Agenda Packet 2003-11-25 _. _ _
CITY COUNCIL ��'�� Of
AGENDA � �r'r'�o G'�'a�
Tony M.Ferrara Mayor ,
Jim Dlckens Mayor Pro Tem Steven Adams City Manager
Thomas A Runels Council Member Timothy J.Carmel City Attomey
Sandy Lubin Councll Member Kelly Wetmore Director,AdministraGve Services
Joe Costello Council Member
NOTICE OF
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING
Tuesdav
November 25, 2003
0 P.M.
Arroyo Grande City Council Chambers
215 East Branch Street, Arroyo Grande
AGENDA
1. ROLL CALL
2. PUBLIC COMMENT on Special Meeting Agenda Items.
Members of the public wishing to address the Council on any item described in this Notice ;
may do so when recognized by the Presiding Officer. �
i
3. CITY COUNCIL CLOSED SESSION:
i
a. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION pursuant to Government
Code Section 54957:
Title: City Manager
b. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR pursuant to Government Code
Section 54957.6:
Agency Negotiator: Timothy J. Carmel, City Attorney
Unrepresented Employee: City Manager
4. RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION:
Announcement of reportable action from closed session, if any.
5. ADJOURNMENT.
c:closedsession.agenda.112503.
CITY COUNCIL C{'��1 Of
AGENDA �r'r'�o �''a�
Tony M. Ferrara Mayor
Jim Dickens Mayor Pro Tem Steven Adams City Manager
Thomas A Runels Councll Member Timothy J.Carmel Ciry Attomey
Sandy Lubin Council Member Kelly Wetrnore Director,Administrative Services
Joe Costello Council Member
AGENDA SUMMARY
CITY COUNCIVREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 25, 2003
7:00 P.M.
Arroyo Grande City Council Chambers
215 East Branch Street, Arroyo Grande
;
�
,
i
1. CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 P.M. r
2. RO�L CALL COUNCIL/RDA
3. FLAG SALUTE: ROTARY CLUB OF ARROYO GRANDE
4. INVOCATION: RABBI NORMAN MENDEL, CONGREGATION
BETH DAVID, SAN LUIS OBISPO
5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS:
None.
6. AGENDA REVIEW:
6.a. Move that all resolutions and ordinances presented tonight be read in title on{y and
all further readings be waived.
AGENDA SUMMARY— NOVEMBER 25, 2003
PAGE 2
7. COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS:
This public comment period is an invitation to members of the community to present
issues, thoughts, or suggestions on matters not scheduled on this agenda.
Comments should be limited to those matters that are within the jurisdiction of the
City Council. The Brown Act restricts the Council from taking formal action on
matters not published on the agenda. In response to your comments, the Mayor or
presiding Council Member may:
♦ Direct City staff to assist or coordinate with you.
♦ A Council Member may state a desire to meet with you.
♦ It may be the desire of the Council to place your issue or matter on a
future Council agenda.
Please adhere to the following procedures when addressing the Council:
♦ Comments should be limited to 3 minutes or less.
♦ Your comments should be directed to the Council as a whole and not
directed to individual Council members.
♦ Slanderous, profane or personal remarks against any Council Member or
member of the audience shall not be permitted.
8. CONSENT AGENDA:
The following routine items listed below are scheduled for consideration as a group.
The recommendations for each item are noted. Any Council Member may request
that any item be withdrawn from the Consent Agenda to permit discussion or change
the recommended course of action. The City Council may approve the remainder of
the Consent Agenda on one motion.
8.a. Cash Disbursement Ratification (SNODGRASS)
Recommended Action: Approve the listings of cash disbursements for the period
November 1, 2003— November 15, 2003.
8.b. Consideration of Cash Flow Analvsis/Aaaroval of Interfund Advance from the
Water Facilitv Fund (SNODGRASS)
Recommended Action: Receive and file the October 2003 cash report and approve
the interfund advance from the Water Facility Fund to cover cash deficits in other
funds at October 31, 2003.
8.c. Consideration of Resolution Establishina the Arrovo Grande Career
Firefis�hters (AGCF) as a Se�arate Groua in CaIPERS Medical Insurance
Pros�ram (SNODGRASS)
Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution.
8.d. Consideration of Aaaroval of Minutes (WETMORE)
Recommended Action: Approve the minutes of the Regular City
Council/Redevelopment Agency Meeting of November 11, 2003 as submitted.
AGENDA SUMMARY— NOVEMBER 25, 2003
PAGE 3
8. CONSENT AGENDA (continued):
8.e. Consideration of Cancellation of December 23. 2003 Citv Council Meetina
(ADAMS)
Recommended Action: Cancel the regularly scheduled City Council meeting of
December 23, 2003 due to the holiday.
8.f. Consideration of Auaointments to Traffic Commission and Senior Advisorv
Commission (ADAMS)
Recommended Action: Approve appointments of Scott Metcalf to the Traffic
Commission and Paul Toms to the Senior Advisory Commission as recommended
by Council Member Lubin.
8.g. Consideration of a Resolution Reauestins� a Cooaerative Work As�reement
(CWA1 for the Brid�e Street Brids�e Feasibilitv Studv(SPAGNOLO)
Recommended Action: 1) Adopt Resolution requesting a Cooperative Work
Agreement (CWA) for the Bridge Street Bridge Feasibility Study thereby extending
the federal funding for an additional year; and 2) Direct staff to forward the
Resolution to Caltrans by December 1, 2003.
8.h. Consideration for Relief bv Mid State Plumbins� and Drain Cleanins�. Inc. and '
Authorization to Re-Advertise Bids for Phase I of the Water Conservation
Pros�ram (SPAGNOLO) :
Recommended Action: 1) Consent to the relief of the low bid by Mid State
Plumbing and Drain Cleaning, Inc.; and 2) Authorize the re-advertisement of bids for
Phase I of the Water Conservation Program without the bond requirements.
8.i. Consideration of Acceatance of Easement As�reements, and Authorization of
Pavment for the Reservoir No. 1. Proiect No. 2000-04 (SPAGNOLO)
Recommended Action: 1) Accept an easement agreement with the Central
California Conference Association of Seventh Day Adventist, and authorize payment
in the amount of $25,762; and 2) Accept permanent and temporary easement
agreements with the California Pacific Annual Conference of the Methodist Church,
and authorize payment in the amount of$19,342.77.
8.j. Consideration to Aaarove a Services As�reement for the Citvwide Traffic
Monitorins� Proaram and Retainer Services to Pre�are and Review Traffic
Studies (SPAGNOLO) .
Recommended Action: 1) Approve a three year Consultant Services Agreement
with Omni-Means in the amount of $71,998 for the Citywide Traffic Monitoring
Program and retain services to prepare and review traffic studies; 2) Authorize the
City Manager to approve and execute contract amendments in the amount of$7,200
for unanticipated services during the three year term of the Agreement; and 3)
Appropriate $46,998 for the Consultant Services Agreement and $7,200 for
unanticipated services for a total of $54,198 from the Transportation Facility Impact
Fund.
8.k. Consideration of Aaaroval of Parcel Map AG 02-0446: Subdividins� One (1)
Parcel into Two (2) Commercial Parcels; 1540 E. Grand Avenue (SPAGNOLO)
Recommended Action: Approve Final Parcel Map AG 02-0446, subdividing 1.75
acres into two (2) commercial lots.
AGENDA SUMMARY— NOVEMBER 25, 2003
PAGE 4
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
9.a. Consideration of Resolution Aaarovina the Issuance of Tax-Exemot Bonds bv
the California Statewide Communities Develooment Authoritv for the
Financins� of the Courtland-Arrovo Grande. L.P. Senior Affordable Housina
Proiect and Discussion of Extension and Reauested Chanaes to the
Disaosition and Develoament As�reement [COUNCIURDA] (ADAMS)
Recommended Action: 1) Adopt Resolution approving the issuance of tax-exempt
bonds by the California Statewide Communities Development Authority for the
financing of the Courtland-Arroyo Grande, L.P. Senior Affordable Housing Project;
and 2) Direct staff to prepare the modifications to the Disposition and Development
Agreement (DDA) requested by the applicant for consideration at the December 9,
2003 meeting.
9.b. Consideration of a General Plan Amendment to Chanae the Land Use Cateaorv
of a 10.3-Acre Prouertv from Low Medium Densitv Residential (LM) to Medium
H�h Densitv Residential (MH) Allowins� ua to 9.0 Dwellins� Units Per Acre:
Develo�ment Code Amendment to Chanae the Zonina Desionation from
Residential Suburban (RSl to Condominium/Townhouse (MF); Planned
Develoament Amendment to allow more flexibilitv in desian and more efficient
use of land: and Vestins� Tentative Tract Ma� to Subdivide the Prouertv into
Sixtv-Five (65) Residential Lots for Prooertv Located on the North Side of
Farroll Avenue between Oak Park Boulevard and Golden West Place: Auplied
for bv Don McHanev (STRONG)
Recommended Action: 1) Adopt Resolution approving General Plan Amendment
Case No. 02-001; 2) Introduce an Ordinance amending the Zoning Map of the City of
Arroyo Grande and amending Planned Development 1.5 in Development Code
Amendment 02-002 and Planned Development Amendment 02-001; and 3) Adopt
Resolution adopting a Negative Declaration with Mitigation Measures, instructing the
Director of Administrative Services to file a Notice of Determination, and approving
Vesting Tentative Tract Map Case No. 02-002, subject to certain conditions.
