Statutes of 1982, Senate Bill 297), and SB 447 (Chapter 44, Statutes of 1987). Section 7050.5 (c) states: "If the coroner determines that the remains are not subject to his or her authority and if the coroner recognizes the remains to be those of a Native American, or has reason to believe that they are Cogstone Resource Management Inc. 18 Item 10.a. - Page 162 Fair Oaks Assessment those of a Native American, he or she will contact by telephone within 24 hours the Native American Heritage Commission." Under typical circumstances, the Native American Heritage Commission will determine the Most Likely Descendent (MLD) of the discovered remains and will then contact that person. The MLD has 24 hours to make recommendations to the project owner regarding treatment and disposition of the identified remains. In the event that significant resources are discovered, additional scope of work including controlled excavation, cleaning, identification, cataloging, reporting and repository fees may be necessary. The San Luis Obispo County Archaeological Society is recommended as the appropriate repository. Artifacts or other materials not meeting significance criteria will be donated to local schools for educational purposes. Cogstone Resource Management lnc. 19 Item 10.a. - Page 163 Fair Oaks Assessment REFERENCES CITED Caltrans (California Department of Transportation) 2001 Exhibit 3. In Environmental Handbook, Vol. 2. Cultural Resources. Website: http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/envhand.htm 2003 Laws, Regulations and Guidelines. In Environmental Handbook, Vol. I. General Guidance for Compliance, Chapter 8-Paleontology. Website: http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/vol l/sec3/physical/Ch08Paleo/chap08paleo.htm Conway,T. 1999 Phase I Archaeological Survey of 580 Cerro Vista, Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo County. Report prepared for Donna Evenson, Arroyo Grande, CA. Report on file, Central Coastal Infonnation Center. Jones, Terry L. 1993 Big Sur: A Keystone in Central California Culture History. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly, Vol. 29, No. I. 1994 Final Report: Archaeological Testing and Salvage at CA-MNT-63, CA-MNT-73 and CA-MNT-376, on the Big Sur Coast, Monterey County, California. Report Prepared for the Resource Management Division, Cultural Heritage Section and the Central Coast Region of the California Department of Parks and Recreation, Sacramento, CA. Jones, T. L. and J, W. Haney 1992 Excavation and Conservation of Six Archaeological Sites at Landels-Hill Big Creek Reserve, Monterey County, California. Report Prepared for the Nature Conservancy, San Francisco, California. Report on file, Central Coastal Information Center. Jones, Terry and Georgie Waugh 1995 Central California Coastal Prehistory: A View from Little Pico Creek~ In Perspectives in California Archaeology, Volume 3. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. Parker,J. 2002 Cultural Resource Investigation of Proposed Additions to the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital Parking Area. Report prepared for RRM Design Group. Report on file, Central Coastal Infonnation Center. Sawyer, W. 1987 Archaeological Subsurface Testing of the 4 acre Jorgensen Parcel APN-06-391-042 between Halcyon Road and Alpine Street, All'oyo Grande, California. Report on file, Central Coastal Infonnation Center. Singer, C. and J. Atwood 1989 Cultural Resources Survey and Impact Assessment for the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital Expansion Site (APN 001-000-006-391-20) City of Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo County. Report prepared for AMI, Inc., Beverly Hills, CA. Report on file, Central Coastal Infonnation Center. 1990 Archaeological Testing for the Eastward Expansion of the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital, San Luis Obispo County, California. Report prepared for AMI, Inc., Beverly Hills, CA. Report on file, Central Coastal Information Center. Woodman, C. and E. Bertrando 1995 Archaeological Survey Report for Segment 2, Chorro Valley Water Transmission Pipeline Project San Luis Obispo County, California: Local Distribution Lines and Facilites of the State Water Project Coastal Branch, Phase II. Report Prepard for San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District and Planning and Building Department, Environmental Division and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles Disu'ict, Prepared by Scientific Applications International Corporation, Santa Barbara, CA. Report on file, Central Coastal Information Center. Cogs tone Resource Managemeut Inc. 20 Item 10.a. - Page 164 Fair Oaks Assessment APPENDIX A: QUALIFICATIONS Cogstone Resource Management Inc. 21 Item 10.a. - Page 165 Fair Oaks Assessment PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR/PROJECT MANAGER Cogstone's principal, Sherri Gust, manages all company cultural resources projects in southern and central California and brings with her considerable experience and expertise in addition to her well- eamed reputation for professional work, regulatory compliance and client satisfaction. Ms. Gust is a Registered Professional Archaeologist and a Qualified Principal Paleontologist with more than twenty- five years experience in cultural resources management and consulting in California. She earned a Bachelor's degree in Anthropology (Physical) from the University of California at Davis and Master's in Anatomy (Evolutionary Morphology) from University of Southern California. Ms. Gust meets national standards in archaeology and paleontology (Secretary of Interior and BLM), is accepted as a principal investigator for both prehistoric and historical archaeology by the State Office of Historic Preservation's Information Centers, and is certified/qualified in all southern California counties. She has special expertise in the identification and analysis of bone; she identifies both archaeological human and animal bone and fossils for Cogstone and other consulting firms. Ms. Gust is well-known for accessible technical reports. Ms. Gust an associate of both the Page Museum of Rancho La Brea Discoveries and the Natural History Museum's Vertebrate Paleontology Division and has extensive field and laboratory experience in prehistoric and historic archaeology and paleontology. In the past three years alone, Ms. Gust has served as the Principal Investigator on more than 150 cultural resources projects in central and southern California. ARCHAEOLOGIST/SUPERVISOR April Van Wyke has more than nine years of full-time experience on California and Great Basin cultural resources projects, including survey, excavation, laboratory analysis, and reporting. She has worked on approximately 60 projects in California, including more than 20 on the Central Coast (Santa Barbara to Monterey Counties). Her experience includes recovery and/or analysis of more than 100 prehistoric human burials from both contract and research archaeological projects, non-human faunal analysis, paleobotanical analysis, and historic artifact analysis. April supervises archaeological field investigation and monitoring projects and assists in preparation of cultural resource assessment reports. She completed her bachelor's degree in anthropology at the University of California at Santa Barbara. She is currently completing her Master's research on the demographic and social archaeology of the peopling of the New World. Cogstone Resource Management lnc. 22 Item 10.a. - Page 166 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FAIR OAKS_MEDICAL OFFICE -, FAIR OAKS AVENUE ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA PREPARED BY: GSI SOILS INC. 524 EAST CHAPEL STREET SANTA MARIA, CA 93454 (805) 349-0140 MATERIALS ENGINEERING MATERIALS TESTING PREPARED FOR: ATTACHMENT C June 22, 2015 PROJECT 15-7064 JOHN J. WILL LIMITED FAMILY PARTNERSHIP 201 S. BROADWAY, SUITE 127 SANTA MARIA, CA 93455 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING Item 10.a. - Page 167 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................•..........................................................•........ 1 2.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE .................................................................................................... 2 3.0 SUBSURFACE SOIL CONDITIONS ..............•................................................................... 2 4.0 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................................................ 3 4.1 Seismic Coefficients ............................................................................................. 3 4.2 Liquefaction Analysis .......................•................................................................... 4 4.3 Faulting ............................................•.•................................................................... 4 4.4 Lateral Spreading................................................................................................. 5 4.5 Slope Stability ...................................................................................................... 5 4.6 Other Seismic-Geologic Hazards ....................................................................... 5 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................. 5 5.1 Clearing and Stripping ......................................................................................... 6 5.2 Site Preparation .................................•................................................................... 6 5.3 Preparation of Paved Areas ................................................................................. 8 5.4 Structural Fill ......................................................................................................... 8 5.5 Conventional Foundations .................................................................................. 9 5.6 Slab Construction ............................................................................................... 10 5.7 Retaining Walls .......•........................................................•......................•........... 11 5.8 Pavement Design •..................................................................................•............ 13 5.9 Underground Facilities Construction ............................................................... 14 5.10 Surface and Subsurface Drainage .................................................................... 15 5.11 Temporary Excavations and Slopes ................................................................. 15 5.12 Percolation Testing ............................................................................................. 16 5.13 Geotechnical Observations & Testing .............................................................. 11· 6.0 LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS .................•................................... 18 FIGURES Site Location Map Site Plan Hillside Grading Liquefaction Analysis Fault Map Geologic Map APPENDIX A Soil Classification Chart Logs of Exploratory Borings APPENDIX B Moisture-Density Tests Direct Shear Test R-Value Test Expansion Index Test Item 10.a. - Page 168 1.0 INTRODUCTION GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING FAIR OAKS AVENUE ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA 'PROJECT 15-7064 This rep~rt presents the results of our geotechnical investigation for the proposed Fair Oaks Medical Office Building to be located on Fair Oaks Avenue in Arroyo Grande, California. A site location map is presented in Figure 1. The property is.located north of Fair Oaks Avenue, west of Arroyo Grande Community Hospital, east of Wqodland Drive and south of existing residences. The terrain is moderately sloping to . the south and east, varying from approximately 119 feet above mean sea level (MSL) in the northwest corner of the property to 90 feet above MSL at the intersection of Fair Oaks Avenue and Woodlan~ Drive. Site gradient are in the rang.~ of 5 to 10 percent with steeper gradients adjacent to Fair Oaks Avenue and Woodland Drive. At the time of our field exploration the site was cover.ad with native grasses, weeds and some trees. It is our understanding that the new building will be a wood-framed structure with a concrete slab-on-grade. Footing loads for the structure ar~ presently unavailable. For the purpose of this report, maximum loads .. on the order of 25 kips (columns) and 2.0 kips per line~I foot (continuous) have been _estimated. The project description is based on a site reconnaissance performed by a Gs.1 ·soils, Inc. engineer, and information provided by John Will of the John J:Will Limited Family Partnership. The site plan provided forms the basis for the "Site Plan", Figure 2. In the event that there is change iri the nature, design or location of improvements, or if the assumed loads are not consistent with actual design loads, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report should be reviewed and modified, if required. Evaluations of the soils for hydrocarbons or other chemical properties are beyond the scope of the investigation. Item 10.a. - Page 169 June 22, 2015 Project 15-7064 2.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of this study was to explore and evaluate the surface and subsurface soil conditions afthe site and to provide geotechnical information and design criteria for the proposed building. The scope of this study included the following items. 1. A review of available geotechnical information for this area of Arroyo Grande. 2. A field .study consisting of a site reconnaissance and an exploratory boring program to formulate a description of the subsurface conditions. 3. A laboratory testing program performed on representative soil samples collected during our field study. 