9.c. Continued Public Hearins� — Develoament Code Amendment Case No. 03-005
and General Plan Amendment Case No. 03-001 (STRONG)
Recommended Action: 1) Introduce Ordinance amending portions of Title 16 of
the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code, creating an Agricultural Buffer Overlay District,
establishing expanded findings for rezoning and subdivision applications, modifying
allowable uses and standards in Agricultural Districts and establishing mitigation
requirements for conversion of agriculturally zoned land; and 2) Adopt Resolution
amending the General Plan Agriculture and Conservation/Open Space Element to
create an Agricultural Conservation Easement Program and an Agricultural
Enterprise Program, and to revise language in Objective Ag1.
9.d. Continued Public Hearins� - Consideration of General Plan Amendment Case
No. 03-005—2003 Housins� Element Uadate (STRONG)
Recommended Action: Review changes made to the 2003 Housing Element since
the November 11, 2003 Council meeting, receive public comment on the document,
and adopt a Resolution approving General Plan Amendment 03-005 — the 2003
Housing Element.
AGENDA SUMMARY— NOVEMBER 25, 2003
PAGE 5
10. CONTINUED BUSINESS:
None.
11. NEW BUSINESS:
None.
12. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS:
This item gives the Mayor and Council Members the opportunity to present reports to
the other members regarding committees, commissions, boards, or special projects '
on which they may be participating.
(a) MAYOR TONY M. FERRARA:
(1) San Luis Obispo Council of Governments/San Luis Obispo Regional
Transit Authority (SLOCOG/SLORTA)
(2) South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District (SSLOCSD)
(3) Integrated Waste Management Authority (IWMA)
(4) Other
(b) MAYOR PRO TEM JIM DICKENS:
(1) South County Youth Coalition
(2) Other
(c) COUNCIL MEMBER THOMAS A. RUNELS:
(1) Zone 3 Water Advisory Board
(2) County Water Resources Advisory Committee (WRAC)
(3) Other
(d) COUNCIL MEMBER SANDY LUBIN:
(1) South County Area Transit (SCAT)
(2) Economic Vitality Corporation (EVC)
(3) Other
(e) COUNCIL MEMBER JOE COSTELLO:
(1) Air Pollution Control District (APCD)
(2) Other
13. CITY COUNCIL MEMBER ITEMS:
The following item(s) are placed on the agenda by the Mayor and/or a Council
Member who would like to receive feedback, direct staff to prepare information,
and/or request a formal agenda report be prepared and the item placed on a future
agenda. No formal action can be taken.
a) None.
AGENDA SUMMARY— NOVEMBER 25, 2003
PAGE 6
14. CITY MANAGER ITEMS:
The following item(s) are placed on the agenda by the City Manager in order to
receive feedback and/or request direction from the Council. No formal action can be
taken.
a) None.
15. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS:
Correspondence/Comments as presented by the City Council.
16. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS:
Correspondence/Comments as presented by the City Manager.
17. COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS:
This public comment period is an invitation to members of the community to present
issues, thoughts, or suggestions. Comments should be limited to those matters that
are within the jurisdiction of the City Council. The Brown Act restricts the Council
from taking formal action on matters not published on the agenda.
18. ADJOURNMENT
♦�������♦
All staff reports or other written documentation relating to each item of business referred to
on the agenda are on file in the Administrative Services Department and are available for
public inspection and reproduction at cost. If requested, the agenda shall be made
available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability, as required by the
Americans with Disabilities Act. To make a request for disability-related modification or
accommodation, contact the Administrative Services Department at 805-473-5414 as soon
as possible and at least 48 hours prior to the meeting date.
♦�������♦
Note: This agenda is subject to amendment up to 72 hours prior to the date and time set
for the meeting. Please refer to the agenda posted at City Hall for any revisions, or call the
Director of Administrative Services at (805) 473-5414 for more information.
www.a rrovo s�ra n d e.o rs�
8.a.
� P�tRO��
o ��
� INCORPORA7ED 90 M EMORAN DU M
C1 m
�( JULY 10. 1911 7� .
c4��FORN�P
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: LYNDA K. SNODGRASS, DIRECTOR OF FINANCIAL SERVICES �� �
BY: JANET M. HUWALDT, ACCOUNTING SUPERVISOR
SUBJECT: CASH DISBURSEMENT RATIFICATION
DATE: NOVEMBER 25, 2003
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City Council ratify the attached listing of cash disbursements for
the period November 1— November 15, 2003.
FUNDING:
There is a $952,489.21 fiscal impact. All payments are within the existing budget.
DISCUSSION:
The attached listing represents the cash disbursements required of normal and usual
� operations. It is requested that the City Council approve these payments.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration:
• Approve staff's recommendation;
• Do not approve staff's recommendation;
• Provide direction to staff.
Attachments:
Attachment 1 —Cash Disbursement Listing
Attachment 2 — November 7, 2003 Accounts Payable Check Register
Attachment 3— November 14, 2003 Accounts Payable Check Register
Attachment 4— November 14, 2003 Payroll Checks and Benefit Checks
ATTACHMENTI
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
CASH DISBURSEMENTS
�ac t.lce �ariod o�?Zoc�r6ea 1 7kr�ouqk�Zoue.�c8ez 15, 2GI�3
November 25,2003
Presented are the cash disbursements issued by the Department of Financial Services for
the period November 1 to November 15, 2003. Shown are cash disbursements by week of
occurrence and type of payment.
WEEK TYPE OF PAYMENT ATTACHMENT AMOUNT '
November 7,2003 �
Accounts Payable Cks 113031-113091 2 $211,199.05 �
f
`t
�
G
�
November 14,2003 �
Accounts Payable Cks 113092-113153 3 364,757.52 �
Payroll Checks and Benefit Checks 4 376,532.64 �
�
741,290.16
I
�
�
i
Two Week Total $ 952,489.21 `
�
CITY OFARROYO GRANDE
INDEX FOR BUDGET DEPARTMENTS
EDEN COMPUTER SYSTEM
GENERAL FUND(010) SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
Cit,y Government(Fund 010) Park Development Fee Fund(Fund 213)
4001 - City Council 4550 - Park Development Fee
4002 - Administrative Services Traffic Signal Fund(Fund 222)
4003 - City Attorney 4501 - Traffic Fund
4101 - City Manager Transportation Fund(Fund 225)
4102 - Printing/Duplicating 4553 - Public Transit System
4120 - Financial Services Construction Tax Fund(Fund 230)
4121 - Taxes/ Insurance/ Bonds 4556 - Construction Tax
4130 - Community Development Police Grant Funds
4131 - Community Building(CDBG) 4201 - Law Enforcement Equip.(Fd 272)
4140 - Management Information System 4202 - State AB3229 Cops Grant(Fd 271)
4145 - Non Departmental 4203 - Federal Universal Hiring(Fd 274)
Public Safet,y(Fund 010) 4208 - Federal Local Law Enforcmt(FD 279)
4201 - Police Redevelopment Agency(Fund 284)
4211 - Fire 4103 - Redevelopment Administration
4212 - Building&Safety ENTERPRISE FUNDS
Public Works(Fund 010) Sewer Fund(Fund 612)
4301 - Public Works-Admin&Engineering 4610 - Sewer Maintenance
4303 - Street/Bridge Maintenance Water Fund(Fund 640)
4304 - Street Lighting 4710 - Water Administration
4305 - Automotive Shop 4711 - Water Production
Parks&Recreation(Fund 010) 4712 - Water Distribution
4420 - Parks Lopez Administration(Fund 641)
4421 - Recreation 4750 - Lopez Administration
4422 - General Recreation CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS(Fund 350)
4423 - Pre-School Program 5501-5599 - Park Projects
4424 - Recreation-Special Programs 5601-5699 - Streets Projects
4425 - Children in Motion 5701-5799 - Drainage Projects
4426 - Five Cities Youth Basketball 5801-5899 - Water/Sewer/Street Projects
4430 - Soto Sport Complex 5901-5999 - Water Projects
4213 - Government Buildings ,
446Q - Parkway Maintenance
Dept Index for Conncil
�
ATTACHt•IB:IT 2
Page: �
Voucher List
vchlist City of Arroyo Grande
1110612003 9:52:54AM
Bank code: boa Amount
Invoice PO# DescriptionlAccount
Voucher Date Vendor 110303 PROB ORIENTED POLICING 11
113031 11/3/2003 001695 JOHNSON,VINCE PROB ORIENTED POLICING 11 138.00
010.4201.5501
Total : 138.00
36357 WE 10/17/03 J. MORAN
113032 11/7/2003 001050 AMERICAN TEMPS WE 10/17/03 J. MORAN g16.00
010.4420.5101
Ta�� ; 816.00
3AM00026 R/O BIN-DUMP/RETURN SVCS.
113033 11/7/2003 002632 API WASTE SERVICES R/O BIN-DUMP/RETURN SVCS. 250.00
010.4213.5303
3AS00021 R/O BIN-DUMP/RETURN SVCS.
R/O BIN-DUMP/RETURN SVCS. 250.00
010.4213.5303
Total : 500.00
3875 SRII WATER METERS P.O.#785
113034 11/7/2003 003175 AQUA-METRIC SALES CO SRII WATER METERS P.O.#785 3,301.62
640.4712.5207
Total : 3,301.62
10497 P-901 MIRROR REPAIR
113035 11/7/2003 001758 AUTO GLASS CENTRAL p-901 MIRROR REPAIR 15.00
010.4430.5601
Total : 15.00
103103 RFND PRE-PAID CARD-CHILDRE
113036 11/7/2003 003982 BAGLIO, PAULETTE RFND PRE-PAID CARD-CHILDRE 33.75
010.0000.4602
Total : 33.75
SMOG TEST PW-951
113037 11/7/2003 000070 BEACH FRONT AUTO SERVICE 1149 SMOG TEST PW-951 35.75
010.4301.5601
Page: �
_ _
vchlist Voucher List Page: 2
11/06/2003 9:52:54AM City of Arroyo Grande
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
113037 11/7/2003 000070 BEACH FRONT AUTO SERVICE (Continued)
1153 SMOG TEST PW-39
' SMOG TEST PW-39
010.4301.5601 35.75
1157 LOF, AIRFILTER &COOLANT PW
LOF, AIRFILTER &COOLANT PW
010.4305.5601 151.83
1158 TUNE-UP PW-40
TUNE-UP PW-40
i 1236 010.4305.5601 352.44
i
P-25 SMOG TEST
i P-25 SMOG TEST
010.4430.5601 35.75
Total : 611.52
113038 11/7/2003 000078 BLUEPRINT EXPRESS 25313 COPIES OF MAPS-E GRAND AV
COPIES OF MAPS-E GRAND AV
010.4301.5201 76.68
Total : 76.68
113039 11/7/2003 003598 BRADBURY, KRISTINA 101703 PRESCHOOL SUPPLY REIMB.
i PRESCHOOL SUPPLY REIMB.
010.4423.5253 28.14
Total : 28.14
113040 11/7/2003 000090 BRISCO MILL& LUMBER 116181 BENCH VISE
BENCH VISE
220.4303.5273 32.16
116196 MISC. ITEMS: SCREWS, BIT, LIN
MISC. ITEMS: SCREWS, BIT, LIN
010.4213.5604 47.33
116303 PANEL REPAIR TO RES#4
PANEL REPAIR TO RES#4
640.4712.5609 38.76
Total : 118.25
Page: 2
;
i
. .. .. ... .. . . . . ... _._ . �
. .._........._... .
vchlist Voucher List Page: 3
11/06/2003 9:52:54AM City of Arroyo Grande
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
113041 11/7/2003 000603 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS-DISTRIB.CT 148-380484 PW-236 STARTER MOTOR
PW-236 STARTER MOTOR
612.4610.5603 81.43
SMALL TOOLS
612.4610.5273 25.21
Total : 106.64
113042 11/7/2003 003983 CCAPA 534 CCAPA 2003 STATE CONF(MC
CCAPA 2003 STATE CONF (MC
010.4130.5301 200.00
' Total : 200.00
i
113043 11/7/2003 003988 CENTRAL COAST INDUSTRIES, INC. 24334 2 PORT. TOILETS/HACLOW�EN (
2 PORT. TOILETS/HALLOWEEN (
010.4420.5303 177.87
Total : 177.87
113044 11/7/2003 003411 CLEAN SWEEP JANITORIAL 1163 JANITORIAL SERVICES
JANITORIAL SERVICES
010.4213.5303 3,709.00
Total : 3,709.00
� 113045 11/7/2003 002842 COMMERCIAL MAINTENANCE SVC 1024-2503 LABOR FLOOR STRIP/WAX-WOh
LABOR FLOOR STRIPM/AX-WOII
010.4213.5303 525.00
Total : 525.00
113046 11/7/2003 003599 COMMERCIAL SANITARY SUPPLY 2303201 10-CS H.D. TRASHER LINERS
10-CS H.D. TRASHER LINERS
010.4213.5604 267.05
Total : 267.05
113047 11/7/2003 000195 CRYSTAL SPRINGS WATER CO 9/22-17922 BOTTLED WATER
Page: 3
_ . ._
vchlist Voucher List Page: 4
11/06/2003 9:52:54AM City of Arroyo Grande
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
113047 11/7/2003 000195 CRYSTAL SPRINGS WATER CO (Continued)
BOTTLED WATER
010.4101.5201 16.34
BOTTLED WATER
010.4130.5201 16.33
BOTTLED WATER
010.4120.5201 16.33
Total : 49.00
113048 11/7/2003 003227 DAY, SHANE 110703 CRIME SCENE INV. 11/17-21/03
; CRlME SCENE INV. 11/17-21/03
� 010.4201.5501 58.00
Total : 58.00
113049 11/7/2003 000205 DAYSTAR INDUSTRIES 23372 STREET SWEEPING
STREET SWEEPING
220.4303.5303 2,371.04
STREET SWEEPING
010.4303.5303 3,708.54
Total : 6,079.58
113050 11/7/2003 000210 DIESELRO INC. 10560 CREDIT- INVOICE 10508
CREDIT- INVOICE 10508
612.4610.5601 -37.50
10932 PW-50 SMOG TEST
PW-5Q SMOG TEST
220.4303.5601 35.00
10933 PW-19 SMOG TEST
PW-19 SMOG TEST
220.4303.5601 35.00
10938 PW-41 SMOG TEST
PW-41 SMOG TEST
220.4303.5601 35.00
10952 CEN BATTERY
CEN BATTERY
220.4303.5601 314.58
Page: 4
vchlist Voucher List Page: 5
11/06/2003 9:52:54AM City of Arroyo Grande
Bank code : boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
113050 11/7/2003 000210 DIESELROINC. (Continued) Total : 382.08
113051 11/7/2003 002210 DUNCAN PRINTING CO 6705 2004 LEGAL HOL. CLOSED SIGN
2004 LEGAL HOL. CLOSED SIGN
010.4101.5201 34.86
2004 LEGAL HOL. CLOSED SIGN
010.4130.5201 34.86
2004 LEGAL HOL. CLOSED SIGN
010.4301.5201 34.86
2004 LEGAL HOL. CLOSED SIGN
I 010.4212.5201 34.85
i Total : 139.43
I113052 11/7/2003 000796 FACTORY DIRECT FURNITURE HA4882-BEL BOAT SHAPE TABLE-PD DEPT
BOAT SHAPE TABLE-PD DEPT
010.4201.6201 250.63
Total : 250.63
113053 11/7/2003 001525 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES,INC 576459 METER BUSHING 19EA
METER BUSHING 19EA
640.4712.5610 74.38
Total : 74.38
113054 11/7/2003 003984 FONTE, MARIANNE 102803 OVER PAYMENT: 441 TANNER L
OVER PAYMENT: 441 TANNER L
640.0000.4751 148.13
Total : 148.13
113055 11/7/2003 000262 FRANK'S LOCK& KEY INC 19449 KEYS FOR T.P DISPENSER
KEYS FOR T.P DISPENSER
010.4213.5604 44.51
Total : 44.51
113056 11/7/2003 000605 GAS COMPANY, THE 10/29-140 GAS SERVICES-140 TRAFFIC W
GAS SERVICES-140 TRAFFIC W
010.4145.5401 82.72
Page: 5
vchlist Voucher List Page: 6
11/06/2003 9:52:54AM City of Arroyo Grande
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
113056 11/7/2003 000605 GAS COMPANY, THE (Continued)
10/29-211 GAS SERVICES 211 VERNON ST
GAS SERVICES 211 VERNON ST
010.4145.5401 35.51
Total : 118.23
113057 11/7/2003 003025 GSI SOILS,INC 10350 SOIL TESTING/BRANCH MILL 0
SOIL TESTING/BRANCH MILL 0
350.5650.7401 4,495.00
Total : 4,495.00
� 113058 11/7/2003 000291 HAAKER EQUIPMENT C30736 PIPE RACK FOR PW-51
j PIPE RACK FOR PW-51
� 612.4610.5603 84.36
Total : 84.36
113059 11/7/2003 000303 HENDRICKS, CRAIG 110703 DRE UPDATE
DRE UPDATE
010.4201.5501 58.00
110703A BACKGROUND INV. UPDATE 11
BACKGROUND INV. UPDATE 11
010.4201.5501 479.32
1107036 BACKGRD SURVIVAL FOR COM
BACKGRD SURVIVAL FOR COM
010.4201.5501 403.32
Total : 940.64
113060 11/7/2003 001692 INDUSTRIAL TRUCK BODIES 4478 TOOL BOX 8�METAL STOKE BO
TOOL BOX& METAL STOKE BO
010.4303.6301 988.07
Total : 988.07
113061 11/7/2003 000330 INFORMATION TECH DEPT 3451 DAS SERV WKS 37 & 38
DAS SERV WKS 37&38
010.4140.5303 3,452.40
Totat : 3,452.40
Page: 6
vchlist Voucher List Page: 7
11/0612003 9:52:54AM City of Arroyo Grande
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
113062 11/7/2003 000345 J J'S FOOD COMPANY 139612 OFFICE EXPENSE
OFFICE EXPENSE
010.4212.5255 7•87
139642 OFFICE EXPENSE
OFFICE EXPENSE
010.4301.5201 9•99
Total : 17.86
113063 11/7/2003 003985 KEITL, SHEILA 101703 REFUND-WATER DEP. 420 CUE
REFUND-WATER DEP. 420 CUE
640.0000.2302 4.85
i Total : 4.85
' 113064 11/7/2003 001035 KRAFT, KIM 110303 MILEAGE REIMB. 9/03-10/03
MILEAGE REIMB. 9/03-10/03
010.4425.5303 32.85
Total : 32.85
113065 11/7/2003 003989 LOPEZ SEALING 3485 ASPHALT PATCHING/COMM. CT
ASPHALT PATCHING/COMM. CT
010.4213.5303 700.00
Total : 700.00
113066 11/7/2003 000393 LUCIA MAR UN.SCH.DIST. 040077 BUS TRANS 4 KINDERGARTEN F
BUS TRANS 4 KINDERGARTEN F
010.4425.5303 379.05
Total : 379.05
113067 11/7/2003 000419 MIDAS MUFFLER& BRAKE 5127 P-901 REPAIR/REPLACE MUFFLE
P-901 REPAIR/REPLACE MUFFLE
010.4430.5601 189.06
5151 PW-36 VACUUM BRAKE/AXEL S
PW-36 VACUUM BRAKE/AXEL S
010.4305.5601 504.77
Total : 693.83
113068 11/7/2003 000429 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE 01856633 FASTENERS
Page: 7
_
vchlist Voucher List Page: 8
11106/2003 9:52:54AM City of Arroyo Grande
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
113068 11/7/2003 000429 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE (Continued)
" FASTENERS
010.4420.5605 12.01
21411607 PLUMBING SUPPLIES
PLUMBING SUPPLIES
010.4213.5604 42.40
21411682 FLARE CONNECT
FLARE CONNECT
010.4420.5605 3.70
21412168 PLUMBING SUPPLIES
i PLUMBING SUPPUES
� 010.4420.5605 4.73
1 21412461 BULBS
i BULBS
010.4420.5605 11.52
21413016 CABLE TIES FOR HALLOWEEN C
CABLE TIES FOR HALLOWEEN C
010.4424.5252 29•99
21413266 LADDER 6'
LADDER 6'
010.4420.5273 $5•79
21413989 LIFT STATION#1 HATCH REPAI
LIFT STATION#1 HATCH REPAI
612.4610.5610 19.04
21414142 CORD EXTENSION HALLOWEE
CORD EXTENSION HAI.LOWEE
010.4420.5605 80.94
21414940 BULBS&CORD LOCK EXT..
BULBS 8�CORD LOCK EXT.