4. Engineering analysis of the data gathered during our field study, .laboratory testing, and literature review. -oevelopment of recommendations for site preparation and grading, and geotechnical design criteria for foundations, slab- on-grade construction, retaining walls, and underground facilities: 5. Preparation of this report summarizing our findings, conclusions, and '' recommendations regarding the geotechnical aspects of the project site. 3.0 SUBSURFACE SOIL CONDITIONS The near surface soils encountered in our exploratory borings generally consisted of sand with silt in a loose condition and slightly moist state to a depth of 3 and 5 feet. Similar sands were encou~tered in a medium dense to dense condition to a depth 15 feet. Below this depth clayey sands were found to termination of our deepest bpring at 20 feet below grade. These soils were found in a moist state and in a medium dense to dense condition. Borings drilled at the adjacent hospital site indicate that sands in a dense to very dense condition can be expected below a depth of 20 feet to a depth of 50 feet. Free groundwater was encountered at a depth of 33 feet at the hospital site. 2 Item 10.a. - Page 170 June 22, 2015 Project 15-7064 A more detailed description of the soils encountered is presented graphically on ·the "Exploratory Boring Logs", B-1 through B-6, Appendix A. An explanation of the symbols and descriptions used on these logs are presented on the "Soil Classification Chart". The soil profile described above is generalized; therefore, the reader is advised to consult the boring logs (Appendix A) for specific soil conditions. Care should be exercised in interpolating or extrapolating subsurface conditions beyond the borings. On the bormg logs we have indicated the soil type, moisture content, grain size, dry density, and the applicable Unified Soil Classification System Symbol. The location of our exploratory borings, shown on Site Plan, Figure 2, was approximately determined from features at the site. Hence, accuracy can be implied only to the degree that this method warrants. Surface elevations at the boring location were not determined. 4.0 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS 4.1 Seismic Coefficients Structures shoul.d be designed to resist the lateral forces generated by earthquake shaking in accordance with the building code and local design practice. This section presents seismic design parameters for use with the 2013 California Building Code (CBC) and ASCE 7-05. The site coordinates and the USGS interactive web page were used to obtain the s~ismic design criteria. The peak ground acceleration was estimated for a 2 percent probability of occurrence in 50 years using the USGS online deaggregation tool. Seismic Data California. Building Code (2013)Se1smic Parameter Values for Site Class D_ Latitude, degrees 35.113711 Longitude, degrees -120.591275 Ss, Seismic Factor, Site Class B at 0.2 sec 1.278 S1 Se1sm1c Factor, Site Class B at 1 sec 0.468 Site Class Sd, Stiff Soil 3 Item 10.a. - Page 171 June 22, 2015 Project 15-7064 California Building Code (2013)Seismic Parameter Values for Site Class D SMs. Site Specific Response Parameter 1.278 for Site Class at 0.2 sec SM,, Site Specific Response Parameter 0.717 for Site Class D at 1 sec Sos = 2/3 SMS1 0.852 So1= 2/3 SM1 0.478 Peak Ground Acceleration 0.46 (2% probabihty in 50 years) Likely Magnitude (M) 68 4.2 Liquefaction Analysis Liquefaction is described as the sudden loss of soil shear strength due to a rapid increase of pore water pressures caused by cyclic loading from a seismic event. In simple terms it means that the soil acts more like a fluid than a solid in a liquefiable event. In order for liquefaction to occur, the following are generally needed; granular soils (sand, silty sand and sandy silt), groundwater and low density (very loose to medium dense) conditions. A liquefaction study was not part of our scope for this project, however, an opinion can be provided based on the results of our soil borings and experience in this area of Arroyo Grande. In general, dense to very dense sands were found below a depth of 15 feet. Based on our experience and borings at Arroyo Grande Hospital similar materials can be anticipated to a depth of 50 feet with groundwater depths being on the order of 35 to 40 feet below existing grades. The potential for liquefaction at the site, in our opinion, would be in the low category due to the dense to very dense soils and the depth to groundwater. 4.3 Faulting There are no active or potentially active faults in the direct vicinity of the proposed building. The nearest known active fault (Los Osos Fault) is 7.8 Km to the northwest of the site. The site is not within a State of California Fault Hazards Zone (Alquist-Priolo). It is our opinion that there is a low to negligible potential for fault rupture to impact the proposed structure based on review of the published maps. 4 Item 10.a. - Page 172 June 22, 2015 Project 15-7064 4.4 Lateral Spreading An estimate of lateral spread displacement to occur at the site was made using equations developed by Youd, Hansen and Bartlett. The parameters used in the equation included data from the Los Osos Fault (M=6.8), an average fines content and a mean grain size. The result of this analysis indicates lateral displacements should be minimal. This is primarily due to the level terrain and lack of liquefiable soil zones. 4.5 Slope Stability The building area is located in slightly to moderately sloping terrain with no visual evidence of overall or deep seated slope instability. The potential for slope movements to influence the proposed construction would be negligible. 4.6 Other Seismic-Geologic Hazards The potential for seismically induced landsliding is also considered to be very low and not a significant hazard at the site. Similarly, the location of the property on an elevated terrace with no water bodies close by results in minimal potential for flooding, tsunami, seiche or a related seismically induced failure of a water- retention facility. 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1. The site is suitable from a geotechnical standpoint for the proposed construction provided the recommendations presented in this report are incorporated into the project plans and specifications. 2. All grading and foundation plans should be reviewed by GSI Soils Inc., hereinafter described as the Geotechnical Engineer, prior to contract bidding. This review should be performed to determine whether the recommendations contained within this report are incorporated into the project plans and specifications. 5 Item 10.a. - Page 173 June 22, 2015 Project 15-7064 3. The Geotechnical Engineer should be notified at least 2 working days before site clearing or grading operations commence, and should be present to observe the stripping of deleterious material and provide consultation to the Grading Contractor in the field. 4. Field observation and testing during the grading operations should be provided by the Geotechnical Engineer so that a decision can be formed regarding the adequacy of the site preparation, the acceptability offill materials, and the extent to which the earthwork construction and the degree of compaction comply with the project geotechnical specifications. Any work related to grading performed without the full knowledge of, and under direct observation of the Geotechnical Engineer, may render the recommendations of this report invalid. 5.1 Clearing and Stripping 1. All surface and subsurface deleterious materials should be removed from the proposed building areas and disposed of off-site. This includes, but is not limited to any existing flatwork, trees & root balls, buried utility lines, loose fills, septic systems, debris, building materials, and any other surface and subsurface structures within proposed building areas. Voids left from site clearing, should be cleaned and backfilled as recommended for structural fill. 2. Once the site has been cleared, the exposed ground surface should be stripped to remove surface vegetation and organic soil. The surface may be disced, rather than stripped, if the organic content of the soil is not more than three percent by weight. If stripping is required, depths should be determined by a member of our staff in the field at the time of stripping. Strippings may be either disposed of off-site or stockpiled for future use in landscape areas if approved by the landscape architect. 5.2 Site Preparation 1. The intent of these recommendations is to moisture condiUon and recompact the loose native soils in the upper 4 to 5 feet and support the footings and slabs on compacted soil. 6 Item 10.a. - Page 174 June 22, 2015 Project 15-7064 2. After clearing and stripping, the building pad area should be excavated to a depth of four (4) feet below existing grades or two (2) feet below the bottom of the deepest footing, or one-half the greatest fill on the pad, whichever is greater. After approval of the excavated bottom by the geotechnical engineer, the exposed surfaces should then be scarified to a depth of 12 inches, wetted to above optimum moisture (-1 %) and compacted to at least ninety (90) percent of maximum dry density. The removed native sands can then be replaced and compacted to 90 percent to pad grade. If import is required to establish pad grade it should consist of a select non-expansive material (such as decomposed granite or Class 111111 base). The lateral limits of overexcavation, scarification and fill placement should be at least five (5) feet beyond the perimeter building and footing lines. Due to the site gradients benching will be required. Where existing site gradient exceed 20 percent keyways will be required. Keyways and benches should be a minimum of 10 feet wide, with a minimum 2 percent gradient back into the slope. The need for subdrain or backdrain systems for the benches should be evaluated by a representative of GSI Soils during grading. Figure 3 presents details for hillside construction. 3. Permanent fill and cut slopes should be constructed at a maximum slope of 3:1 (horizontal:vertical). Fill slopes should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by the ASTM 01557-02 test procedure. Fill slopes should be overfilled and trimmed back to competent material 4. If loose or unstable soils are encountered, these loose areas should be excavated (18 inches minimum) and a layer of stabilization fabric (Mirafi HP370 or equivalent) and Class 111111 Base placed prior to placing fill. The base should be compacted to 90% of ASTM 01557. 5. In order to help minimize potential settlement problems associated with structures supported on a non-uniform thickness of compacted fill, the soils engineer should be consulted for specific site recommendations during grading. In general, all 7 Item 10.a. - Page 175 June 22, 2015 Project 15-7064 proposed construction should be supported by a uniform thickness of compacted soil. 6. The above grading is based on the strength characteristics of the materials under conditions of normal moisture that would result from rain water and do not take into consideration the additional activating forces applied by seepage from springs or subsurface water. Areas of observed seepage should be provided with subsurface drains to release the hydrostatic pressures. 7. The near-surface soils may become partially or completely saturated during the rainy season. Grading operations during this time period may be difficult since the saturated materials may not be compactable and they may not support construction equipment. Consideration should be given to the seasonal limit of the grading operations on the site. 8. All final grades should be provided with a positive drainage gradient away from foundations. Final grades should provide for rapid removal of surface water runoff. Ponding of water should not be allowed on building pads or adjacent to foundations. 5.3 Preparation of Paved Areas 1. Pavement areas should be overexcavated a minimum of 12 inches. The exposed surface should then be scarified, moisture conditioned to near optimum to a depth of 18 inches, and compacted to at least 90 percent of maximum dry density .. 2. The upper 9 inches of subgrade beneath all paved areas should be compacted to at least 95% relative compaction. Subgrade soils should not be allowed to dry out or have excessive construction traffic between the time of water cond1tionmg and compaction, and the time of placement of the pavement structural section. 5.4 Structural Fill 1. On-site sand soils free of organic and deleterious material are suitable for use as fill. This fill should not contain rocks larger than 3 inches in greatest d1mens1on, 8 Item 10.a. - Page 176 June 22, 2015 Project 15-7064 and should have no more than 15% larger than 1.5 inches in greatest dimension. 2. Import (decomposed granite and Class 111111 Base) should be free of organic and other deleterious material and should have very low expansion potential, with a plasticity index of 1 O or less and a sand equivalent of at least 30. Before delivery to the site, a sample of the proposed import should be tested in our laboratory to determine its suitability for use as structural fill. 3. Structural fill should be placed in layers, each not exceeding 8 inches in thickness before compaction. On-site inorganic or imported soil should be conditioned with water, or allowed to dry, to produce a soil water content at approximately optimum value, and should be compacted to at least 90% relative compaction based on ASTM 01557-02. 5.5 Conventional Foundations 1. Conventional continuous footings and spread footings may be used for support of the proposed building. All of the foundation materials should be competent after preparation in accordance with the grading section of this report. 2. New perimeter footings should be at least 15 inches wide and embedded a minimum of 24 inches below pad grade or below adjacent finished grade, whichever is lower. New spread footings should be similarly embedded, be a minimum of 24 inches square and tied to the perimeter footings with grade beams (12" wide by 24" deep). The reinforcement for the footings and grade beams should be designed by the structural engineer, however, a minimum of two (2) No. 4 rebar should be provided top and bottom (for continuous footings) with dowels (#3 at 18 inches on-center) to tie the footings and grade beams to new slab areas. 3. An allowable dead plus live load bearing pressure of 2500 psf may be used for design. A total settlement of less than 1-inch 1s anticipated, and differential settlement should be 50 percent of this value over a distance of 20 feet. For alternate footing configurations, the following formula may be used for design: 9 Item 10.a. - Page 177 ( June 22, 2015 Project 15-7064 qallowable = 1,000 + 6000 + 2508 qa11owab1e = the allowable bearing pressure in psf D = depth below lowest adjacent finish grade (ft) B = minimum width of footing in feet This formula was derived with a factor of safety of 3 or greater to allow for some differential in materials. In no case should an allowable bearing pressure in excess of 3500 psf be utilized without review by the Geotechnical Engineer. 4. The above allowable pressures are for support of dead plus live loads and may be increased by one-third for short-term wind and seismic loads. 5. Lateral forces on structures may be resisted by passive pressure acting against the sides of shallow footings and/or friction between the soil 'and the bottom of the footing. For resistance to lateral loads, a friction factor of 0.35 may be utilized for sliding resistance at the base of the spread footings in engineered fill. A passive resistance of 350 pcf equivalent fluid weight may be used against the side of shallow footings. If friction and passive pressures are combined, the lesser value should be reduced by 33%. 5.6 Slab Construction 1. Concrete slabs-on-grade and flatwork should not be placed directly on unprepared loose fill materials. Preparation of subgrade to receive concrete slabs-on-grade and flatwork should be processed as discussed in the preceding sections of this report. 2. To minimize floor dampness a section of capillary break material at least 4 inches thick and covered with a 10-mil polyethylene barrier should be provided between slabs-on-grade and compacted soil subgrade. The capillary break should be a clean free-draining material such as clean gravel or permeable aggregate complying with Caltrans Standard Specifications 68, Class I, Type A or Type B, to 10 Item 10.a. - Page 178 June 22, 2015 Project 15-7064 service as a cushion and a capillary break. Clean gravel should have less than 3% passing the No. 200 sieve. All seams through the vapor barrier should be overlapped and sealed. Where pipes extend through the vapor barrier, the barrier should be sealed to the pipes. Tears or punctures in the moisture barrier should be completely repaired. It is suggested that a 2 inch thick sand layer be - placed on top of the membrane to assist in the curing of the concrete. The sand should be hghtly moistened prior to placing concrete. 3. Concrete slabs-on-grade should be a minimum of 4 in~hes thick and should be reinforced with No. 3 reinforcing bars placed at 18 inches on-center both ways at or slightly above the center of the structural section. Reinforcing bars should have a minimum clear cover of 1.5 inches, and hot bars should be cooled prior to placing concrete. The aforementioned reinforcement may be used for anticipated uniform floor loads not exceeding 100 psf. If floor loads greater than 100 psf are anticipated, the slab should be evaluated by a structural engineer 4. All slabs should be poured at a maximum slump of less than 5 inches. Excessive water content is the major cause of concrete cracking. For design of concrete floors, a modulus of subgrade reaction of k = 100 psi per inch would be applicable to on-site engineered fill soils. 5.7 Retaining Walls 1. Retaining walls should be designed to resist lateral pressures from adjacent soils and surcharge loads applied behind the walls, see table below. 2. Isolated retaining wall foundations should extend a minimum depth of 24 inches below lowest adjacent grade. An allowable toe pressure of 2,500 psf is recommended for footings supported on 12 inches of native soils compacted to 90%. A coefficient offnct1on of 0.35 may be used between subgrade soil and concrete footings. 11 Item 10.a. - Page 179 _.--.... June 22, 2015 Project 15-7064 Active Case, Level-native soils 40 Drained Level-granular backfill 30 At-Rest Case, Level-native soils 60 Drained Level-sand backfill 50 Passive Case, Level 350 Drained 2:1 Sloping Down 200 3. For retaining walls greater than 6 feet, as measured from the top of the foundation, a seismic horizontal surcharge of 1 OH 2 (pounds per linear foot of wall) may be assumed to act on retaining walls. The surcharge will act at a height of 0.33H above the wall base (where H is the height of the wall in feet). This surcharge force shall be added to an active design equivalent fluid pressure of 40 pounds per square foot of depth for the seismic condition. 4. In addition to the lateral soil pressure given above, retaining walls should be designed to support any design live load, such as from vehicle and construction surcharges, etc., to be supported by the wall backfill. If construction vehicles are required to operate within 10 feet of a wall, supplemental pressures will be induced and should be taken into account through design. 5. The above-recommended pressures are based on the assumption that sufficient subsurface drainage will be provided behind the walls to prevent the build-up of hydrostatic pressure. To achieve this we recommend that a filter material be placed behind all proposed walls. The blanket of filter material should be a minimum of 12 inches thick and should extend from the bottom of the wall to within 12 inches of the ground surface. The top 12 inches should consist of water conditioned, compacted native soil. A 4 inch diameter drain pipe should be installed near the bottom of the filter blanket with perforations facing down. The drain pipe should be underlain by at least 4 inches of filter type material. 12 Item 10.a. - Page 180 June 22, 2015 Project 15-7064 Adequate gradients should be provided to discharge water that collects behind the retaining wall to an adequately controlled discharge system with suitably projected outlets. The filter material should conform to Class I, Type B permeable material as specified in Section 68 of the California Department of Transportation Standard Specifications, current edition. 6. For hydrostatic loading conditions (i.e. no free drainage behind walls), an additional loading of 45 pcf equivalent fluid weight should be added to the above soil pressures. If it is necessary to design retaining structures for submerged conditions, allowed bearing and passive pressures should be reduced by 33%. In addition, soil friction beneath the base of the foundations should be neglected. 7. Precautions should be taken to ensure that heavy compaction equipment is not used immediately adjacent to walls, so as to prevent undue pressure against, and movement of, the walls. The use of water-stops/impermeable barriers (Paraseal or equivalent) should be provided for any below grade walls, basement construction, and for building walls which retain earth. 5.8 Pavement Design 1. The following table provides recommended pavement sections based on an estimated R-Value of 30 for the near surface sand soils encountered at the site. •:,~: "._ :~r: ~' .l_i:~·; pt~,;~:~ ,f ,~;--\ (d, ~:~;i;1~: ·~~~~}--_:.::;•~-1'!~-; ~-~ ~~-·~~~-;;~1 • \1 i.~~1 ";1 ,1;y~ :':~-:-~ _ ',~;'t ~»', ~~ ;_~~' -, __ r..-~-1·~ .. ~\,<y{·<~t f· :L'I ~-' --~, -,~ -,-,, ·-. ~:-, .:., : _ iRECOMMENDED.!MINIMUM;P:SRHAL T~CONCRET:E.' '.·:·:~" ; :,-":_;·-1 ;;~:·~·~'°~''.'-~::b~·,,"o-:&AVEMENT:SECTIONS'.DESIGN·J.HICKNESS~~:L~!l;,U'"~.:··~·_-,-1;: .. " 4.5 2.5 60 5.0 2.5 7.0 5.5 3.0 7.5 6.0 3.0 85 -': -· , .. '.-. , '.:T .I.=. Traffic Index ,.A:C.-= Asphaltic Concrete -must meet specifications for Caltrans Type A ' -> '_' · · Asphalt Concrete .-A:B. = Aggregate Base· must meet specifications for Caltrans Class II -' ~·" -·,',' \-. ._.. -·:;, • .::: ·-· Aggregate Base (R·Value =minimum 78) 13 Item 10.a. - Page 181 June 22, 2015 Project 15-7064 2. All asphalt pavement construction and materials used should conform with Sections 26 and 39 of the latest edition of the Standard Specifications, State of California, Department of Transportation. Aggregate bases and sub-bases should also be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 95% based on ASTM 01557-02. 3. R-value samples should be obtained and tested at the completion of rough grading and the pavement sections confirmed or revised. All asphaltic concrete pavement sections and all sections should be crowned for good drainage. 5.9 Underground Facilities Construction 1. The attention of contractors, particularly the underground contractors, should be drawn to the State of California Construction Safety Orders for "Excavations, Trenches, and Earthwork". Trenches or excavations greater than 5 feet in depth should be shored or sloped back in accordance with OSHA Regulations prior to entry. 2. For purposes of this section of the report, bedding is defined as material placed in a trench up to 1 foot above a utility pipe and backfill is all material placed in the trench above the bedding. Unless concrete bedding 1s required around utility pipes, free-draining sand should be used as bedding. Sand proposed for use as bedding should be tested in our laboratory to verify its suitability and to measure its compaction characteristics. Sand bedding should be compacted by mechanical means to achieve at least 90% relative compaction based on ASTM Test 01557-02. 3. On-site inorganic soil, or approved import, may be used as utility trench backfill. Proper compaction of trench backfill will be necessary under and adjacent to structural fill, building foundations, concrete slabs and vehicle pavements. In these areas, backfill should be conditioned with water (or allowed to dry), to produce a soil water content of about 2-3% above the optimum value and placed in horizontal layers each not exceeding 8 inches in thickness before compaction. Each layer should be compacted to at least 90% relative compaction based on 14 Item 10.a. - Page 182 June 22, 2015 Project 15-7064 ASTM Test D1557-02. The top lift of trench backfill under vehicle pavements should be compacted to the requirements given in report section 5.3 for vehicle pavement subgrades. Trench walls must be kept moist prior to and during backfill placement. 5.10 Surface and Subsurface Drainage 1. Concentrated surface water runoff within or immediately adjacent to the site should be conveyed in pipes or in lined channels to discharge areas that are relatively level or that are adequately protected against erosion. 2. Water from roof downspouts should be conveyed in pipes that discharge in areas a safe distance away from structures. Surface drainage gradients should be planned to prevent ponding and promote drainage of surface water away from building foundations, edges of pavements and sidewalks. For soil areas we recommend that a minimum of 5% gradient be maintained. 3. Careful attention should be paid to erosion protection of soil surfaces adjacent to the edges of roads, curbs and sidewalks, and in other areas where "hard" edges of structures may cause concentrated flow of surface water runoff. Erosion resistant matting such as Miramat, or other similar products, may be considered for lining drainage channels. 4. The spread of extensive root systems into soil subgrade of foundations, slabs or pavements could cause differential movements and consequent distress in these structural elements. Landscape designs should be made accordingly. 5.11 Temporary Excavations and Slopes 1. Conventional earth moving equipment should be adequate to excavate the soils at the site. 2. We recommend that temporary excavations greater than 5 feet deep be sloped at an inclination of 1.5:1 (horizontal:vertical). However, during the rainy season, or 15 Item 10.a. - Page 183 June 22, 2015 Project 15-7064 where soft or loose sediments, or perched water conditions are found, slopes of 2:1 (horizontal:vertical) or less are more likely. 3. It should be noted that it is the Contractor's responsibility to maintain safe cut slopes based on actual field conditions and according to OSHA requirements. The slopes presented are those we expect will be used in project design and we have assumed that in general the slopes will not be open for more than 2 to 3 days. In some geologic units, perched water may be present locally. The stability of the slopes may be compromised somewhat where these conditions exist due to softening or piping of the saturated materials. 4. Where the excavation bottom is locally wet, soft and yielding, it is recommended that the bottom be stabilized prior to placement of fill. Methods such as the use of pit-run gravels and cobbles on the excavated bottom covered with a geotextile fabric such as Mirafi HP370 or placement of a Class II base material over a similar fabric could be used. The Contractor should be responsible for design and implementation of stabilization techniques. 5. Where the temporary trench slopes are inclined as described above, no shoring is required. However, where adjacent features may influence establishment of appropriate slopes, the Contractor may elect to use shoring. In no case should personnel enter trenches with vertical sidewalls greater than 5 feet deep without proper shoring. Design and installation of the shoring should be the responsibility of the Contractor and should be performed according to OSHA requirements. 5.11 Percolation Testing 1. A percolation test was performed (P-1) at a depth of 5 feet below grade. Sandy soils were encountered at the location drilled. The percolation test was conducted in general conformance with U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare Manual of Septic Tank Practice Guidelines. The results are summarized in the following table. 16 Item 10.a. - Page 184 June 22, 2~15 Project 15-7064 P-1 5 Sand (SP-SM) 22 min/in 5.12 Geotechnical Observation and Testing 1) Field exploration and site reconnaissance provides only a limited view of the geotechnical conditions of the site. Substantially more information will be revealed during the excavation and grading phases of the construction. Stripping & clearing of vegetation, overexcavation, scarification, fill and backfill placement and compaction should be reviewed by the geotechnical professional during construction to evaluate if the materials encountered during construction are consistent with those assumed for this report. 2) Special inspection of grading should be provided in accordarice with California Building Code Section 1705.6 and Table 1705.6. The special inspector should be under the direction of the engineer. As indicated in the table below periodic inspection should suffice for this project. ,~ ... ,;,.;' .': '· .-.o: .. lcV§_RIFICA'HON1~0_;_1NSP.ECil'l,O!'J;;Jy1,sK\•~:·r:.),;,~ :: '.~ p·:~ON:r.INUOUS'DU~!NG:.:f 1~_-\;f!ERIODIC.DU~ING:-;, tr2~~ ~l~:~r;,~) ~~ :;~ ~~~ ~~~ ,~~>1r{~;1tr};v;~ E,~ :~~~:~:~~~:~}~0?~~~~:~4!~ · ~~~t::-. ~1::.:::~,~~11, ~~ ;:"~ ~ 1~~~.~~.