010.4420.5605 16.07
21417716 MILLER WAY BOOSTER
MILLER WAY BOOSTER
640.4712.5610 2.36
Page: 8
vchlist Voucher List Page: 9
11/06/2003 9:52:54AM City of Arroyo Grande
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
113068 11/7/2003 000429 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE (Continued)
21417881 KEN GREEN SPRAY
KEN GREEN SPRAY
612.4610.5610 �2•29
21417893 CREDIT: BOLD BARRL
CREDIT: BOLD BARRL
612.4610.5610 -11.11
21419215 SAND PAPER&SATIN BLACK E
SAND PAPER &SATIN BLACK E
; 220.4303.5613 18.56
I Total : 328.29
i
i
I 113069 11/7/2003 000444 MUSTANG TREE CARE 2572 NEWPORT AVE. TREE TRIMMI
NEWPORT AVE. TREE TRIMMI
I 010.4420.5303 Total : 1,600 00
113070 11/7/2003 002927 NATIONAL RESOURCE SAFETY 59690 SHIPPING: SAFETY VIDEOS
SHIPPING: SAFETY VIDEOS
220.4303.5501 19.40
Total : 19.40
i 113071 11/7/2003 001162 NICKSON'S MACHINE SHOP,INC. 69155 REPR MOTOR/UFT STATION#1
REPR MOTOR/LIFT STATION#1
612.4610.5610 799.50
' Total : 799.50
113072 11/7/2003 000481 PACIFIC GAS& ELECTRIC 10/21-019097 ELECTRIC
ELECTRIC
010.4304.5402 50.93
10/21-194097 ELECTRIC
ELECTRIC
010.4304.5402 15,311.81
Total : 15,362.74
113073 11/7/2003 003987 PATRICK, FRED&SUSAN 102203 . OVR-PYMT-841 PEARL DR
Page: 9
vchlist Voucher List Page: 10
11/06/2003 9:52:54AM City of Arroyo Grande
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
113073 11/7/2003 003987 PATRICK, FRED 8�SUSAN (Continued)
OVR-PYMT-841 PEARI. DR
640.0000.4751 3.48
Total : 3.48
113074 11/7/2003 003981 POLICE EXEC. RESEARCH FORUM 1263 POP CONF. REGISTRATION (V. J
POP CONF. REGlSTRATION (V. J
010.4201.5501 469.00
Total : 469.00
� 113075 11/7/2003 003986 PORTER INDUSTRIES 102803 OVR-PYMT 336 S HALCYON RD
� OVR-PYMT 336 S HALCYON RD
1 640.0000.4751 334.31
Total : 334.31
I 113076 11/7/2003 000513 PRYOR, BEAU 110703 CRIME SCENE INV. 11/17-21/03
CRIME SCENE INV. 11/17-21/03
010.4201.5501 58.00
Total : 58.00
113077 11/7/2003 002792 PULITZER C.C.NEWSPAPER 151807 NOTICE PUB. HEARING DCA 02
NOTICE PUB. HEARING DCA 02
� 010.4002.5301 54.00
151810 NOTICE PUB. HEARING BUS LIC
NOTICE PUB. HEARING BUS LIC
010.4002.5301 51.00
151811 NOTICE PUB HEARING APPEAL-
NOTICE PUB HEARING APPEAL-
010.4002.5301 45.00
151812 NOTICE PUB HEARING APPEAL-
NOTICE PUB HEARING APPEAL-
010.4002.5301 48.00
151813 NOTICE PUB HEARING-IMPACT I
NOTICE PUB HEARING-IMPACT I
010.4002.5301 48.00
Page: 10
vchlist Voucher List Page: 11
11/06/2003 9:52:54AM City of Arroyo Grande
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
113077 11/7/2003 002792 PULITZER C.C.NEWSPAPER (Continued) Total : 246.00
113078 11/7/2003 000569 SAN LUIS PAINTS 495440 FIELD MARKING PAINT
FIELD MARKING PAINT
010.4430.5255 192.36
Total : 192.36
113079 11/7/2003 000541 SANCHEZ, DAVID 102403 LOGING - BURBANK 10/19-24/03
LOGING-BURBANK 10/19-24/03
010.4201.5501 544.50
102903 LODGING-BURBANK 10/26-29
j LODGING- BURBANK 10/26-29
010.4201.5501 326.70
110703 CRIME SCENE INV. 11/17-21/03
CRIME SCENE INV. 11/17-21/03
010.4201.5501 58.00
Total : 929.20
113080 11/7/2003 003513 SHRM 2001525838 MBSHP SOCIETY HUMAN RES. ti
MBSHP SOCIETY HUMAN RES. ti
010.4101.5503 160.00
Total : 160.00
113081 11/7/2003 000613 STATEWIDE SAFETY 8�SIGNS 33101 2 1/2"V CLAMPS
2 1/2"V CLAMPS
220.4303.5613 300.30
33102 FLAT SIGN CAP
FLAT SIGN CAP
220.4303.5613 320.41
33103 12 BARRICADES 10/27/03
12 BARRICADES 10/27/03
010.4420.5605 450.45
Total : 1,071.16
113082 11/7/2003 000620 STREATOR PIPE& SUPPLY 368114 PIPE FITTINGS/MILLER WAY BOc
Page: 11
vchlist Voucher List Page: 12
11/06/2003 9:52:54AM City of Arroyo Grande
Bank code : boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
113082 11/7/2003 000620 STREATOR PIPE 8�SUPPLY (Continued)
PIPE FITTINGS/MILLER WAY BOc
640.4712.5610 18.35
Total : 18.35
113083 11/7/2003 000636 TERBORCH, RICK 100903 10/20-25/03 ADD'L COST
10/20-25/03 ADD'L COST
010.4201.5501 203.90
Total : 203.90
i 113084 11/7/2003 002370 TITAN INDUSTRIAL 14845 ANTIBACTERIAL SOAP
i ANTIBACTERIAL SOAP
612.4610.5255 86.49
14959 BOOT LINERS FOR RUBBER BO
BOOT LINERS FOR RUBBER BO
220.4303.5255 136.81
Total : 223.30
113085 11/7/2003 000641 TOSTE CONSTRUCTION 2095 80 GAL OF SS-1H OIL
80 GAL OF SS-1 H OIL
220.4303.5613 120.00
Total : 120.00
113086 11/7/2003 000669 UNION ASPHALT INC 127998 ASPHALT
ASPHALT
220.4303.5613 363.25
128150 ASPHALT
ASPHALT
220.4303.5613 337.61
Totai : 700.86
113087 11/7/2003 000671 UNITED GREEN MARK,INC. 3782669 SERV FOUNTAIN - KINGO PARK
SERV FOUNTAIN - KINGO PARK
010.4420.5605 12.95
Page: 12
__ _
vchlist VOUCher List Page: 13
11/06/2003 9:52:54AM City of Arroyo Grande
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
113087 11/7/2003 000671 UNITED GREEN MARK,INC. (Continued)
3787106 PIPE FITTINGS-CREEKSIDE ARE
PIPE FITTINGS-CREEKSIDE ARE
010.4420.5605 4.60
3787186 RAINBIRD-QUICK COUPLER VAL
RAINBIRD-QUICK COUPLER VAL
010.4430.5605 52.55
3787306 RPR FITTINGS-SOTO SPORTS
RPR FITTINGS-SOTO SPORTS
010.4430.5605 31.15
i 3787312 BALL VALVE-SOTO SPORTS
BALL VALVE-SOTO SPORTS
010.4430.5605 14.16
3787373 RPR COUPLING, VALVE-PARKV
RPR COUPLING,VALVE-PARKV
010.4420.5605 64.46
3787375 CEMEMT& PIPE-SOTO SPOR
CEMEMT 8� PIPE-SOTO SPOR
010.4430.5605 43.65
Total : 223.52
113088 11/7/2003 000685 WALLACE&ASSOC., JOHN 12446 GEN CONSULTING SERV
GEN CONSULTING SERV
010.4301.5303 4,081.18
12447 WATER CONSERVATION PROG
WATER CONSERVATION PROG
350.5409.7701 805.00
12448 EL CAMPO/ROUTE 101 PSR
EL CAMPO/ROUTE 101 PSR
350.5616.7301 401.00
12449 BRANCH MILL ROAD OVERLAY
BRANCH MILL ROAD OVERLAY
350.5650.7501 20.00
Page: 13
vchlist Voucher List Page: 14
11/0612003 9:52:54AM City of Arroyo Grande
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
113088 11/7/2003 000685 WALLACE &ASSOC., JOHN (Continued)
12450 GRAND AVE, PHASE III
GRAND AVE, PHASE III
350.5812.7301 16,850.93
12451 RESERVOIR NO 1 DESIGN
RESERVOIR NO 1 DESIGN
350.5903.7501 650.00
Total : 22,808.11
113089 11/7/2003 000687 WAYNE'S TIRE 736396 P-5 TIRES: SOTO SPORTS COMF
i P-5 TIRES: SOTO SPORTS COMF
� 010.4430.5601 75.66
736426 2 NEW TIRES PW-52
2 NEW TIRES PW-52
640.4712.5601 225.24
736463 BRAKE SERV
BRAKE SERV
220.4303.5601 368.77
Total : 669.67
113090 11/7/2003 000699 WILSON ELECTRIC COMPANY, LEE 2 PYMT#2/SOTO SPORTS COMPL
PYMT#2/SOTO SPORTS COMPL
350.5514.7001 134,842.50
Total : 134,842.50
113091 11/7/2003 002324 ZIGELMAN, MICHAEL 110703 CRIME SCENE INV 11/17-21/03
CRIME SCENE INV 11/17-21/03
010.4201.5501 58.00
Total : 58.00
61 Vouchers for bank code: boa Bank total : 211,199.05
61 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 211,199.05
Page: 14
AiTACIL"1EidT 3
vchlist Voucher List Page: 1
11/13/2003 9:16:39AM City of Arroyo Grande
Bank code: boa
�
i Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
�
{ 113092 11/�4/2003 001050 AMERICAN TEMPS 36290 WE 10/17 K. ELY
� WE 10/17 K. ELY
010.4120.5303 378.10
36356 WE 10/24 K. ELY
WE 10/24 K. ELY
010.4120.5303 796.00
36427 WE 10/31 K. ELY
WE 10/31 K. ELY
010.4120.5303 766.15
Total : 1,940.25
i 113093 11/14/2003 000049 ATCO INTERNATIONAL 10021294 2 CASES HAND CLEANER
2 CASES HAND CLEANER
010.4305.5255 228.00
Total : 228.00
113094 11/14/2003 000053 B8B STEEL&SUPPLY 195057 2 1/2 SCH 40 PIPE
2 1/2 SCH 40 PIPE
220.4303.5613 538.29
' Total : 538.29
113095 11/14/2003 000069 BAUER COMPRESSORS,lNC. 48041 O-RING
O-RING
010.4211.5601 12.06
Total : 12.06
113096 11/14/2003 000090 BRISCO MILL& LUMBER 116298 SHELVES, PLUNGERS, CLEANE
SHELVES, PLUNGERS, CLEANE
010.4213.5604 106.85
116636 TOOLS
TOOLS
220.4303.5273 132.56
MISC ITEMS
220.4303.5613 86.80
Page: 1
vchlist Voucher List Page: 2
11/13/2003 9:16:39AM City of Arroyo Grande
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
113096 11/14/2003 000090 BRISCO MILL& LUMBER (Continued) Total : 326.21
113097 11/14/2003 000094 BRUMIT DIESEL,INC 64930 VALVE
VALVE
010.4211.5601 142.43
Total : 142.43
113098 11/14/2003 002915 C.C.CITIES SELF-INS.FUND 102203 REF: W/COMP OVERPAY-CABRI
REF: W/COMP OVERPAY-CABRI
010.0000.4805 2,109.70
Total : 2,109.70
113099 11/14/2003 000156 C.COAST TAXI CAB SERVICES 103103 TAXI SERVICE 10/15-10/31/03
TAXI SERVICE 10/15-10/31/03
225.4553.5507 1,196.75
Total : 1,196.75
113100 11/14/2003 001250 C.T.I.NALUELINE 337722 TONER FOR 2510 COPIER
TONER FOR 2510 COPIER
010.4301.5201 170.53
Total : 170.53
113101 11/14/2003 000603 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS-DISTRIB.CT 148-378672 FIBER GLASS REPAIR
FIBER GLASS REPAIR
010.4211.5601 16.06
148-379268 LAMP&SPARK PLUB WIRE
LAMP &SPARK PLUB WIRE
010.4211.5601 7.08
148-385219 CLEANING SUPPLIES
CLEANING SUPPLIES
640.4712.5601 20.86
148-385592 BATTERY CLEANER
BATTERY CLEANER
220.4303.5601 15.27
Page: 2
vchlist Voucher List Page: 3
11/13/2003 9:16:39AM City of Arroyo Grande
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
113101 11/14/2003 000603 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS-DISTRIB.CT (Continued)
148-387671 COOLANT SUPPLIES
COOLANT SUPPLIES
010.4211.5601 158.34
148-390929 T-HANDLE TWIST
T-HANDLE TWIST
220.4303.5603 17.67
Total : 235.28
913102 91/14/2003 000168 ClTY NATIONAL BANK 02091AF-2 LEASE PURCH. EDEN INFORUM
LEASE PURCH. EDEN INFORUM
010.4145.5803 12,534.02
LEASE PURCH. EDEN INFORUM
612.4610.5803 1,735.48
LEASE PURCH. EDEN INFORUM
640.4712.5803 5,013.62
Totai : 19,283.12
113103 11/14/2003 000177 COASTAL REPROGRAPHICS 56810 FIRE STATION EXP. FULL SZ PL
FIRE STATION EXP. FULL SZ PL
350.5410.7301 772.g7
Total: 772.97
113104 11/14/2003 002868 COTA, MICHELLE 110703 DARE IN SERVICE
DARE IN SERVICE
010.4201.5501 391.24
Total : 391.24
113105 11/14/2003 003992 CPRS DIS7RICT VIII 110403 CONF REG. DAN, DOUG &CAR
CONF REG. DAN, DOUG &CAR
010.4421.5501 105.00
Total : 105.00
113106 11/14/2003 000196 CUESTA EQUIPMENT CO 277547 PIPE CUTTER
Page: 3
. �
vchlist Voucher List Page: 4
11113/2003 9:16:39AM City of Arroyo Grande
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
113106 11/14/2003 000196 CUESTA EQUIPMENT CO (Continued)
PIPE CUTTER
640.4712.5273 219.33
RIDGID MODEL#226
612.4610.5273 219.32
Total : 438.65
113107 11/14/2003 000208 DEWAR,INC., J.B. 802182 PUMP, OIL CONTAINER, FILTER
PUMP, OIL CONTAINER, FILTER
010.4211.5608 168.90
802212 FILTER, TECHRON CONCENTRA
FILTER, TECHRON CONCENTRA
010.4211.5608 91.76
Total : 260.66
113108 11/14/2003 003990 DIAMOND FLOOR COVERINGS 1296 BATHROOM FLOORS
BATHROOM FLOORS
010.4213.6401 977.70
Totai : 977.70
113109 11/14/2003 000210 DIESELRO INC. 10965 SERVICE PW-52 IZUZU TRUCK
SERVICE PW-52 IZUZU TRUCK
640.4712.5601 307.67
Total : 307.67
113110 11/14/2003 003998 DJM/BORBON CONSTRUCTION, INC. 1-FIRE STAT. 1 ST PYMT-FIRE STATION EXPA
1ST PYMT-FIRE STATION EXPA
350.5410.7001 191,682.76
Total : 191,682.76
113111 11/14/2003 000225 EARTH SYSTEMS PACIFIC 210704 FIRE STATION EXP. MATERIAL T
FIRE STATION EXP. MATERIAL T
350.5410.7401 256.25
Total : 256.25
113112 11/14/2003 000904 EDEN SYSTEMS,INC. 18038 EDEN DATE CONVERSION P/R
Page: 4
�
vchlist Voucher List Page: 5
11/1312003 9:16:39AM City of Arroyo Grande
s
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
113112 11/14/2003 000904 EDEN SYSTEMS,INC. (Continued)
EDEN DATE CONVERSION P/R
0'10.4120.5597 687.50
18039 EDEN TRAINING P/R
EDEN TRAINING P/R
010.4120.5597 2,125.00
EDEN INSTALL SVCS P/R
010.4120.5597 731.31
Total : 3,543.81
113113 11/14/2003 001525 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES,INC 549065 CLA-VAL REPAIR KITS
CLA-VAL REPAIR KITS
640.4712.5610 852.64
574211 2"SHELL CUTTER
2"SHELL CUTTER
640.4712.5273 123.23
579236 3" BALL VALVE PW-51
3" BALL VALVE PW-51
612.4610.5603 94.35
579420 BRASS FITTINGS
BRASS FITTINGS
640.4712.5610 218.32
579515 3" BRASS VALVE PW-51
3" BRASS VALVE PW-51
612.4610.5603 327.91
Total : 1,616.45
113114 11/14/2003 000247 FIBICH, TERENCE 102903 FUEL(OLD FIRE ASSiGN)
FUEL(OLD FIRE ASSIGN)
010.4211.5608 6.00
Total : 6.00
113115 11/14/2003 000267 GALL'S INC 566918960 NAME TAGS
NAME TAGS
010.4211.5272 28.49
Page: 5
vChlist Voucher List Page: 6
11/13/2003 9:16:39AM City of Arroyo Grande
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
113115 11/14/2003 000267 GALL'S INC (Continued)
566977510 TRUCK FIRST AID KIT
TRUCK FIRST AID KIT
010.4211.5206 118.22
Total : 146.71
113116 11/14/2003 000605 GAS COMPANY, THE 10/31-200E GAS SERVICES-200 E BRANCH
GAS SERVICES-200 E BRANCH
010.4145.5401 25.99
10/39-208E GAS SERVICES-205 E BRANCH
GAS SERVICES-205 E BRANCH
010.4145.5401 25.12
10/31-214E GAS SERVICES-214 E BRANCH
GAS SERVICES-214 E BRANCH
010.4145.5401 16.46
11/3-1500W GAS SERVICES
GAS SERVICES
010.4145.5401 9.21
11/5-200N GAS SERVICES
GAS SERVICES
010.4145.5401 110.48
Total : 187.26
113117 11/14/2003 000272 GIBBS INTERNATIONAL TRUCKS,INC 55777N AIR SYSTEM FOR 6695
AIR SYSTEM FOR 6695
010.4211.5601 56.59
Total : 56.59
113118 11/14/2003 003993 GREGORY, GLADYS 110403 OVR PYMT-802 PARK WAY
OVR PYMT-802 PARK WAY
640.0000.4751 105.30
Total : 105.30
113119 11/14/2003 003025 GSI SOILS,INC 10349 E GRAND AVE PHS. III SOIL TES
E GRAND AVE PHS. III SOIL TES
350.5812.7401 490.00
Page: 6
�
vchlist Voucher List Page: 7
11/13/2003 9:16:39AM City of Arroyo Grande
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor tnvoice PO# Description/Account Amount
113119 11/14/2003 003025 GSI SOILS,INC (Continued) Total : 490.00
113120 11/14/2003 000943 HAGLUND, NANCY 110303 OFFICE EXPENSE
OFFICE EXPENSE
010.4211.5501 141.35
Total : 141.35
113121 11/14/2003 000297 HANCOCK COLLEGE, ALLAN BS030685 ENROLL FEES-13 FIREFIGHTER
ENROLL FEES-13 FIREFIGHTER
010.4211.55Q1 143.00
Total : 143.00
113122 11/14/2003 001237 HANSON AGGREGATES 92751 COBBLE STONE
� COBBLE STONE
220.4303.5613 209.58
92752 COBBLE STONE
COBBLE STONE
220.4303.5613 239.97