~~trr~s~!t1~~~~ \ ~;~-;1~,8~~;~ ~·:$t;:" ~AsKtt:~~ri:o ;~ \~c:, ~ ~ 1. Verify materials below shallow foundailons are adequate to achieve the design bearing capacity 2. Verify excavations are extended to proper depth and ,have reached proper material 3. Perform class1ficabon and testing of compacted fill 4. Verify use of proper materials, dens1lles and lift thicknesses dunng placement and compaction of compacted fill 5. Pnor to placement of compacted fill, observe subgrade and venfy that site has been prepared properly. x x x x x 3) The validity of the recommendations contained in this report are also dependent upon a prescribed testing and observation program. Our firm assumes no responsibility for construction compliance with these design concepts and recommendations unless we have been retained to perform on-site testing and 17 Item 10.a. - Page 185 June 22, 2015 Project 15-7064 review during all phases of site preparation, grading, and foundation/slab construction. The Geotechnical Engineer should be notified at least two (2) working days before site clearing or grading operations commence to develop a program of quality control. 6.0 LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS 1. It should be noted that it is the responsibility of the owner or his/her representative to notify GSI Soils Inc. a minimum of 48 hours before any stripping, grading, or foundation excavations can commence at this site. 2. 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 grading of the site, GSI Soils Inc. will provide supplemental recommendations as dictated by the field conditions. 3. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner or his/her representative to ensure that the infonnation 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 his/her representative is responsible for ensuring that the necessary steps are taken to see that the contractor and subcontractors carry out such recommendations in the field. 4. Ks of the present date, the findings 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 be due to natural processes or to the works of man on this or adjacent properties. Legislation or the broadening of knowledge may result in changes in applicable standards. Changes outside of our control may find this report to be invalid, wholly or partially. Therefore, this report should not be relied upon after a period of 3 years without our review nor is it applicable for any properties other than those studied. 18 Item 10.a. - Page 186 June 22, 2015 Project 15-7064 5. Validity of the recommendations contained in this report is also dependent upon the prescribed testing and observation program during the site preparation and construction phases. Our firm assumes no responsibility for construction compliance with these design concepts and recommendations unless we have been retained to perform continuous on-site testing and review during all phases of site preparation, grading, and foundation/slab construction. Thank you for the opportunity to have been of service in preparing this report. If you have any questions or require additional assistance, please feel free to contact the undersigned at (805) 349-0140. Sincerely, GSI SOILS, INC. RickArmero Project Manager 19 Item 10.a. - Page 187 FIGURES Item 10.a. - Page 188 II";' ' '" ! 1~: 1 ~,- !'\ ~ L~ ... ~' "' ~1 f' -~ "' ,_----., SITE f'.'AP FAIR OAKS MEDrCAL-OFRCE FAIR-OAKS AVENUE ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNfA Project No. I Figure No. 15-706A 1 Item 10.a. - Page 189 l N • Bonng Locatmn SITE PLAN FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE FAIR OAKS AVENUE ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA Project No. Figure No. 15-7064 2 Item 10.a. - Page 190 GENERAL GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS ------ ------- ------- Unweathered Bedrock or Competent soil CUT LOT CUT/FILL LOT TRANSITION ----;;;=----- Original Grouru:t ------- Overexcavate and Regrade -- Original Ground ------ ------ '--~~~-~-----=----<;;,,,.., ------4' or 1/2 max. fill depth, whichever is greater ----;--COMPACTED FILL ---- Remov"Ei' Top soil, _ ..., --a; Undocumented fill an_d ___ --- Colluvium -,--- keyway extending 4 feet below lowest grade and at least 2 feet into competent materials Keyway Drain, Mira drain 6000 with 4" PVC drain pipe, perforations down; drainrock (3 cu ft/ft) in Mirafi 140n Bench Drain (if required), 4" PVC; Perforations down; drainrock (3 cu ft/ft) in Mirafi 140n Overexcavate and Regrade When native slopes exceed 10% benching 1s required. A keyway is required when slopes exceed 20%, minimum width and height of keyways and benches is 10 feet & 4 feet respectively. Project No. Figure No. HILLSIDE LOTS 15-7064 3 Item 10.a. - Page 191 E a :Ii 'ii ~ • <Ji => ~ i ~ :;;; " ~ g. ::i LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS Arroyo Grande Community Hospital Hole No.=B-4 WaterDepth=33 ft Surface Elev.=115 Magnitude=6.8 Acce/eration=0.46g Shear Stress Ratio (fl) 0 0 1\1 I / 10 20 30 "7 40 fs1=1 50 CRR -CSR fs1- Shaded Zone has LlquetactJon Potential 60 70 CivilTech Corporation Factor of Safety 0 1 5 I II II Sett/emont o (m) 11111111 Sol/ Des en ptlOn Sand· fine grained, sorre silt aayey Sand· fine to rred1urn sorre gravel '~ , Sand. fine to rred1um Sand· fine to rred1urn sorre silt .. ~\ '. S = o 10 m ~·-1 _· ~------------- Saturated Unsaturat - LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE FAIR OAKS AVENUE ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA Project No. Figure No. 15-7064 4 Item 10.a. - Page 192 Base Map Source Faults and Folds m Onshore & Offshore Regions of Southern C,aliforrna (Lett1s 2004) FAULT MAP FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE FAIR OAKS AVENUE ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA Project No. Figure No. 15-7064 5 Item 10.a. - Page 193 Base Map Source· Geology of Arroyo Grande (Hall 1974) GEOLOGY MAP FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE FAIR OAKS AVENUE ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA Project No. Figure No. 15-7064 6 Item 10.a. - Page 194 APPENDIX A Field Investigation Key to Boring Logs Boring Logs Item 10.a. - Page 195 June 22, 2015 Project 15-7064 FIELD INVESTIGATION Test Hole Drilling The field investigation was conducted on May 29, 2015. Six (6) exploratory borings and one (1) percolation boring were drilled at the approximate locations indicated on the Site Plan, Figure 2. The locations of these borings were approximated in the field. Undisturbed and bulk samples were obtained at various depths during test hole drilling. The undisturbed samples were obtained by driving a 2.4 inch inside diameter sampler into soils. Bulk samples were also obtained during drilling. Logs of Boring A continuous log of soils, as encountered in the borings was recorded at the time of the field investigation, by a Staff Engineer. The Exploration Boring Logs are attached. Locations and depth of sampling, in-situ soil dry densities and moisture contents are tabulated in the Boring Logs. Item 10.a. - Page 196 UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS MAJOR DIVISION SYMBOLS TYPICAL NAMES PLASTICITY CHART CLEANGRAVEl.S GW O~o WELL GRADED GRAVELS GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES USED FOR CLASSIFICATION OF FINE GRAINED SOILS GRAVELS wmrnm.e 0 c Over50% ORNOANES GP •i· POORLY GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES > #4 sieve . . 8 GM ~~ SIL TY GRAVELS, POORLY GRADED GRAVEL.SANO.SILT I GRAVEL.5WITH MIXTURES / OVER12V.FINES ~ CLAVEY GRAVELS, POORLY GRADED GRAVEL-SAND-CL.A Y A GC MlXiURES [,'] 6 SW ~·J WELL GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS Cl CH v A-LINE ClEANSAM)S ~ SANDS WITHUTTl.E ~I~ ~ v Over 50% OR NO FINES SP POORLY GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS u / <#4 sieve ;::: 4 SM :Ill SILTY SANDS, POORLY GRADED SANO.SILT MIXTURES en Cl v SANOS WITH '.) OVER 12" FINES ~ n. v SC CLAYEY SANDS, POORLY GRADED SAND-CLAY MIXTURES 2 ML II INORGANIC SILTS, SILTY OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS, OR /v CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY MH&OH SILTS AND CLAYS CL f/!t INORGANIC CLA VS OF LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICITY, =::? Ml& I L1qu1d ilTll! < 50 GRAVELLY SANDY, OR SILTY CLAYS LEAN CLAYS -I a --ORGANIC CLA VS AND ORGANIC Sil TY CLAYS OF LOW 0 2 40 80 100 12 OL --60 ----PLASTICnY MH 111 I INORGANIC SILTS M1CACEOUS OR DIATOMACIOUS FINE SANDY OR Sil TY SOILS, ELASTIC SILTS LIQUID LIMIT SILTS AND CLAYS CH WA INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAYS Liquid lm1t > 50 OH , .' ,' ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH PlASTICITY, ORGANIC /SILTS HIGHLY ORGANIC CLAYS Pt s PEAT AND OTHER HIGHLY ORGANIC son..s US STANDARD SIEVE 6" 3" 3/4" 4 10 40 200 I GRAVEL SAND SOIL GRAIN SIZE BOULDERS COBBLES SILT CLAY COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM FINE I 150 75 19 475 20 0425 0075 0 002 SOIL GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS SAMPLE DRIVING RECORD BLOWS PER FOOT DESCRIPTION 25 25 BLOWS DROVE SAMPLER 12 INCHES, AFTER INITIAL6 INCHES OF SEATING 50!7" 50 BLOWS DROVE SAMPLER 7 INCHES, AFTER INmAL 6 INCHES OF SEATING Ref/3" 50 BLOWS DROVE SAMPLER 3 INCHES DURING OR AFTER INmAL 6 INCHES OF SEATING NOTE TO AVOID DAMAGE TO SAMPLING TOOLS, DRIVING IS LIMITED TO 50 BLOWS PER 6 INCHES DURING OR AFTER SEATING INTERVAL KEY TO TEST DATA !]] Bag Sample CONS Consohdat1on (ASTM D2435) IJJ Dnve, No Sample Collected DS Cons. Drained Direct Shear (ASTM D3080) [2] 2 1/2" O.D Mod Cahforma Sampler, Not Tested pp Pocket Penetrometer [;;iii 2 1/2" 0.D. Mod Cahforma Sampler, Tested GSD Gram Size D1stnbut1on (ASTM D422) 0 Standard Penetration Test CP Compaction Test (ASTM 01557) [2] Sample Attempted with No Recovery El Expansion Index (ASTM D4829) ~ Water Level at Time of Dnlhng LL Liquid L1m1t (m percent) "'!' Water Level after Dnlhng Pl Plast1c1ty Index RELATIVE DENSITY RELATIVE DENSITY SANDS, GRAVELS, AND NON BLOWS/FOOT CLAYS AND PLASTIC SILTS STRENGTH BLOWS/FOOT PLASTIC SILTS VERY LOOSE 0-4 VERY SOFT 0-1/4 0-2 LOOSE 4-10 SOFT 1/4-1/2 2-4 MEDIUM DENSE 10-30 FIRM 1/2-1 4-8 DENSE 30-50 STIFF 1-2 8-16 VERY DENSE OVER 50 VERY STIFF 2-4 16-32 HARD OVER4 OVER 32 ~ PROJECT NO· 15-7064 SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART DATE DRILLED 5/29/2015 AND BORING LOG LEGEND -.:::.--..Jiii FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE FIGURE NO. ·----· ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA A-1 Item 10.a. - Page 197 LOGGEDBY CF DRILL RIG Simco2400 BORING NO. B-1 ELEVATION· 112' BORING DIAMETER (INCH) 5 DATE DRILLED 29 May 2015 GROUNDWATER DEPTH (FT) i=" Li:' (!) [il en !O:. w I-e /'.:: £l.. 0 z I-o.:;: z i=" ....I GEOTECHNICAL a... I-:::J Ui :1 0 COMMENTS AND 0 !O:. () ~ o..o oc~ z :::; ~ ::;;; I- ~ J: DESCRIPTION w en u w ...: 0(!) ADDITIONAL TESTS :c ....I 0 uz I-I £l.. ...J £l.. > $: WI-O~ 5 Ui uw w £l.. I ffi 0 ~ Zo 1-Z >-u. ::i ....I w CfJ 0....1 ~8 oc () 0 z g: w 0 tn () "' oeo. :::; £l.. :::J en J~ Sand with Silt brown to dark brown, slightly SP 111 1~ moist, fine with trace medium, trace gravel, 't loose 110 2 ?:.;. -"'!-< ?~ B 2.5 El= 0 [;~:.) - 109 3 -.:.e:.. t.: >:J 108 rr::.: 4 -..:-:._i 1.: ,:-medium dense 107 5 ~~:; ~ l;;:j 11 2.5 r 106 6 1:Ji ··;.: ;;Ji .. ~ 105 7 ~~ -··-B -:--ra 104 B {~ .... ·t ' 103 Sand· light yellowish brown, slightly moist, fine SP-.... 102 10 ~ grained, trace clay, medium dense SC II 19 2.6 ~ .. 101 11 -:., ~~ 100 12 _w Clayey Sand yellowish brown, moist, fine SC -~ grained, trace clay, medium dense B 9.7 ~;. - 99 13 -fi 98 14 -~· ~ 97 15 -{Ii. II ~ dense 33 11 4 96 16 -~ i.~ I. . ., i.0( 95 17 -.. ,,, U?. 94 18 -::@. 6W 93 19 -% -v~ B 8.7 -~ 92 20 -~ Bonno terminated at 20 feet EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS ~ FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE ' FAIR OAKS AVENUE ·--..-• PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE NO. 15-7064 June-15 A-2 Item 10.a. - Page 198 LOGGEDBY CF DRILL RIG· Simco 2400 ELEVATION 115' BORING DIAMETER (INCH)· 5 (!) 0 ~ ~ I :r: f-a. w 0 a. ~ (!) , GROUNDWATER DEPTH (FT). GEOTECHNICAL , DESCRIPTION w ~ ....! 0 (/) 1-----·L~~ Sand with Silt. brown to dark brown, slightly '!~ moist, fine gramed, trace gravel, loose 1 -~.ot .... 114 SP 113 112 111 110 109 108 107 106 105 104 103 102 101 100 99 98 97 96 95 ;~~ ~i':.i 2 -~:.,~ :~.~ !>":,? 3 -+~5 +;~ 4 --..:-;;[S· medium dense, 8 2.5 - 11 12 2.a r1·~ 5 -•• A-----------------+--~ : 1~ Sand with Silt" yellowish brown, slightly SP- 6 !;~,);moist, fine grained, trace silt, medium dense SM -t;~~ ·~·· 7 ..... -·;~~ . ':"' !~ 8 -·=~' .. ~J •l=ii 9 -~~'-; .. ~~ 11 11 4.3 +;j 10 -~-·.1-----'-------------+-----i ~ Clayey Sand. yellowish brown, moist, fme SC ~ gramed, trace clay, medium dense · 11 -~ 12-~ ·~ 13 -~ (.(~ ,..__ B 10.5 ~ 14 -~ 11 2s ·10.5 15 _qp,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-+~--1 T1}. Sand with Clay· brown, moist, fine gramed, SP- ~;:~ dense SC 16 -~,.;: -='~ Ti";); 17 --:~~ ·'~ ~;:j 18 -i::~: ':'•:!oi ~=~:..: ·•=.!oi 19 -;=-· , ;:~ clay layer !+-):~ 20 -"·-1-------------------t----1 · Bonno terminated at 20 feet -B 10 8 - EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS BORING NO. B-2 DATE DRILLED 29 May 2015 iL Cll a. a:;::- ::;; f- 0 (!) uz ·W Un:: z f-::> Cll COMMENTS AND ADDITIONAL TESTS FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE FAIR OAKS AVENUE PROJECT NO. 15-7064 DATE June-15 FIGURE NO A-3 Item 10.a. - Page 199 LOGGED BY CF ELEVATION 109' i=" !:!;. z 0 ~ w _J w DRILL RIG Simco 2400 BORING DIAMETER (INCH) 5 GROUNDWATER DEPTH (FT) GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION BORING NO. 8-3 DATE DRILLED 29 May 2015 108 ~~~S-a_n_d_w_i-th-S-1lt_b_r_ow-n-to-da_r_k_b_r-ow-n.-s-h-g-ht-ly--1-----l--l---+---+----+-+--+----+-------~ ~):,j;: moist, fine with trace medium, trace gravel, 1 -~:;; loose ~;~ 107 2 -19.•:.. ; >;JI ,...__ 106 105 ~~:l 3 -~;:: .... i+,:: 4 -~·.;: ; 1~ medium dense 104 ~~:s 5 ···-~,;i...-----------------+----! -!1":j Sand with Slit· yellowish brown, slightly 103 102 101 100 99 98 97 96 95 ~r:_~ moist, fine grained, trace silt, medium dense 6 -.:~:· "':J t;:_~ 7 -•• ~~ of.:- +;~ 8 -~:.~ ;~=-~ !~~ light brown 9 -.;~ ;;-1 10 -.......... !~ •)°!:: 11 --~~ !)~ '!'~ 12 -~:. -~~ !)~ 13 -;:; !~~ 14 --.:-:.. ;~:.,'dense SP- SM -~~"' 15 _;>~!-----------------+--~ 94 Bormg terrrnnated at 15 feet 93 16 - 92 17 - 91 18 - 90 19 - 89 20 - B II II - B - II 23 14 20 2.3 28 2.1 27 38 46 EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE FAIR OAKS AVENUE PROJECT NO. 15-7064 DATE June-15 FIGURE NO. A-4 Item 10.a. - Page 200 LOGGED BY· CF DRILL RIG Simco 2400 BORING NO. B-4 ELEVATION 106' BORING DIAMETER (INCH) 5 DATE DRILLED 29 May 2015 GROUNDWATER DEPTH (FT) i=' IL (!) ts en ~ LU f-~ ~ a. 0 z f-o..i z i=' ...J GEOTECHNICAL 0... f-::> iii ~ 0 COMMENTS AND 0 !!:. (.) ~ o..o o:~ z :J ?; 2 f-ADDITIONAL TESTS f:= s: DESCRIPTION w en u w ,_: OC> ~ I __J ...J >s: o_ 0 uz f-0.. a. w f-s iii (.) w 0.. ~ 5 2 Zo f-Z >-LL :5 ...J w ;:; 0...J ~8 0: (.) a z g: w 0 (!) (/') (.)IIJ oe::. :J 0.. ::>en ~~ Sand with Silt: brown to dark brown, slightly SP- ~~:$' moist, fine with trace medium, loose SM 105 1 -~)'~ . :...., 104 2 -~>:;, ._ ~~~ B 22 ·;-~ - 103 3 -~~:. t;u ,. .. 