92788 ASPHALT
ASPHALT
220.4303.5613 458.95
Totai : 908.50
113123 11/14/2003 000301 HEACOCK WELDING NORTH 14495 PW-36 HITCH BALL 2"
PW-36 HITCH BALL 2"
010.4305.5603 13.94
Total : 13.94
113124 11/14/2003 002820 INDOFF,INC. 1097071A OFFICE SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES
010.4421.5201 395.90
Total : 395.90
113125 11/14/2003 000343 IRRIGATION WEST 0014400A MISS'D SALES TAX ON ORIGINA
MISS'D SALES TAX ON ORIGINA
640.4712.5610 4.47
Page: 7
vchlist Voucher List Page: 8
11/1312003 9:16:39AM City of Arroyo Grande
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
113125 11/14/2003 000343 IRRIGATION WEST (Continued) Total : 4.47
113126 11/14/2003 003903 LAHR ELECTRIC MOTORS 1023 GE 75PH MOTOR-WELL#8 (PO#
GE 75PH MOTOR-WELL#8 (PO#
640.4712.5610 4,071.87
Total : 4,071.87
113127 11/14/2003 000410 MASTERLINE AIR SYSTEMS 13222 MANIFOLD, GAUGES &SRV
MANIFOLD, GAUGES &SRV
010.4211.5603 322.46
Total : 322.46
113128 11/14/2003 001120 MAXIMUS,INC. 1019256-001 03/04 PROF. SERVICES
03/04 PROF. SERVICES
010.4145.5303 772.00
Total : 772.00
113129 11/14/2003 000429 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE 21413634 TAPE MASK, SCBA REPAIR
TAPE MASK, SCBA REPAIR
010.4211.5603 65.96
� 21414086 CONNECTORS
CONNECTORS
010.4211.5603 25.72
21414409 ELBOW ABS DMV, COUPLE FLE
ELBOW ABS DMV, COUPLE FLE
010.4211.5255 37.68
21414491 COUPLE ABS DMV
COUPLE ABS DMV
010.4211.5255 1.81
21415669 SURGE OUTLET, CAP ABS DMV:
SURGE OUTLET, CAP ABS DMV�
010.4211.5255 14.46
21418181 KNIFE-SNAP BLADE
KNIFE-SNAP BLADE
010.4212.5255 5.34
Page: 8
vchlist Voucher List Page: 9
11/1312003 9:16:39AM City of Arroyo Grande
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
113129 11/14/2003 000429 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE (Continued)
21419286 GUTTER END CAPS, BLDG MAT
GUTTER END CAPS, BLDG MAT
010.4211.5255 3.08
21422309 TAPE
TAPE
010.4211.5603 15.41
21422489 DEORDERIZER
DEORDERIZER
010.4211.5255 6.42
21422972 KEYS
KEYS
010.4211.5255 1.71
21423568 MASON JAR
MASON JAR
640.4712.5255 7.50
21423859 HEATER
HEATER
010.4305.5255 21.44
21424002 ROLLER TRIM, METAL BUCKET
ROLLER TRIM, METAL BUCKET
640.4712.5273 10.71
ROLLER TRIM, SAFETY BLUE E
640.4712.5610 48.21
21424302 AI R/VAC PARTS
AIRNAC PARTS
640.4712.5610 31.16
Total : 296.61
113130 11/14/2003 000441 MULLAHEY FORD 993028 SOCKET& DOOR HANDLE
SOCKET& DOOR HANDLE
010.4211.5603 34.86
Total : 34.86
113131 11/14/2003 002849 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS 933066312-10 CELL-FIRE EMERG.
Page: 9
vchiist Voucher List Page: 10
11/13/2003 9:16:39AM City of Arroyo Grande
Bank code : boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
; 113131 11/14/2003 002849 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS (Continued)
� CELL- FIRE EMERG.
010.4211.5403 107.64
CELL-BLDG & LIFE SAFETY DIV
010.4212.5403 35.88
Total : 143.52
113132 11/14/2003 001886 OFFICEMAX CREDIT PLAN 2041J274 OFFICE SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES
010.4120.5201 27.21
897J272 OFFICE SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES
010.4120.5201 6.40
Total : 33.61
113133 11/14/2003 003027 PAPICH CONSTRUCTION 5-E GRAND 5TH PYMT-E GRAND/ELM ST PH
5TH PYMT-E GRAND/ELM ST PH
350.5812.7001 112,785.73
Total : 112,785.73
113134 11/14/2003 000516 PUBLIC SAFETY CENTER 33186DIN 2 PAIR OF BOOTS
2 PAIR OF BOOTS
010.4211.5272 245.13
331861N TURNOUT GEAR-BAG &STRA
TURNOUT GEAR- BAG &STRA
010.4211.5272 31.51
Total : 276.64
113135 11/14/2003 000523 R&T EMBROIDERY,INC 023507 HATS-PARKS DEPT
HATS- PARKS DEPT
010.4420.5143 169.88
HATS-BLDG MAINT.
010.4213.5143 31.49
Total : 201.37
113136 11/14/2003 000816 RITTERBUSH, JIM 102803 REIMB. CALIF. FIRE CHIEF'S LU�
Page: 10
vchlist Voucher List Page: 11
11/13/2003 9:16:39AM City of Arroyo Grande
Bank code: boa
; Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
113136 11/14/2003 000816 RITTERBUSH, JIM (Continued)
� REIMB. CALIF. FIRE CHIEF'S LU�
010.4211.5501 10.00
Totai : 10.00
113137 11/14/2003 000810 RRM DESIGN GROUP 09031002508 DESIGN SERV-FIRE STATION E
DESiGN SERV-FIRE STATION E
350.5410.7501 4,498.63
Total : 4,498.63
113138 11/14/2003 003991 S&S SEEDS, INC. 0-17400-03 RANCHO GRANDE PARK-SEE
RANCHO GRANDE PARK-SEE
' 350.5512.7001 201.46
Total : 201.46
113139 11/14/2003 002292 SANDAG 102803 TRIP GENERATION MANUAL
TRIP GENERATION MANUAL
010.4301.5255 35.00
Total : 35.00
113140 11/14/2003 003108 SBC/MCI T1663068 5400
5400
010.4145.5403 1,823.28
T1840813 2345
2345
010.4145.5403 47.56
T1848996 0379 PAYROLL
0379 PAYROLL
010.4145.5403 17.44
T1849000 1935 ALARM
1935 ALARM
640.4710.5403 28.90
T1849001 2041 ALARM
2041 ALARM
010.4145.5403 14.31
Page: 11
vchlist Voucher List Page: 12
11/13/2003 9:16:39AM City of Arroyo Grande
Bank code : boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
113140 11/14/2003 003108 SBC/MCI (Continued)
T1849008 5400
5400
010.4145.5403 1,788.62
Tota1 : 3,720.11
113141 11/14/2003 003997 SCHIESL, MARK 110303 RFND-WATER DEP. 419 SPANI
RFND-WATER DEP. 419 SPANI
640.0000.2302 11.40
Total : 11.40
113142 11/14/2003 003838 SILVAS OIL COMPANY,INC 278545 1200 GL#2 RED DIESEL
1200 GL#2 RED DIESEL
010.0000.1202 1,716.84
Total : 1,716.84
113143 11/14/2003 000552 SLO CNTY AUDITOR-CONTROLLER 102403A LAFCO APPORTIONMENT
LAFCO APPORTIONMENT
010.4145.5503 1,362.73
Total : 1,362.73
113144 11/14/2003 003343 SNAP-ON INDUSTRIAL 23V/12114659 SCREW DRIVERS
SCREW DRIVERS
010.4211.5273 184.20
Total : 184.20
113145 11/14/2003 000613 STATEWIDE SAFETY&SIGNS 33179 SIGNS-RANCHO GRANDE PRK/
SIGNS-RANCHO GRANDE PRK/
010.4420.5605 579.15
Total : 579.15
113146 11/14/2003 000620 STREATOR PIPE &SUPPLY 368187 PIPE FOR STATION RENOVATIO
PIPE FOR STATION RENOVATIO
350.5410.7001 10.53
Total : 10.53
113147 11/14/2003 002904 TEMPLETON UNIFORMS 10335 UNIFORMS-PANTS&SHIRTS
Page: 12
��c��� � �
ATTACEi�•IEIQT 4
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
DEPARTMENTAL LABOR DISTRIBUTION
PAY PERIOD
10/24/03 -11106/03
11/14/03
FUND 010 342,694.51 Salaries Full time 169,759.14
FUND 220 15,159.83 Salaries Part-Time-PPT 21,658.48
FUND 284 877.80 Salaries Part-Time-TPT 31,597.89
FUND 612 5,038.38 Salaries OverTime 26,347.01
FUND 640 12,762.12 Salaries Standby 369.62
376,532.64 Holiday Pay 6,632.54
Sick Pay 2,892.52
Annual Leave Buyback -
Vacation Buyback -
Sick Leave Buyback -
Vacation Pay 9,546.87
Comp Pay 6,375.58
Annual Leave Pay 5,739.89
PERS Retirement 36,923.23
Social Security 19,365.11
PARS Retirement 302.27
State Disability Ins. 914.89
Deferred Compensation 700.00
Health Insurance 30,440.07
Dental Insurance 4,286.20
Vision Insurance 971.33
Life Insurance 735.00
Long Term Disability 875.00
Uniform Allowance - '
Car Allowance -
Council Expense -
Employee Assistance -
Boot Allowance -
Motor Pay 100.00
376,532.64
_._._.. _.., .
� pRRO�� ���■
° ��+
� INCORPORATEO 9Z MEMORANDUM
V T
�c JULY 10, 1911 *
c4��FORN�P
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: LYNDA K. SNODGRASS, DIRECTOR OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF ACCEPTANCE OF CASH FLOW ANALYSIS
AND APPROVAL OF INTERFUND ADVANCES FROM THE WATER
FACILITY FUND
DATE: NOVEMBER 25, 2003
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City Council:
• Accept the October 2003 cash report,
• Approve the interFund advance of $728,418 from the Water Facility Fund to
cover cash deficits in other funds as of October 31 2003.
FUNDING:
No outside funding is required.
DISCUSSION:
Revenues in individual funds are earned in uneven amounts during each month of the
year; however, expenses in these funds are paid out in fairly consistent amounts.
These differences cause some funds to have temporary cash deficits while waiting for
revenues to equal expenses.
For investment purposes, the City pools cash in individual funds into one bank account.
Since the City pools the cash of all funds, individual fund shortages are not readily
apparent. However, in reality, funds with excess cash are "financing" the shortages in
other funds until revenues equal expenses. This report is prepared to present to the
City Council individual fund shortages and the funds financing those shortages. By
year-end, all funds are expected to have positive cash balances.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for City Council consideration:
- Approve staff recommendation and accept the annual report;
- Do not approve staff recommendation and decline the annual report;
- Modify as appropriate and approve staff s recommendation;
- Provide direction to staff.
Attachment:
A— Cash Balance/Interfund Advance Report
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
CASH BALANCE/INTERFUND ADVANCE REPORT
At October 31,2003
Balance at Recommended Revised
Fund 10/31/03 Advances Balance
O10 General Fund 1,179,796 1,179,796
210 Fire Protection Impact Fees 1'75,399 175,399
212 Police Protection Impact Fees 32,278 32,27g
213 Park Development 535,179 535,179
214 Park Improvement 111,247 111,247
215 Recreation Community Center 8,837 g,837
217 Landscape Maintenance 31,204 31,204
220 Street(Gas Tax)Fund 41,555 41,555
221 Traffic Congestion Relief 42,800 42,800
222 Traffic Signalization 464,500 464,500
223 Traffic Circulation 462,996 462,996
224 Transportation Facility Impact 1,854,444 1,854,444
225 Transportation 60,715 60,715
226 Water Neutralization Impact 733,638 733,638
230 Construction Tax 104,667 104,667
231 Drainage Facility 26,159 26,159
232 In-Lieu Affordable Housing 851,201 851,201
241 Lopez Facility Fund 1,074,680 1,074,680
250 CDBG Fund 544 544
271 State COPS Block Grant Fund (22,862) 22,862 0
272 Calif.Law Enf.Technology Grant (7,259) 7,259 0
279 00-01 Fed Local Law Enforcement Grant 66 66
284 Redevelopment Agency (23,478) 23,478 0
285 Redevelopment Set Aside 129,218 129,218
350 Capital Projects (667,866) 667,$66 0
612 Sewer Fund (6,953) 6,953 0
634 Sewer Facility 148,042 148,042
640 Water Fund 2,786,120 2,786,120
641 Lopez 232,771 232,771
642 Water Facility 1,280,460 (728,418) 552,042
751 Downtown Parking 20,126 20,126
760 Sanitation District Fund 43,579 43,579
Total City Wide Cash 11,703,803 0 11,703,803
THE ABOVE LISTING ARE THE CASH BALANCES SHOWN IN THE GENERAL LEDGER
OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE AS OF OCTOBER 31,2003
da K. Snodgrass
irector of Financi Services
� pitROYp �■C■
° ��
� INCOfiPOAATED�Z •
y ° MEMORANDUM
* JULY 10. 1911 *
c4��FOaN�P
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: LYNDA K. SNODGRASS, DIRECTOR OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
SUBJECT: ESTABLISH CAREER FIRE FIGHTERS AS A SEPARATE GROUP IN
CALPERS MEDICAL INSURANCE. PROGRAM
DATE: NOVEMBER 25, 2003
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City Council adopt a resolution establishing the Career Fire
Fighters as a separate group in the CaIPERS medical insurance program.
FUNDING:
There is no fiscal impact from this action.
DISCUSSION:
On October 28, 2003 the City Council adopted two resolutions to share health insurance
costs between the City and the Police Officer's Association (AGPOA) and the Career
Firefighters Association. The two employee groups agreed to pay 25% of the increased
premium cost as of January 1, 2004.
CaIPERS noti�ed the City that both resolutions are effective on January 1, 2004.
However, the City used the incorrect resolution format for the Career Firefighters. The
City used a "change" resolution format for both groups, rather than a "change" for the
Arroyo Grande Police Officer's Association and a "new" resolution for the Career
Firefighters Association. Because the City had not previously segregated the Career
Fire Fighters into a separate group, the change resolution format was not correct. The
attached "new group" resolution meets CaIPERS standards, establishes the new group,
and establishes coverage for future retirees in agreement with retiree coverage under
other City groups.
The adoption of this resolution documents the City's original intention of establishing a
separate Career Firefighter group and sharing the premium increases. This resolution
is attached for City Council consideration and approval is respectFully recommended.
CITY COUNCIL
ESTABLISH CAREER FIRE FIGHTERS GROUP
NOVEMBER 25, 2003
PAGE 2
Alternatives
The fallowing alternatives are provided for City Council consideration:
- Approve staff recommendation by adopting the resolution;
- Do not approve staff s recommendation;
- Modify and approve staff's recommendation;
- Provide staff direction.
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ARROYO GRANDE ELECTING TO BE SUBJECT TO
PUBUC EMPLOYEES' MEDICAL AND HOSPITAL CARE
ACT FOR MEMBERS OF THE � ARROYO GRANDE
CAREER FIREFIGHTERS ASSOCIATION AND
ESTABLISHING THE CITY'S CONTRIBUTION FOR
EMPLOYEES AND ANNUITANTS AT DIFFERENT
AMOUNTS
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 22850.3 provides that a contracting agency
may elect upon proper application to participate under the Public Employees' Medical
and Hospital Care Act with respect to a recognized employee organization only; and
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 22857 provides that a contracting agency may
fix the amount of the employer's contribution for employees and the employer's
contribution for annuitants at different amounts provided that the monthly contribution
for annuitants shall be annually increased by an amount not less than 5 percent of the
monthly contribution for employees, until such time as the amounts are equal; and
WHEREAS, The City of Arroyo Grande, hereinafter referred to as Public Agency is a
local agency contracting with the Public Employees' Retirement System; and �
WHEREAS, The Public Agency desires to obtain for the members of the Arroyo Grande
Career Firefighters Association, who are employees and annuitants of the agency, the
benefit of the Act and to accept the liabilities and obligations of an employer under the
Act and Regulations.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
1. That the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande does hereby elect to be
subject to the provisions of the Act; and
2. That the employer's contribution for each employee shall be the amount
necessary to pay the full cost of his/her enrollment, including the enrollment of
his/her family members in a health benefits plan up to a maximum of $303.22
with respect to employee enrolled for self alone, $606.45 for an employee
� enrolled for self and one family member, and $788.39 for an employee enrolled
for self and two or more family members, plus administrative fees and
Contingency Reserve Fund assessments; and
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 2
3. That the employer's contribution for each annuitant shall be the amount
necessary to pay the cost of his enrollment, including the enrollment of his family
members, in a health benefits plan up to a maximum of same contribution
amounts per month as the SEIU Local 620 Group; and
4. That the employer's contribution for each annuitant shall be increased annually .
by five (5%) percent of the monthly contribution for employees, until such time as
the contributions are equal; and that the contributions for employees and
annuitants shall be in addition to those amounts contributed by the Public Agency '
for administrative fees and to the Contingency Reserve Fund; and
5. That the City Council appoint and direct, and it does hereby appoint and direct,
the Director of Administrative Services to file with the Board of Administration of
the Public Employees' Retirement System a verified copy of this Resolution, and
to perform on behalf of said Public Agency all functions required of it under the
Act and Regulations of the Board of Administration; and
6. That coverage under the Act be effective on January 1, 2004.
On motion of Council Member , seconded by Council Member
, and on the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this day of
,2003.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 3
TONY M. FERRARA, MAYOR
ATTEST:
KELLY WETMORE, DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES/
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY
8.d.