102 : 1:J 4 -t.; .:~~ --U;:5 101 5 .. l;,~J Sand light brown, slightly moist, fme grained, SP II 13 21 !~S trace silt, medium dense 100 6 --l!:·:· ,.,:~ -..... ... B 2.1 99 7 -.; . :--.--: "~:JI. '!;~ 98 8 -;;1 ... •rj 97 9 -~;j . ·-- 96 10 -!~~ !~ II 22 1.9 95 11 -!~ !~ 94 12 - '!')'~ :~~ 93 13 -;:i'~ !~~ 92 14 - ;:i';i . :.:,.. -r!~ B 38 - 91 15 -!1:.;• Boring terminated at 15 feet 90 16 - 89 17 - 88 18 - 87 19 - 86 20 - EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE ~~1, 1~ FAIR OAKS AVENUE ~ PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE NO -~--15-7064 June-15 A-5 Item 10.a. - Page 201 LOGGED BY· CF DRILL RIG Simco 2400 BORING NO B-5 ELEVATION 113' BORING DIAMETER (INCH) 5 DATE DRILLED 29 May 2015 GROUNDWATER DEPTH (FT): i=' rL (!) @ C/) ~ LJ..J I-~ ~ I-a. 0 z a. I" z i=' --' GEOTECHNICAL a.. I-::> lii ::E 0 COMMENTS AND 0 ~ (.) ~ a.o o:~ z :J ~ ::;;: I-;:: 5: DESCRIPTION w Cllu w ~ OC!l ADDITIONAL TESTS I --' 0 uz :;; I-a. ...J a. >s: WI-O~ 5 lii uw w CL ~ 0 ::;;: Zo 1--Z >-LL :5 zg: --' w -0:: o_. ~8 0: (.) a w 0 (!) en en UID o~ :J a. ::> en I;~ Sand with Silt. brown to dark brown, slightly SP- 112 1 - ~;-~--moist, fine grained, loose SM ;~ ; ~:.. 111 2 - i;;;.l ~~1 8 3 1 ~=.~ ........ 110 3 -.: J• !;j 109 4 -t;t T;·~ ~ 9 3.2 108 5 - 7;-1 19·" • ,:,:t Sand light brown, slightly moist, fine grained, SP 19:-::.-trace silt, medium dense 107 6 -.;~~ ~;:.;.: ........ ~~J B 2.9 106 7 -.... ~ ~ ~i:JI ~~ 105 8 -~~ 104 9 -~~ ~f:.~ 103 10 -~?:; ~rui II 18 3.3 i.~· 102 11 -• ~.Joi Boring terminated at 11 feet 101 12 - 100 13 - 99 14 - 98 15 - 97 16 - 96 17 - 95 18 - 94 19 - 93 20 - EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS """ ~ FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE FAIR OAKS AVENUE ,_,.~ ----"' PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE NO. 15-7064 June-15 A-6 Item 10.a. - Page 202 LOGGEDBY CF DRILL RIG Simco2400 BORING NO B-6 ELEVATION· 110' BORING DIAMETER (INCH)· 5 DATE DRILLED 29 May 2015 GROUNDWATER DEPTH {FT): j'.:" IL (!) ~ (/) !:!:. w I->i" >-a. 0 z I-I-a. I" z ~ -' GEOTECHNICAL D.. I-::i u.; ~ 0 COMMENTS AND 0 u ~ a. 0 I-z ::::; ~ ::;; I- ~ :E DESCRIPTION w CllU o::m w 0(!) ADDITIONAL TESTS :i: -' 0 I-uz I-a. _J a. >S: w I-o_ 5 u.; ·W w a. <{ 0 ::;; Zo !:{Z >-LL :'.5 Uo:: -' w 0:: <{ 0-' s:8 o::U a z I-w 0 (!) en (/) UID oe:. ::::; c.. ::JC/l !~ Sand with Silt' brown to dark brown, slightly SP- 7~ moist, fine grained, loose SM 109 1 -... -:~~ 8 !>!.. - 108 2 -!~; i.A 107 3 -:~~ T~j II 8 3.2 T;~ 106 4 -!;·~ ---"' • ,:_i 105 5 -~-~ medium dense, hght brown .; :t:- 104 6 -7~ 7r:l i. .... -~~~ 8 29 103 7 -I- +~~~ i.4.• 102 8 -~~1 ..... i.;;- 101 9 -..... i.~! .... i.~ 100 10 -~~ II 21 26 99 11 -~~ Bonng terminated at 11 feet 98 12 - 97 13 - 96 14 - 95 15 - 94 16 - 93 17 - 92 18 - 91 19 - 90 20 - EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS ~ FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE ~ FAIR OAKS AVENUE ;;~· -~~ -~· PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE NO. 15-7064 June-15 A-7 Item 10.a. - Page 203 ... -. LOGGED BY CF DRILL RIG· Simco 2400 BORING NO P-1 ELEVATION 106' BORING DIAMETER (INCH)· 5 DATE DRILLED· 29 May 2015 GROUNDWATER DEPTH (FT): j'.:' iL Cl ~ Ul ~ w I-~ >-a_ 0 z t:: I-o..J: z j'.:' -' GEOTECHNICAL 0... I-:::> ~ 0 COMMENTS AND Ul ~ 0 ~ u ~ o..o I-z ::J ::;; I- ~ :c DESCRIPTION w uiu a:::z w OC> ADDITIONAL TESTS :r: -' >S: w~ o_ 0 I-uz I-a_ ....I a_ 5 iii •W w a_ ~ 5 ::;; Zo 1-Z >-LL :5 Ua::: -' w <( o_, ~8 a:::U 0 Z1-w 0 Cl (/) Ul UCD o~ ::J a_ :::> Ul • "1 SP-;~~ Sand with Silt: brown to dark brown, slightly 105 1 -!~~ moist, fine grained, loose SM !$ 104 2 -!~ ~:J ; ,. ~::.;. ,...__ B 1.4 103 3 -i+).3 ~ ~~ • ):.J 102 4 -~.:] ~~~ 19.• 101 5 -;1~ Bonng terminated at 5 feet 100 6 - 99 7 - 98 8 - 97 9 - 96 10 - 95 11 - 94 12 - 93 13 - 92 14 - 91 15 - 90 16 - 89 17 - 88 18 - 87 19 - 86 20 - EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS ~ FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE FAIR OAKS AVENUE -.:::.--..:. '-~']I PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE NO. 15-7064 June-15 A-8 Item 10.a. - Page 204 APPENDIX B Laboratory Testing Direct Shear Test R-Value Test Expansion Index Test Item 10.a. - Page 205 June 22, 2015 Project 15-7064 LABORATORY TESTING Moisture-Density Tests The field moisture content, as a percentage of the dry weight of the soil, was determined by weighing samples before and after oven drying. Dry densities, in pounds per cubic foot, were also determined for the undisturbed samples. Results of these determinations are shown in the Exploration Boring Logs. Direct Shear Test Direct shear tests were performed on undisturbed samples, to' determine strength characteristics of the soil. The test specimens were soaked prior to testing. Results of the shear strength tests are attached. Resistance (R) Value Test An R-Value test was estimated based on seive analysis and plasticity on a bulk sample obtained from boring 8-1. The results of the tests indicate that the silty clay soils have an R-Value of 30 Expansion Index Tests An expansion index of 0 was obtained for the near surface sands encountered at the site. The test procedure was performed in accordance with ASTM 04829 -Standard Test Method for Expansion Index of Soils. Item 10.a. - Page 206 DIRECT SHEAR TEST ASTM D3080-11 (Modified for unconsolidated-undrained conditions) Shear Strength Diagram 4000 3000 I ... UI c. / ~ / v ui UI ~ 2000 II) ... OS G) .c: II) / / et" v 1000 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 Normal Stress, psf Project. Fair Oaks Medical Office Pro1ect No. 15-7064 Sample Location: B-1@ 5 feet Initial Dry Density (pcf) 99.3 Soil Description: Sand Initial Moisture(%) 2.5 Sample Type: @Remolded Peak Shear Angle 31 0Rrng Cohesion (psf) 0 Item 10.a. - Page 207 August 27, 2015 Project No. 15-7064 Brian Starr Studio Design Group 762 Higuera Street, Suite 212 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Subject: Plan Review Permeable Paver Plan Fair Oaks Medical Office Building Arroyo Grande, California ATTACHMENT D GSI SOILS INC. 524 East Chapel Street Santa Maria, CA 93454 Tel: (805) 349-0140 Fax: (805) 349-8861 Reference: Geotechnicat Investigation, Proposed Fair Oaks Medical Office Building, Fair Oaks Avenue, Arroyo Grande, California, by GSI Soils Inc. dated June 22, 2015, Project No. 15-7064. Dear Brian: 1.0 INTRODUCTION As requested, we have performed a geotechnical review of the following plan: Preliminary Grading Plan- Permeable Paver Section :.: • .;.~ \•\ .1-·:~,-,_~..,"'r~~'~,.~·~ ~:t"':~,•"_'!t:£ ~.. ,r~ •• -·1' ,. ''- •:isheet~Nq(s)~,; ''.'. ~~-:_· ~~ ·~Pr:epared\~y :: 06/09/2015 1 of 2 Bethel Engineering ·~ ' • l • \ ( "l •; .. , ' = -,, ' The purpose of our work was to evaluate the proposed plan with respect to the recommendations provided in the referenced report and with known site conditions. 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The property is located north of Fair Oaks Avenue, west of Arroyo Grande Community Hospital, east of Wootjland Drive and south of existing residences. The terrain is moderately sloping to the south and east, varying from approximately 119 feet above mean sea level (MSL) in the northwest comer of the property to 90 feet above MSL at the intersection of Fair Oaks Avenue and Woodland Drive. Site gradient are in the range of 5 to 10 percent with steeper gradients adjacent to Fair Oaks Avenue and Woodland Drive. The proposed permeable pavers will be located in select parking areas around the proposed building (see Sheet 1 of 2 by Bethel) Item 10.a. - Page 208 r i August 27, 2015 Project 15-7064 3.0 GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS The surface materials to a depth of 4 to 5 feet consisted of brown to light brown clayey sands and silty sands with fine gravels. These materials were encountered in a slightly moist state and in a loose condition in the upper 3 feet becoming medium dense below this depth. The surface materials are underlain by highly weathered bedrock that became less weathered with depth. These materials were encountered in a slightly moist state and in a very dense condition. Laboratory testing indicates that the near surface silty sands and clayey sands have very low to low expansivity. 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS It is our opinion that the Preliminary Grading Plan is in general conformance with the findings as given in the referenced report, however, the follow comments are provided regarding the installation of the concrete pavers. After clearing and stripping, the parking area subgrade soils to receive pavers should be graded in accordance with Section 5.3 of the referenced report with the compaction level in the upper 9 inches of the subgrade increased to 98 percent of ASTM 01557-02 prior to placement of the ASTM No. 2 stone. If the subgrade is to remain un-compacted to improve moisture infiltration we would recommend that the use of a geotextile (Mirafi 180N or equivalent) on top of the prepared subgrade to reduce the movement of the native soils into the No. 2 stone. In addition, the potential for differential settlements should be considered in the paver design as the near surface site soils are loose and dry. The permeable paver section detail on Preliminary Grading Plan indicates that pavers are to be supported on ASTM No. 57 stone (Base) over ASTM No. 2 stone (Subbase). Based on our review of Interlocking Concrete Pavement Institute (ICPI) documents an ASTM No. 8 bedding and joint filler should be installed between and below the pavers and above the ASTM No. 57 stone layer. Construction of the permeable pavers should comply with the requirements of the manufacturer and ICPI. In particular, the lift thicknesses prior to compaction should not exceed 6 inches for the No. 2 stone and 4 inches for the No. 57 stone. 2 Item 10.a. - Page 209 August 27, 2015 Project 15-7064 The Geotechnical Engineer should be notified at least two (2) working days before site clearing or grading operations commence, and should be present to observe the stripping of material and provide consultation to the Grading Contractor in the field. 5.0 LIMITATIONS Our review was performed in accordance with the usual and current standards of the professions, as they relate to this or similar localities. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional advice included in this report. As in most projects, conditions revealed by excavation may be at variance with preliminary findings. If this occurs, the changed conditions must be evaluated by the Project Geotechnical Engineer, and revised recommendations be provided. This report has been prepared for use by the client. It may not contain sufficient information for the purposes of other parties or other uses. If any changes are made to the conclusions and opinions contained herein, this report will not be considered valid unless the changes are reviewed and the conclusions and opinions of this report are modified or approved in writing by GSI Soils Inc. If you require additional assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me at (805) 349-0140. Sincerely, GSI SOILS INC. Rick Armero Project Manager 3 Ron J. Church GE #2184 Item 10.a. - Page 210 FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING Revised Traffic and Circulation Study Arroyo Grande, CA September 23, 2015 W.O. 2064112100 () Stantec Prepared By: 111 E. Victoria Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101 Phone: (805) 963-9532 ATTACHMENT E Item 10.a. - Page 211 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction Project Description Traffic Scenarios Study Methodology Level of Service Criteria Existing Conditions Street Network Bicycle Facilities Transit Facilities Intersection Operations Project-Specific Analysis Thresholds of Significance Project Trip Generation and Distribution Project-Specific Intersection Operations Short Term Conditions Short Term Traffic Forecasts Short Term Transportation System improvements Short Term Intersection Operations Cumulative Conditions Site Access, Circulations and Parking Site Access Circulation Parking Mitigation Measures Project-Specific Mitigations Short Term and Cumulative Mitigations 1 4 4 4 5 5 5 6 6 10 10 11 16 17 17 18 18 24 26 26 27 27 27 27 27 Item 10.a. - Page 212 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Study Area Intersections Table 2: Intersection Level of Service Criteria Table 3: Existing Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service Table 4: Project Trip Generation Rates Table 5: Project Trip Generation Table 6: Project Trip Distribution Table 7: AM Peak Hour -Existing + Project Intersection Level of Service Table 8: PM Peak Hour -Existing+ Project Intersection Level of Service Table 9: AM Peak Hour -Short Term + Project Intersection Level of Service Table 10: PM Peak Hour -Short Term+ Project Intersection Level of Service Table 11: Project trip generation -Cumulative Conditions Table 1 O: Project Peak Hour Trip Additions -Cumulative Conditions TABLE OF EXHIBITS Exhibit 1 : Project Location/Street Network Exhibit 2: Conceptual Site Plan Exhibit 3: Existing Intersection Geometry Exhibit 4: Existing AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. Exhibit 5: Existing PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Exhibit 6: Project Trip Distribution Percentages and Project-Added Traffic Volumes Exhibit 7: Existing + Project AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Exhibit 8: Existing + Project PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Exhibit 9: Short Term AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Exhibit 1 O: Short Term PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Exhibit 11: Short Term + Project AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Exhibit 12: Short Term + Project PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes TECHNICAL APPENDIX Appendix 1 -Intersection Turning Movement Counts Appendix 2 -Approved and Pending Projects Exhibit and Trip Generation Worksheet Appendix 3 -Intersection Levels of Service Calculation Worksheets 1 4 10 11 12 12 16 17 23 24 25 25 2 3 7 8 9 13 14 15 19 20 21 22 Item 10.a. - Page 213 INTRODUCTION Stantec has prepared the following revised traffic and circulation study for the Fair Oaks Medical Office Building. The traffic and circulation study includes an assessment of the existing and future traffic conditions within the study area, determines the trip generation and trip distribution for the proposed development, evaluates the potential traffic impacts to the vicinity intersections, and provides mitigations where applicable. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project site is located on the northwest corner of Fair Oaks A venue and Woodland Drive directly east of the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital,. The site is surrounded by the Hospital to the west, residences to the nort~, Arroyo Grande Creek to the east, and Fair Oaks Avenue to the south. The location of the project site is shown in Exhibit 1 and the proposed site plan is illustrated in Exhibit 2. The applicant proposes to construct a 44,926 square feet (SF) medical office building on the currently vacant site. A traffic study was prepared by Penfield & Smith (now Stantec) in 2006 that included a Phase I residential component and a Phase 2 medical office building (40 KSF). The residential component has since been constructed and is located directly east of the project site. STUDY AREA The project study area is bounded by West Branch Street to the north, Farrall Avenue to the south, Alder Street to the west, and Mason Street to the east. Based on input by City's Public Works Department, the following intersections are included in the analysis. 1. Brisco Road/W. Branch Street Table 1 Study-Area Intersections Intersections 8. Fair Oaks A venue I Alder Street 2. Brisco Road/Hwy l 01 Northbound Ramps 9. Halcyon Road/Fair Oaks Avenue 3. Brisco Road./EI Camino Real 10. Fair Oaks Avenue/Woodland Drive 4. Halcyon Road/Hwy 101 Southbound 11. Fair Oaks A venue/Y alley Road Ramps/El Camino Real 5. E. Branch Road/Mason Street 12. Fair Oaks Avenue/HWY l 01 Southbound Ramps 6. Poole Street/Mason street 13. Fair Oaks Avenue/Traffic Wav 7. Halcyon Road/Grand Avenue 14. Halcvon Road/Farroll A venue Stantec Page 1 Item 10.a. - Page 214 INTRODUCTION Stantec has prepared the following revised traffic and circulation study for the Fair Oaks Medical Office Building. The traffic and circulation study includes an assessment of existing and future traffic conditions within the study area, determines the trip generation and trip distribution for the proposed development, evaluates the potential traffic impacts to the vicinity intersections, and provides mitigations where applicable. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project site is located on the northwest corner of Fair Oaks A venue and Woodland Drive directly east of the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital. The site is surrounded by the Hospital to the west, residences ~o the north, Arroyo Grande Creek to the east, and Fair Oaks Avenue to the south. The location of the project site is shown in Exhibit l and the proposed site plan is illustrated in Exhibit 2. The applicant proposes to construct a 44,926 square feet (SF) medical office building on the currently vacant site. A traffic: study was prepared by Penfield & Smith (now Stantec) in 2006 that included a Phase I residential component and a Phase 2 medical office building (40 KSF). The residential component has since been constructed and is located directly east of the project site. STUDY AREA The project study area is bounded by West Branch Street to the north, Farroll A venue to the south, Alder Street to the west, and Mason Street to the east. Based on input by the City's Public Works Department, the following intersections are included in the analysis. 1. Brisco Road/W. Branch Street , Table 1 Study-Area Intersections Intersections 8. Fair Oaks A venue I Alder Street 2. Brisco Road/Hwy 101 Northbound Ramps 9. Halcyon Road/Fair Oaks Avenue 3. Brisco Road./EI Camino Real 10. Fair Oaks Avenue/Woodland Drive 4.Halcyon Road/Hwy Ramps/El Camino Real 101 Southbound 11. Fair Oaks Avenue/Valley Road 5. E. Branch Road/Mason Street 12. Fair Oaks Avenue/Hwy 101 Southbound Ramps 6. Poole Street/Mason street 13. Fair Oaks Avenue/Traffic Wav 7. Halcyon Road/Grand Avenue 14. Halcvon Road/Farrall A venue Stantec Pagel Item 10.a. - Page 215 Maple Dr Ash St Fair Oaks Ave Farrall 111 East Victoria Street, Santa Barbaro, CA 93101 Phone: (805) 963-9532 Fax: (805) 966-9801 U5 J:: g Q) CD U5 lii ~1---D-od_s_o_n-f-w-y--'----1 Ave "C Todd Ln a: c OliveSt ~1----..;.{' a; :i:: Cerro Vista Ln N.TS EXHIBIT 1 EXISTING STREET NETWORK/ PROJECT SITE LOCATION FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING Item 10.a. - Page 216 111 East Victoria Street, Phone: (805) 963-9532 '" "!~Ill ARROYO GRAN HOSPITAL SITE PLAN tAIR OAk.5 ~.rtJICALOF11("£ tJUll !)ING Santo Barbara, c&. 93101 Fox: (805) 966-9801 NTS EXHIBIT 2 CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING Item 10.a. - Page 217 TRAFFIC SCENARIOS The project site is zoned Office Mixed-Use and the project is consistent with the City's General Plan Land Use Element. The traffic analysis focuses on the following traffic scenarios: • Existing Conditions • Existing plus Project Conditions • Short-Term Conditions (Existing plus Approved & Pending Projects) • Short-Term+ Project Conditions • Cumulative + Project Conditions STUDY METHODOLOGY Level of Service Criteria To identify the operating condition at the study area roadways and intersections, a level of service (LOS) ranking scale was used. This scale compares traffic volumes to roadway and intersection capacity and assigns a letter value to this relationship. The letter scale ranges from A to F with LOS A representing free flow conditions and LOS F representing congested conditions. The City endeavors to maintain level of service (LOS) C or better. Level of service for both signalized and unsignalized intersections were calculated using Highway Capacity Software (HCS), which applies the methodologies outlined in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM)1 and the results are presented as seconds of vehicle delay. In addition, vehicle delays were collected in the field to calibrate the computed delay. Table 2 summarizes the LOS definitions. Table 2 Intersection Level of Service Criteria Signalized Unsignalized LOS intersections intersections Definition (sec. of delay) (sec. of delay) Conditions of free unobstructed flow, no delays and all A S...10 .:5..,10 signal phases sufficient in duration to clear all aooroachina vehicles. B > 10 and S20 > 10andS15 Conditions of stable flow, very little delay, a few phases are unable to handle all aooroachinq vehicles. c > 20 andS35 > 15 and S25 Conditions of stable flow, delays are low to moderate, full use of peak direction signal phases is experienced. Conditions approaching unstable flow, delays are D >35 and sss > 25 and S35 moderate to heavy, significant signal time deficiencies are experienced for short durations during the peak traffic period. Conditions of unstable flow, delays are significant, signal E > 55 and sso > 35 and sso phase timing is generally insufficient, congestion exists for extended duration throuqhout the peak period. Conditions of forced flow, travel speeds are low and volumes are well above capacity. This condition is often F >80 >so caused when vehicles released by an upstream signal are unable to proceed because of back-ups from a downstream siqnal 1 Highway Capacity Manual. Transportation Research Board, 2010. Stantec Page4 Item 10.a. - Page 218 EXISTING CONDITIONS Street Network The primary transportation corridors within the project study area consist of highways, arterials, and collectors, and include U.S. Highway l 01, Halcyon Road, East Grand Avenue, Fair Oaks Avenue, Woodland Drive, and Traffic Way. The following paragraphs provide a brief discussion of the major study-area roadways. U.S. Highway 1O1 is a major freeway facility that traverses north-south along coastal California connecting San Luis Obispo County with the San Francisco Bay area to the north and the Los Angeles basin to the south. Within San Luis Obispo County, U.S. Highway 101 provides a major connection between and through the "Five Cities Area", including Arroyo Grande, Pismo Beach, Shell Beach, Grover Beach, and Oceana. Within Arroyo Grande, U.S. 101 is a typical four-lane divided highway. Within the City, U.S. 101 provides full access interchanges with Oak Park Boulevard, Brisco Road/Halcyon Road, and East Grand A venue/Branch Street as well as directional interchange access at Traffic Way and Fair Oaks Avenue. Halcyon Road is a two to four lane arterial running north-south between U.S. l 01 to the north and State Route l (SR l) located to the south of the City. Halcyon Road, in conjunction with Brisco Road and El Camino Real, forms a full-access interchange with U.S. l 01, just north of the U.S. l 01 /East Grand interchange. Grand Avenue is a major east-west arterial traversing through and within the City. East Grand Avenue contains four lanes with a center two-way left turn lane. East of the full access interchange with U.S. l 01, East Grand Avenue becomes East Branch Street, which extends further east to Corbett Canyon Road and State Route 227. Fair Oaks Avenue is a two to four lane arterial that provides an east-west connection to and across U.S. 101. Adjacent to the project site, Fair Oaks Avenue has a posted speed limit of 40 MPH and provides left turn lanes, shoulders, parking, and sidewalks on both sides of the street. Woodland Drive is a residential street that extends from Virginia Drive to Creekview Drive Woodland Drive north of Fair Oaks Avenue, where it is gated. The street segment north of Fair Oaks Avenue provides access to the recently constructed condominium complex and the proposed project. Traffic Way is a two-lane arterial serving commercial development north of the U.S. l 01. Traffic Way extends between East Branch Street to the north and the Highway l 01 ramps to the south. Bicycle Facilities Within the vicinity of the project site, Class II bike lanes are provided on Fair Oaks A venue from Elm Street to Valley Road, at which point the northbound Class II bike lane continues as a Class Ill Bike Route (unstriped). Bicycle lanes are currently not present on Halcyon Road. The City's Bicycle and Trails Master Plan 2 indicates that continuous bike lanes or bike routes are proposed 2 Bicycle & Trails Master plan, City of Arroyo Grande, Adopted July, 2012. Stantec Page 5 Item 10.a. - Page 219 along Fair Oaks Avenue and Halcyon Road. The Master Plan recognizes that along several segments, Class II bike lanes can only be accommodated by narrowing travel lanes, removing of parking, or acquiring additional right-of-way. The Short Term Transportation System Improvements section of this report provides a summary of proposed bike improvements. Transit Facilities The study area is served by the San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority's (RTA) and South County Transit (SCT). RTA's Route 10 SCT provides regional access to the City with a stop at El Camino Real and Halcyon Street. A Park & Ride lot is provided at this location. SCAT routes 21 23 and 24 provide local service throughout the City. Of those routes, Route 23 directly serves the project area, with a bus stop located on Fair Oaks A venue east of Halcyon Road across the Regional Hospital. From this stop, Route 23 buses travel east to Traffic Way and the Park & Ride lot on El Camino Real. In addition, regional transit is provided via Amtrak train service, from a train station located in Grover Beach. Intersection Operations Turning volume counts at the study area intersections were collected by Stantec during the AM (7 AM to 9 PM) and PM (4 PM to 6 PM) peak commute periods on June 4, 2015. Exhibit 3 shows the intersection lane geometry and control, and the AM and PM peak hour intersection volumes are illustrated in Exhibits 4 and 5. It is noted that while levels of service are provided separately for the intersections of Brisco Road with W. Branch Street and U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps, these intersections, due to their close proximity, essentially operate as one signalized intersection. Levels of service were calculated for the study-area intersections based on the level of service methodology outlined previously. The existing intersection levels of service are summarized in Table 4. As shown, all study area intersections currently operate in the LOS A -C or better during the AM and PM peak hours, which is considered acceptable based on the City's level of service standard of LOS C. Stantec Page 6 Item 10.a. - Page 220 (;I 3 5 6 -c * ::I * -ID n F x ~ ~x r-~ ( x 7 B .J.._ + + 4~ -t "V" :L -..t,..-+p ..0.. -+ t 9 0 Linda Dr .J.._ + .J.._ -w· .. r "V" t -..tt-J ..0.. J t + t 11 12 JJ ~ <t> 5· :0 "' <t> !!} !!} Maple Dr en a; 13 4 " Dodson Wy <( Ash St Cerro Vista Ln ..-!~ q+. ~ +p ~ -..t- .,, Todd Ln ~ en a: .r:. c Olive St LEGEND CJ 0 "' CJ ., ID iii n :c -K--Traffic Signal Farron Ave ! q Stop Sign _J Lane Assignments Starlltec NT.S t EXHIBIT 3 .,, INTERSECTION GEOMETRY c 111 East Victoria Street, Santa Barbara, !'.A 93101 (Q ID Phone: (805) 963-9532 fax: (805) 966-9801 FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING 'I Item 10.a. - Page 221 "V Q ta (]) co Linda Dr Maple Dr (ii a; ~1---D-o-ds_o_n+-w-y--'-----l Ash St Farrell Ave "tJ Todd Ln cc l5 Ohve St 0 c;; I ~,, StaJntec ~]_:;!" 111 East Victoria Slmt, Santa Barbara, r.A 93101 Phone: (805) 963-9532 Fax: (805) 966-9801 Cerro Vista Ln -~ -1'-LEGEND ! xxx _J NTS. 18J_j l I JB r 118-, ~;;;a. 9 53_j 396- 1221 l")CIO L142 P;~~ ~ON -144 J 1 L ,118 J I L ---'---1----1 11 13 s1_J I 3_j 113-1 r s28- 12 --. :!: ;:!; ti 6 I I in- 4 ...... -en ...... c-.i- Jjl 154_j o- 171 llr 1")0~ L1 -1 ,o 1 Ir ao-o -:g -AM Peak Hour Volume -Traffic Movement EXHIBIT 4 EXISTING AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING Item 10.a. - Page 222 Linda Dr Maple Dr en Q; ~1---D-o-ds_o_n+-W-y~~----1 Ash St Cerro Vista Ln Stantec 111 East Victoria Street, Santa Barbara, r.A 93101 Phone: (805) 963-9532 Fox: (805) 966-9801 LEGEND XXX -PM Peak Hour Volume NTS '_J -Traffic Movement L29 N- -512 in-"' r123 Jjl 77_j 1lr 2_J 584-88- 162-, !;j! NCI> 1-, ONClO Cl>N -c-i -c-i- 9 Lgg L2 :g~~ -147 COOi") -385 Jjl r175 j j l r25 26_J 1lr 5_j :ilr 105-313- 171 t::ira~ 10-, inOI") ,,,_ 11 13 L2 -~ -in--1 Jjl ro 86_J 1lr o- 19-, .... Cl>O "'::!= EXHIBIT 5 'EXISTING PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING Item 10.a. - Page 223 Table 3 Existing Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service Traffic AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection Control Delay/LOS Delay/LOS 1. Brisco Road/W. Branch Street Signal 15.4 sec/LOS B 13.6 sec/LOS B 2. Brisco Road/U.S. 101 NB Ramos Signal 7 .5 sec/LOS A 12.4 sec/LOS B 3. Brisco Road/El Camino Real Signal 19 .2 sec/LOS B 20.4 sec/LOS B :4. Halcyon Road/U.S. 101 SB Ramps Signal 10.7 sec/LOS B 12.5 sec/LOS B 5. E. Branch Road/Mason Street Signal 17 .2 sec/LOS B 18.8 sec/LOS B 6. Poole Street/Mason street Two-Way Stop 9 .5 sec/LOS A 9 .8 sec/LOS A 7. Halcyon Road/Grand Avenue Signal 1 :4.6 sec/LOS B 14.8 sec/LOS B S. Fair Oaks A venue I Alder Street All-Way Stop 8.9 sec/LOS A 8.5 sec/LOS A ft. Halcyon Road/Fair Oaks Avenue Signal 26.1 sec/LOS C 20.8 sec/LOS C 10. Fair Oaks Avenue/Woodland Drive Two-Way Stop l 0.6 sec/LOS B 11.1 sec/LOS B 11. Fair Oaks Avenue/Valley Road Signal 15.4 sec/LOS B 15.4 sec/LOS B 12. Fair Oaks Avenue/U.S. 101 SB Ramps All-Way Stop 19 .8 sec/LOS C 14.5 sec/LOS B 13. Fair Oaks Avenue/Traffic Way All-Way Stop 17 .8 sec/LOS C 19.1 sec/LOS C 14. Halcvon Road/Farrall Avenue Two-Way Stop 21.8 sec/LOS C 19 .6 sec/LOS C Levels of service for signalized and all-way stop controlled intersections based on average delay of all approaches. Levels of service for two-way stop controlled intersections based on highest approach delay. PROJECT-SPECIFIC ANALYSIS Thresholds of Significance City of Arroyo Grande. Based on City policy, level of service (LOS) "C" should be attained and maintained at all intersections. Where deficiencies exist, mitigate to a LOS D at, a minimum and plan improvement to achieve LOS C. Signalized Intersections -Significance Thresholds The project is considered to have a significant impact if it would: • Result in a signalized intersection that operates at an acceptable LOS D or better in in the No Project conditions to deteriorate to an unacceptable LOS E or"worse in the Plus Project conditions, or; Stantec PagelO Item 10.a. - Page 224 • Increase the delay by more than 7.5 seconds at a signalized intersection that is already operating or will already operate at LOS D or E within Caltrans right-of-way or LOS E within City right-of-way in the No Project condition. • Increase the delay by more than 5 seconds at a signalized intersection that is already operating or will already operate at LOS Fin the No Project condition. Unsignalized Intersections -Significance Thresholds The project is considered to have a significant impact if it would: • Result in an unsignalized intersection that will operate at an acceptable LOS D or better in the No Project condition to deteriorate to an unacceptable LOS E or worse in the Plus Project condition: or, • Increase the delay by more than 5 seconds at an unsignalized intersection that is already operating or will already operate at an unacceptable LOS in the No Project condition. Caltrans. Caltrans has established the cusp of the LOS C/D range as the target level of service sta_ndard for State Highway intersections. If an existing State Highway facility is operati~g at less than the target LOS, the existing Measure of Effectiveness (MOE) should be maintained. Project Trip Generation and Distribution Trip Generation. Trip generation estimates for .the proposed project are developed based on rates contained in the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual3 for Land Use #720-Medical-Dental Office Building. The trip generation rates are summarized in Table 4. Table 4 Project Trip Generation Rates AM Peak PM Peak Daily Hour Rate Hour Rate Land Use ITE Code Rate In Out Total In Out Total Medical-Dental Office Buildina 720 36.13 1.89 0.50 2.39 1.00 2.57 3.57 Rates are per 1.000 SF. The trip generation rates shown above apply for a medical office building in a stand-alone location. The proposed medical office is sited directly adjacent to the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital. The proximity of the facilities to each other will result in medical staff and patient interaction between the separate buildings. For example, doctors that have a practice at the proposed medical building would also likely use surgery facilities or walk the rounds at the hospital. Another example would be patients at the proposed medical office who would be referred to other specialists, or have tests performed. Such interaction between adjacent medical facilities would reduce trips generated by each of these facilities, compared to standalone medical buildings. 3 Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 9th Edition, 2012. Stantec Page 11 Item 10.a. - Page 225 To account for this interaction, an "internal trip capture" rate of 103 was applied to the trip generation estimates for the project, as shown in Table 5. Table 5 Project Trip Generation Average AM Peak PM Peak Daily Hour Trips Hour Trips Land Use Size Trips In Out Total In Out Total Medical-Dental Office Building 44,926 SF 1,623 85 22 107 45 115 160 Internal Capture -162 9 2 11 4 12 16 Net New Trips 1,461 76 20 96 41 103 144 As shown, the project is expected to generate 1,461 average daily trips (ADT), with 96 trips occurring during the AM peak hour and 144 trips occurring during the PM peak hour. Trip Distribution. Project trip distribution patterns were developed considering the type of existing and proposed land uses and traffic flow patterns in the study area, and were coordinated with the Public Works staff. The project trip distribution percentages are shown in Table 6, and the distribution percentages and project-added peak hour trips are illustrated in Exhibit 6. Table 6 Project Trip Distribution Commercial Street Direction Trips West Brach St. Northeast 53 East Branch St./Old Town East 153 U.S. 101 -north of Oak Park Blvd Northwest 303 U.S. 1 Ql -south of Traffic Way Southeast 303 Grand Ave -west of Brisco Road West 103 Halcyon Rd -south of Fair Oaks Ave. South 53 Fair Oaks Ave -west of Halcyon Rd. West 53 Total 1003 Stantec Pagel2 Item 10.a. - Page 226 .,, c IC ID Linda Dr Maple Dr Ash St en .c: fil Ill en ffi ~1--~D~o~d-so-n-1--W-y~'--~~ Farrell Ave 111 East Victoria Street, Santa Barbara, CA 93101 Phone: {805) 963-9532 Fax: {805) 966-9801 5 ct> $2 Cerro Vista Ln NTS PROJECT TRIP GENERATION -EXTERNAL TRIPS I 1n Out Total I ADT 1,461 AM PEAK HOUR 76 20 96 PM PEAK HOUR (41) (103) (144) LEGEND 8 -Trip Distribution Percentage XX(XX) _J -AM(PM) Peak Hour Volume -Traffic Movement ,11(6) -1(5) 7(5)-, llr 4(2)- ~coin' ~ ............ .., 9 'iO 10 N'- ~ L 12~62) ....... ~ ~ ~c. ,H5J ~ <D L23(12) l j l 4(2)-r 53(29)_) ~ EXHIBIT 6 PROJECT DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES AND PROJECT-ADDED TRAFFIC VOLUMES FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING Item 10.a. - Page 227 ..,, c cc 11> Linda Dr Maple Dr Ash St 111 East Victoria Street, Santa Barbara, CA 93101 Phone: {805) 963-9532 Fox: (805) 966-9801 Cerro Vista Ln NT.S LEGEND XXX -AM Peak Hour Volume ~ -Traffic Movement L154 -145 ,119 ~oco Jll 55_j 528-e--, EXHIBIT 7 EXISTING+ PROJECT 1 Ir no~ AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING Item 10.a. - Page 228 ""Cl c IC ~ ..... Ut Linda Dr Maple Dr Ash St 111 East Viclorkl Street, Sonia Barbara, 0\ 93101 Phone: (805) 963-9532 Fax: (805) 966-9801 ~ :; ID SQ Cerro Vista Ln NTS 7 L29 8 L33 ~:i!N N-_...,,,., -512' ,,.,_..., -168 Jjl r129 Jjl r14 77_J llr 2_J llr 584-90- 1671 ~~~ 11 ONQCI -N _...,_ 9 L151 10 L14 ...,C) co """ CO Q:IN '°"""--152 ..... o.., -385 Jjl r180 Jjl r25 26_J llr 35_J llr 107-313- 171 E::i:.6~ 101 ll) 0!;2 ..,_ 11 13 _L2 -in -in--1 Jjl ro 86_J llr o- 191 ;:i;~o LEGEND XXX -PM Peak Hour Volume _j -Traffic Movement EXHIBIT 8 EXISTING+ PROJECT PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING Item 10.a. - Page 229 Project-Specific Intersection Operations Project-generated traffic volumes were added to the existing peak hour traffic volumes and levels of service were recalculated assuming existing plus project conditions. The existing + project traffic volumes are illustrated in Exhibits 7 and 8, and Tables 7 and 8 summarize the level of service calculations. Tables 7 and 8 indicate that the study area intersections would continue to operate at LOS C or better during the AM and PM peak hours under project-specific conditions. The project would not generate any project-specific intersection impacts based on the City's traffic impact thresholds. Table 7 AM Peak Hour Existing + Project Intersection Level of Service Existing Existing + Project Intersection Delay/LOS Delay/LOS 1. Brisco Road/W. Branch Street 15.4 sec/LOS B 15.4 sec/LOS B 2. Brisco Road/U.S. 101 NB Ramps 7 .5 sec/LOS A 7 .6 sec/LOS A t3. Brisco Road/El Camino Real 19 .2 sec/LOS B 19 .2 sec/LOS B ~.Halcyon Road/U.S. 101 SB Ramps 10.7 sec/LOS B 10.8 sec/LOS B 5. E. Branch Road/Mason Street 17 .2 sec/LOS B 1 7 .3 sec/LOS B 6. Poole Street/Mason street 9 .5 sec/LOS A 9 .6 sec/LOS A 7. Halcyon Road/Grand Avenue 14.6 sec/LOS B 15.0 sec/LOS B 8. Fair Oaks A venue I Alder Street 8.9 sec/LOS A 8.9 sec/LOS A 9. Halcyon Road/Fair Oaks Avenue 26.1 sec/LOS C 29.4 sec/LOS C 10. Fair Oaks Avenue/Woodland Drive 10.6 sec/LOS B 12.3 sec/LOS B 11. Fair Oaks Avenue/Valley Road 15.4 sec/LOS B 15.4 sec/LOS B 12. Fair Oaks Avenue/U.S. l 01 SB Ramps 19 .8 sec/LOS C 20.6 sec/LOS C 13. Fair Oaks Avenue/Traffic Way 17.8 sec/LOS C 19 .0 sec/LOS C 14. Halcyon Road/Farroll Avenue 21.8 sec/LOS C 21.9 sec/LOS C Project- Change in Specific Delay Impact? 0.0 sec No 0.1 sec No 0.0 sec No 0.1 sec No O.l sec No O.l sec No 0.4 sec No 0.0 sec No 3.3 sec No l.2 sec No 0.0 sec No 0.8 sec No l.2sec No 0.l sec No Levels of service for signalized and all-way stop controlled intersections based on average delay of all approaches. Levels of service for two-way stop controlled intersections based on highest approach delay. Stantec Page16 Item 10.a. - Page 230 Table 8 PM Peak Hour Existing + Project Intersection Level of Service Project- Existing Existing + Project Change in Specific Intersection Delay/LOS Delay/LOS Delay Impact? 1. Brisco Road/W. Branch Street 13.6 sec/LOS B 13.6 sec/LOS B 0.0 sec No 2. Brisco Road/U.S. 101 NB Ramps 12.4 sec/LOS B 12.4 sec/LOS B 0.0 sec No 3. Brisco Road/El Camino Real 20.4 sec/LOS B 21.1 sec/LOS B 0.7 sec No 4. Halcvon Road/U.S. 101 SB Ramps 12.5 sec/LOS B 12.7 sec/LOS B 0.2 sec No 5. E. Branch Road/Mason Street 18.8 sec/LOS B 18.8 sec/LOS B 0.0 sec No 6. Poole Street/Mason street 9 .8 sec/LOS A 9.9 sec/LOS A 0.1 sec No 7. Halcyon Road/Grand Avenue 14.8 sec/LOS B 15.1 sec/LOS B 0.3 sec No 8. Fair Oaks A venue I Alder Street 8.5 sec/LOS A 8.5 sec/LOS A 0.0 sec No 9. Halcyon Road/Fair Oaks Avenue 20.8 sec/LOS C 22.5 sec/LOS C 1.7 sec No 10. Fair Oaks Avenue/Woodland Drive 11 .1 sec/LOS B 12.8 sec/LOS B 2.2 sec No 11. Fair Oaks Avenue/Valley Road 15.4 sec/LOS B 15.6 sec/LOS B 0.2 sec No 12. Fair Oaks Avenue/U.S. 101 SB Ramps 14.5 sec/LOS B 15. l sec/LOS C 0.6 sec No 13. Fair Oaks A venue/Traffic Wav 19.1 sec/LOS C 20.9 sec/LOS C 1.8 sec No 14. Halcyon Road/Farrall Avenue 19 .6 sec/LOS C 19 .6 sec/LOS C 0.0 sec No Levels of service for signalized and all-way stop controlled intersections based on average delay of all approaches. Levels of service for two-way stop controlled intersections based on highest approach delay. SHORT TERM CONDITIONS Short term Conditions represent a near-term future analysis scenario in which approved and pending development projects and transportation system improvements are assumed to be constructed. This scenario is representative of conditions in the foreseeable future. Short Term Traffic Forecasts A list of approved and pending development projects was provided by City staff. Trip generation estimates for the approved projects were developed using trip generation rates contained in ITE's Trip Generation Manual for each individual development project. The approved and pending projects list and a table showing the trip generation estimates are included in the Technical Appendix for reference. Approved and pending development project trips were distributed based on the location of each approved project and existing traffic patterns. Stantec Page17 Item 10.a. - Page 231 Short Term Transportation System Improvements The following improvement project that would affect traffic in the study area is included in the City's 5-Year Capital Improvement Program (C/P]: Brisco Road-Halcyon Road/Route 101 Interchange Improvements. This interchange reconstruction project will relocate the U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps from Brisco Road to Rodeo Drive and realign Rodeo Drive to redirect traffic to Grace Lane. This project is in the PA&ED stage. Given that analysis of design alternatives has not been completed, construction of interchange improvements may not occur in the near term. Therefore, the proposed interchange improvements were not assumed to be in place under near term conditions. The City's Bicycle and Trails Master Plan indicates that continuous bike routes or bike lanes are proposed along Fair Oaks Avenue and Halcyon Road. The following. improvements are proposed: Implementation Priority 4: Fair Oaks Avenue from Traffic Way to Orchard Avenue. This road segment connects areas east of us ... 101 to Arroyo Grande High School, Arroyo Grande Community Hospital and the Soto Sports Complex. Pavement limitations negate the opportunity to stripe a Class II Bike Lane. Proposed improvements include installation of Bike Route signs and Share the Road signs to provide for a Class Ill bike route. Implementation Priority 5: Fair Oaks Avenue from Orchard Avenue to Elm Street. Improvements include installation of initial for Bike Route and Share the Road signage between U.S. 101 and Valley Road. The existing pavement may allow the re-striping of the right lane to 11-ft. This would allow at least 3-4 ft. of bike area. However, in order to accommodate Class II Bike Lanes additional right-of-way will need to acquired. The Master Plan recommends a study to determine feasibility of widening road pavement. Between Valley Road and Halcyon Road, implement bike lane striping, markings and signing for a Class II Bike Lane. Between Halcyon Road and Elm Street, remove markings referencing "Bike Lane", remove any "Bike Lane" Signage, and replace with Bike Route Signs. Keep lane striping in place. Short Term Intersection Operations Short term traffic volumes were developed by adding traffic generated by the approved and pending projects to the existing traffic volumes. Project-generated traffic volumes were then superimposed onto to the short term peak hour traffic volumes and levels of service were recalculated assuming short term plus project conditions. Exhibits 9 and 10 show the short term AM and PM peak hour volumes, and Exhibits 11 and 12 illustrate the short term plus project AM and PM peak hour volumes, respectively. Tables 9 and 10 summarize the level of service calculations. It is noted that the calculations assume that Woodland Drive remains gated north of the project site. A discussion of the anticipated traffic impacts associated with opening Woodland Drive to through traffic is provided in the Site Access, Circulation and Parking section of this report. Stantec Pagel8 Item 10.a. - Page 232 (I) 2 -4 c :I -ID n <! co L21 ...... o ..,_NN -411 j j L 1 142 53_J llr 405-122-, c;~~ ... nN 9 L14j 1 L3 Linda Dr i:;:i=~ ~OC'ol .,.., ... -147 -424 j j L ,125 Jjl ,a 62_J llr 3_J llr 176-545- Gr«rie1 12-, :!: ~ i:e 6-, no~ "11re It) ... 11 JJ ~ (!) 5 :J Dl (!) gi gi Maple Dr Cii Qi "C Dodson Wy 13 4 <i: L1 Ash St Cerro Vista Ln ll) coo r-n.--1 j j l ,o -161_J llr o- Fair Oaks Ave 11-, cone B .-0> It) Cii ~ .c: LEGEND f;l -l!f- OJ aJ ! Farrall Ave xxx -AM Peak Hour Volume _J -Traffic Movement N.TS. S'tt©JD1tec EXHIBIT 9 ...,, SHORT TERM c 111 £ost Victoria Street, IC Sonia Barbaro, r.A 93101 AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES ID Phone: (805) 963-9532 Fax: (805) 966-9801 ..... -0 FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING Item 10.a. - Page 233 .,, c cc CD "' 0 Linda Dr Maple Dr Ash St Cii Q; ~1--~~__._~--L~--J < Dodson Wy ~ Todd Ln a: 5 OliveSt 0 iii I 111 East Victoria SIRet, Santa Barbaro, rA 93101 Phone: (805) 963-9532 Fax: (805) 966-9801 3 "' SQ Cerro Vista Ln NTS 7 L33 L36 ~~<D NI"') ~l"')li) -522 ll)~I"') -164 Jjl r129 j IL r14 77_J llr 2_J llr 595-93- 1ss1 t:i:8~ 11 O l"')CIO ~"" _,,.,_ 9 L10a 10 L2 f.O~o l.O '°~ -151 <DOl"l -409 Jjl 1 1as Jjl 1 25 29_J llr 5_j llr 109-331- 111 r--1'>-101 Ii) 0 !:2 "" .... Ii) ,,.,- 11 ~ /~~ ( <. -".~ / Cfs> ~~ /'-Cl:>~ 13 L2 .... ~LO ~~ " <NLO--1 ~ " j IL ,o (j') -". <6> > ~{J 92_J llr -$' /'-o- 19r ..t--o o,,rd> I"')~ LEGEND XXX -PM Peak Hour Volume _J -Traffic Movement EXHIBIT 10 SHORT TERM PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING Item 10.a. - Page 234 Linda Dr Maple Dr Ash St Fair Oaks Ave 111 East V'ictoria Street, Santa Barbara, r.A 93101 Phone: (805) 963-9532 fax: (Bos) 966-9801 5 <D sa Cerro Vista Ln NTS L21. CO" -411 cc-co r153 Jll 53...J llr 5...J 405-128- 1291 ..,,...._. 41 Ctn CO _..,.._. 9 L159 L26 _.,, c!i oco P; c!i~ -148 -424 Jjl r12s J j l. r8 52...J 1 Ir 55...J llr 180-545- 121 ~::S:!6 61 l'>O~ tn- 11 L,EGEND. XXX -AM Peak Hour Volume _J -Traffic Movement EXHIBIT 11 SHORT TERM + PROJECT AM PEAK t-fOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING Item 10.a. - Page 235 "'V c IC ID ~ Linda Dr Maple Dr Ash St Cerro Vista Ln Fair Oaks Ave 8 t-----t g 1----'==-i Farro II Ave u Todd Ln a: § OllveSt 0 iii :r: _.....__....._ __ -i 111 East Victoria street, Santa Barbaro, r.A 93101 Phone: (805) 963-9532' Fox: (805) 966-9801 NTS LEGEND XXX -PM Peak Hour Volume _J -Traffic Movement L33 -522 r135 77_) llr 595- 171-,' :8~~ ~,.,~ 9 L110 co~Ln U') lO ;;! -156 j j l r191 29_J llr 111- 17-, ~~~ 11 13 Nl'l L36 IO ~l'l -169 Jjl r14 2_J llr 95- 1-, 0!;2~ 10 L14 co "'*" r-ol'l -409 Jjl r25 35_J llr 331- 10-, IOO~ ~~ L2 NIO~ -1 J j l ro 92_J o- 19-, llr EXHIBIT 12 SHORT TERM + PROJECT PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES FAIR OAKS MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING L-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--~~~~~----~.....;;..~~~~---- Item 10.a. - Page 236 Table 9 AM Peak Hour Short Term + Project Intersection Level of Service Short Term Short Term + Project Intersection Delay/LOS Delay/LOS 1. Brisco Road/W. Branch Street 16.0 sec/LOS B 16.0 sec/LOS B 2. Brisco Road/U.S. l 01 NB Ramps 8.3 sec/LOS A 8.3 sec/LOS A ~-Brisco Road/El Camino Real 19 .2 sec/LOS B 19.3 sec/LOS B 4. Halcyon Road/U.S. 101 SB Ramps l 0.8 sec/LOS B l 0.9 sec/LOS B 15. E. Branch Road/Mason Street 18.5 sec/LOS B 18.7 sec/LOS B 6. Poole Street/Mason street 9 .6 sec/LOS A 9 .6 sec/LOS A 7. Halcyon Road/Grand Avenue 14.8 sec/LOS B 15.2 sec/LOS B 8. Fair Oaks A venue I Alder Street 8.9 sec/LOS A 8.9 sec/LOS A 9. Halcyon Road/Fair Oaks Avenue 27.2 sec/LOS C 30.9 sec/LOS C l 0. Fair Oaks Avenue/Woodland Drive l 0.7 sec/LOS B 12.5 sec/LOS B 11. Fair Oaks Avenue/Valley Road 15.6 sec/LOS B 15.6 sec/LOS B 12. Fair Oaks Avenue/U.S. l 01 SB Ramps 20.7 sec/LOS C 21.5 sec/LOS C 13. Fair Oaks A venue/Traffic Way 19.1 sec/LOS C 20.6 sec/LOS C 14. Halcyon Road/Farrall A venue 23.0 sec/LOS C 23.1 sec/LOS C Project- Change in Specific Delay Impact? 0.0 sec No 0.0 sec No 0.1 sec No 0.1 sec No 0.2 sec No 0.0 sec No 0.4 sec No 0.0 sec No 3.7 sec No 1.8 sec No 0.0 sec No 0.8 sec No 1.5 sec No 0.1 sec No Levels of service for signalized and all-way stop controlled intersections based on average delay of all approaches. Levels of service for two-way stop controlled intersections based on highest approach delay. Stantec Page 23 Item 10.a. - Page 237 Table 10 PM Peak Hour Short Term+ Project Intersection Level of Service Short Term Short Term + Project Intersection Delay/LOS Delay/LOS 1. Brisco Road/W. Branch Street 14.2 sec/LOS B 14.2 sec/LOS B 12. Brisco Road/U.S. 101 NB Ramps 12.8 sec/LOS B 13.0 sec/LOS B 3. Brisco Road/El Camino Real 25.3 sec/LOS C 25.3 sec/LOS C 4. Halcyon Road/U.S. 101 SB Ramps 12.8 sec/LOS B 13.0 sec/LOS B 5. E. Branch Road/Mason Street 21 .3 sec/LOS C 21.5 sec/LOS C 6. Poole Street/Mason street 9.9 sec/LOS A 10.0 sec/LOS A 7. Halcyon Road/Grand Avenue 15.1 sec/LOS C 15.4 sec/LOS C 8. Fair Oaks A venue I Alder Street 8.5 sec/LOS A 8.6 sec/LOS A 9. Halcyon Road/Fair Oaks A venue 22.2 sec/LOS C 28.4 sec/LOS C 10. Fair Oaks Avenue/Woodland Drive 11.4 sec/LOS B 13.2 sec/LOS B 11. Fair Oaks A venue/Valley Road 15.4 sec/LOS B 15.6 sec/LOS B 12. Fair Oaks Avenue/U.S. 101 SB Ramos 15.2 sec/LOS C 15.9 sec/LOS C 13. Fair Oaks Avenue/Traffic Wav 21 .5 sec/LOS C 24.1 sec/LOS C 14. Halcyon Road/Farroll A venue 20.4 sec/LOS C 20.6 sec/LOS C Project- Change in Specific Delay Impact? 0.0 sec No 0.2 sec No 0.0 sec No 0.2 sec No 0.2 sec No 0.1 sec No 0.3 sec No 0.1 sec No 5.2 sec No 1.8 sec No 0.2 sec No 0.7 sec No 2.6 sec No 0.2 sec No Levels of service for signalized and all-way stop controlled intersections based on average delay of all approaches. Levels of service for two-way stop controlled intersections based on highest approach delay. As shown, the study area intersections are forecast to operate at LOS C or better during the AM and PM peak ours under short term conditions. The project would therefore not generate any short term impacts during the AM and PM peak hours based on the City's traffic impact thresholds. CUMULATIVE CONDITIONS Cumulative conditions assumes full buildout of the City's General Plan land uses and circulation network. Cumulative traffic conditions are developed using the City Travel Demand Model. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan land use designation for the site. The traffic model assumes development of a 31,363 square feet medical office building on the site; the project proposes to construct a 44,926 square feet medical office building on the site. Table 11 shows the trip generation changes resulting from the building size increase under cumulative conditions. Stantec Page 24 Item 10.a. - Page 238 Table 11 Project Trip Generation -Cumulative Conditions Average AM Peak PM Peak. Daily Hour Trips Hour Trips Land Use Size Trips In Out Total In Out Total Traffic Model -Medical Office Building 31,363 SF 1,133 59 16 75 31 81 112 Proposed Project 44,926 SF 1,461 76 20 96 41 103 144 Net Trio Generation Difference 328 17 4 21 10 22 32 Table 11 indicates that the proposed project would add 21 AM peak hour trips and 32 PM peak hour trips to the future study area street network compared to the medical building assumed in the traffic model. The trip additions to each intersection (distributed based on the trip distribution patterns outlined previously) are shown in Table 12. Table 12 Project Peak Hour Trip Additions -Cumulative Conditions AM PM Intersection Peak Hour Trips Peak hour Trips 1. Brisco Road/W. Branch Street 1 2 12. Brisco Road/U.S. 101 NB Ramps 6 8 t.3. Brisco Road/El Camino Real 6 8 14. Halcyon Road/U.S. 101 SB Ramps 7 11 5. E. Branch Road/Mason Street 3 5 6. Poole Street/Mason street 2 3 7. Halcyon Road/Grand Avenue 13 19 8. Fair Oaks A venue I Alder Street 1 1 9. Halcyon Road/Fair Oaks A venue 15 22 10. Fair Oaks Avenue/Woodland Drive 6 10 11. Fair Oaks Avenue/Valley Road ·6 10 12. Fair Oaks Avenue/U.S. 101 SB Ramps 6 10 13. Fair Oaks Avenue/Traffic Wav 6 10 14. Halcyon Road/Farrall A venue 1 1 Improvements to the City's circulation network would be developed to accommodate traffic associated with buildout of the General Plan land uses. Future improvements include the Brisco Road -Halcyon Road/U.S. 101 Interchange Project and the El Campo Road -Traffic Way/U.S. 101 Interchange Project. The peak hour trip additions resulting from the proposed building size, Stantec Page 25 Item 10.a. - Page 239 when assigned to the separate traffic movements at each intersection, are not expected to generate any adverse impacts to the circulation network under cumulative conditions. SITE ACCESS, CIRCULATION AND PARKING Site Access Vehicular Access. As shown in Exhibit 2, access to the project site is proposed via a main driveway on Fair Oaks Avenue, and two 24-foot wide driveways on Woodland Drive approximately 250' north of the Fair Oaks Avenue/Woodland Drive intersection. The main driveway on Fair Oaks A venue is shared with the existing Arroyo Grande Community Hospital driveway and provides access to the main entrance drop off and accessible parking spaces. Along the project's frontage, Fair Oaks Avenue contains two travel lanes and a median two- way left-turn lane. Exiting traffic can use the median to turn left from the driveway in two stages, thereby minimizing delays. Sufficient corner sight distance is provided from the driveway onto Fair Oaks Boulevard. The main driveway connection is expected to operate acceptably. The proposed driveways on Woodland Drive would adequately accommodate project generated traffic. The southerly driveway would be used as access service vehicles and should be designed to accommodate trash vehicle and delivery vehicle turning movements. The City's wall, fence, and vegetation and setback regulations along the project's frontage will be met to ensure appropriate sight distances from the project driveway. Pedestrian Access. Pedestrian access is proposed via an accessible pedestrian walkway that provides a pedestrian connection between Fair Oaks Avenue and the building's main entrance. A walkway between the hospital and the new building is also proposed for employees and patients that would frequent both facilities. Sidewalks are present on Fair Oaks A venue and Woodland Drive and pedestrian ramps are provided at the Fair Oaks Avenue/Woodland Drive intersection. Transit riders would use the crosswalk provided at the signalized Fair Oaks Avenue/Halcyon Road intersection to cross Fair Oak Avenue from the Route 23 bus stop to the medical office building. Woodland Drive. The street is gated just north of the project site and currently accommodates traffic generated by the Creekview condominium complex opposite the project site. As shown in the analysis, The Fair Oaks Avenue/Woodland Drive intersection is forecast to operate at LOS B under project-specific and short term plus project conditions, with acceptable delays experienced on the stopped approaches (Woodland Drive). A separate analysis was completed assuming that Woodland Drive would be opened to provide a connection between Fair Oaks Avenue and the neighborhood north of the project site. This is expected to result in the following traffic pattern changes: • A portion of neighborhood traffic would use Fair Oaks Avenue to U.S. 101 instead of Grand Avenue, as Fair Oaks Avenue provides a shorter route to U.S l 01 Southbound. • A portion of neighborhood traffic travelling to local destinations south, southeast and west (High School) would use Alpine Drive and Woodland Drive to access Fair Oaks Avenue instead of using Halcyon Road. Stantec Page 26 Item 10.a. - Page 240 • A portion of project traffic would use Alpine Street to and from Grand A venue, instead of using Halcyon Road. Project traffic to Brisco Road, U.S. 101 north and east Grand Avenue would not benefit from using Alpine Street and turning left from the unsignalized Grand Avenue/Alpine Street intersection. Therefore, the traffic diversion would apply to traffic to Downtown only. These traffic pattern changes would result in a reduction of traffic volumes at the Grand A venue/ Alpine Street and Halcyon Road/Dodson Way intersections, thereby improving operations at these intersections. The expected traffic additions to the Fair Oaks Avenue/Woodland Drive intersection are expected to be 43 AM peak hour trips and 65 PM peak hour trips. Level of service calculations assuming these traffic additions indicate that the intersection would operate in the low LOS C range (16.2 seconds of vehicle delay in the AM peak hour and 17.4 seconds of delay i~ the PM peak hour) under short term plus project conditions. The opening of Woodland Drive north of the project would therefore not result in unacceptable intersection operatior:s. Circulation Review of the proposed circulation plan indicates that overall, the site would accommodate the expected traffic volumes and turning movements by delivery trucks, trash trucks and other large vehicles. The ultimate site plan should verify that all on-site vehicle turning requirements are satisfied. Parking The parking requirement for medical office buildings is the project is one space per 250 SF. The project parking requirements would be 180 spaces (44,926 SF / 250 SF). The project proposes to provide a total of 184 parking spaces, including seven accessible spaces and three motorcycle spaces. The proposed parking supply would therefore satisfy the City's parking requirement. MITIGATION MEASURES Project-Specific Mitigations The traffic analysis found that all study area intersection would operate at LOS C or better under existing plus project conditions. The proposed Fair Oaks Medical Office Building would not generate any significant impacts at the study area intersections under project-specific conditions. No project-specific mitigations are therefore required. The project would be required to pay its Development impact Fess as required by the City. Short Term and Cumulative Mitigations The short term conditions analysis found that the study area intersections would continue to operate at LOS C or better under short term plus project conditions. The proposed project would not generate any short term impacts and no mitigations are required. The cumulative analysis indicated that the project trip additions· are not expected to impact the cumulative (Buildout) street network. Stantec Page 27 Item 10.a. - Page 241 ••• Stan tee Page 28 Item 10.a. - Page 242