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 11, 2003
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 215 EAST BRANCH STREET
ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA
1. CALL TQ ORDER
Mayor/Chair Ferrara called the Regular City Council/Redevelopment Agency meeting
to order at 7:00 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
City Council: Council Member Lubin, Costello, Mayor Pro Tem Dickens, and
Mayor Ferrara were present. Council Member Runels was
absent.
RDA: Board Member Lubin, Costello, Vice Chair Dickens, and Chair
Ferrara were present. Board Member Runels was absent.
City Staff Present: City Manager Adams, City Attorney Carmel, Director of
Administrative Services Wetmore, Director of Financial Services
Snodgrass, Director of Building and Fire/Fire Chief Fibich, Acting
Community Development Director Heffemon, and Assistant
Planner Bergman.
3. FLAG SALUTE
Steve Champeau, Jr. Vice Commander, VFW Post 28/29, led the Flag Salute.
4. INVOCATION
Mayor/Chair Ferrara delivered the invocation.
5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
5.a. Proclamation Recognizing the 50th Anniversary of Veterans Day,
November 11, 2003.
Mayor Ferrara presented an Honorary Proclamation recognizing the 50�' Anniversary
of Veterans Day, November 11, 2003. Steve Champeau, Jr. Vice Commander of
VFW Post 28/29 accepted the Proclamation.
5.b. Mayor's Commendation Recognizing Corporal Nicholas Emmerling,
United States Marine Corps.
Mayor Ferrara presented a Mayor's Commendation to Corporal Nichotas Emmerling
in recognition of his participation in the United States Marine Corps, Combat Service
Support Group in Operation Iraqi Freedom.
CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
NOVEMBER 11, 2003
PAGE 2
6. AGENDA REVIEW
6.a. Resolutions and Ordinances Read in Title Only
Mayor Pro Tem Dickens moved, Council Member Lubin seconded, and the motion
passed unanimously that all resolutions and ordinances presented at the meeting
shall be read in title only and all further reading be waived.
7. CITIZENS' INPUT, COMMENTS, AND SUGGESTIONS
None.
8. CONSENT AGENDA
Council Member Costello moved, and Mayor Pro Tem Dickens seconded the motion
to approve Consent Agenda Items 8.a. through 8.e., with the recommended courses
of action. The motion carried on the following roll-call vote, to wit:
AYES: Costello, Dickens, Lubin, and Ferrara
NOES: None
ABSENT: Runels
8.a. Cash Disbursement Ratification. .
Action: Approved the listing of cash disbursements for the period October 15,
2003 through October 31, 2003.
8.b. Statement of Investment Deposits.
Action: Received and filed the report of current investment deposits as of
October 31, 2003.
8.c. Consideration of Approval of Minutes.
Action: Approved the minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of October
28, 2003 as submitted.
8.d. Consideration of Appeal of Viewshed Review Case No. 03-004; 195 North
Elm Street.
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 3718 upholding the appeal of the Planning
Commission's denial of Viewshed Review Case No. 03-004.
8.e. Consideration of Authorization to Refund Application Fee - Watershed
Education Fair and Creek Clean-Up Day.
Action: Approved the request from Central Coast Salmon Enhancement, Inc.
to refund the application fee for Temporary Use Permit 03-023.
� Mayor Ferrara requested, and the Council unanimously concurred, to move New
Business Items 11.a. and 11.b. up on the Agenda to be heard before Public Hearing
Item 9.c.
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
9.a. Continued Public Hearing - Consideration of Appeal of Amencle�6
Conditional Use Permit Case No. 03-004; 1220 Farroll Avenue.
CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
NOVEMBER 11, 2003
PAGE 3
Assistant Planner Bergman presented the staff report and recommended the Council
adopt a Resolution denying the appeal and requiring the placement of two fire
hydrants on the subject property. Director of Building and Fire/Fire Chief Fibich
responded to questions from Council.
Mayor Ferrara opened the Public Hearing.
Lance Tullis, appellant, asked questions of Fire Chief Fibich regarding the required
number and placement of fire hydrants; volunteer firefighter training; how the Chief
rated the AGFD in the firefighting exercise example illustrated in the staff report; and
concluded by requesting the Council waive the requirement for the second fire
hydrant. He further requested that should the Council deny the appeal and require
the placement of two fire hydrants, that the Council extend the required time for
compliance from 60 days to 180 days.
Upon hearing no further public comments, Mayor Ferrara closed the Public Hearing.
Council Member Lubin expressed that his first and primary concern is with safety. He
supported the requirement for the installation of the second fire hydrant, and stated
that although he was hesitant to extend the time for compliance, he could support the
requested 180 days.
Council Member Costello agreed that the primary issue is safety and that the second
fire hydrant was absolutely necessary for the rear of the property. He supported the
request for 180-day compliance and suggested that the property owner should be
responsible for some of the costs. He supported staffs recommendation.
Mayor Pro Tem Dickens expressed concern regarding the need for the fire hydrant
condition considering the length of time the use has existed without the additional fire
hydrants. He stated there are secondary benefits for the proposed placement of the ,
hydrants, including the unprotected 22-unit residential development located directly
across the street from the proposed hydrant location: He commented that it was
unreasonable to have the applicant bear the�full costs of the improvements and
proposed that the City share half the cost with the applicant.
Mayor Ferrara commented that a 180-day compliance cond�tion seemed reasonable.
He supported the requirement for the second fire hydrant; however, he said he would
. like to look into some form of cost sharing, considering the public benefits provided '
by the project.
Council Member Lubin inquired what the City's recourse was if the 180 day
compliance condition was not met. Discussion ensued with regard to the '
requirement of a performance bond, and whether or not the City could share in the '
cost of a portion of the required work. City Manager Adams suggested that a letter of '
credit could be required instead of a performance bond.
CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
NOVEMBER 11, 2003
PAGE 4
Following discussion, Council Member Costello moved to adopt a Resolution, as �
amended, denying the appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of Amended
Conditional Use Permit 03-004 and requiring the placement of two fire hydrants on
the subject property; extending the time for compliance to 180 days; and directing
staff to explore the possibility of cost sharing alternatives with the applicant. City
Attorney Carmel recommended the motion include an amendment to Condition of
Approval #9 as follows: "The applicant shall post a letter of credit in an amount
estimated by the Fire Chief to satisfy the total cost of installation of both hydrants
within 10 days of the date of approval. Both fire hydrants are to be installed within
one hundred eighty (180) days of the date of approval." Council Member Costello
agreed to the amended motion. Council Member Lubin seconded the amended
motion, and on the following roll-call vote, to wit:
AYES: Costello, Lubin, Dickens, and Ferrara
NOES: None
ABSENT: Runels
There being 4 AYES, 0 NOES,�and 1 ABSENT, the motion is hereby declared to be '
passed. '
9.b. Consideration of Resolution Modifying the Rate Structure for Existing
Development Impact Fees.
City Manager Adams presented the staff report and recommended the Council adopt
a Resolution modifying the development impact fee rate structure. Mr. Joe Colgan,
MAXIMUS representative, gave a brief overview of the proposal to refine the way
fees are applied to projects and to make it easier to administer the fees.
Mayor Ferrara opened the Public Hearing, and upon hearing no comments, he closed
the Public Hearing.
Council Member Lubin moved to adopt a Resolution modifying the Development
Impact Fee Schedule. Mayor Pro Tem Dickens seconded the motion, and on the ,
following roll call vote, to wit:
. AYES: Lubin, Dickens, Costello, and Ferrara
' NOES: None
ABSENT: Runels
There being 4 AYES, 0 NOES, and 1 ABSENT, the motion is hereby declared to be
passed.
CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
NOVEMBER 11, 2003 �
PAGE 5
10. CONTINUED BUSINESS:
None.
11. NEW BUSINESS:
11.a. Consideration of Business License Ordinance Repealing Chapters 5.04,
5.08, 5.12, 5.20, 5.32, 5.40, 5.48 and 5.76 of Title 5 of the Arroyo �rande
Municipal Code and Adding Thereto a New Chapter 5.02 Regarding
Business Licenses, and a Resolution Establishing an Annuai Business
License Fee Schedule.
Financial Services Director Snodgrass presented the staff report and recommended
the Council: 1) Adopt an Ordinance repealing Chapters 5.04, 5.08, 5.12, 5.20, 5.32,
5.40, 5.48 and 5.76 of Title 5 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code and adding a new
Chapter 5A2 regarding Business Licenses; and, 2) Adopt a Resolution establishing a
Business License Fee Schedule.
Mayor Ferrara opened up the item for public comment.
Mr. Dallen asked what were the current and proposed eosts for a business license.
Financial Services Director Snodgrass responded the business license would
increase from $25 to $30 and the additional per employee cost would increase from
$4 to $5 per employee.
When no one further came forward, Mayor Ferrara closed the floor to public comment
and brought the item back to Council for consideration.
Council Member Costello moved to adopt an Ordinance repealing Chapters 5.04,
5.08, 5.12, 5.20, 5.32, 5.40, 5.48 and 5.76 of Title 5 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal
Code and adding a new Chapter 5.02 regarding Business Licenses. Mayor Pro Tem
Dickens seconded the motion, and on the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Costello, Dickens, Lubin, and Ferrara
NOES: None
ABSENT: Runels
There being 4 AYES, 0 NOES, and 1 ABSENT, the motion is hereby declared to be
, passed.
Council Member Costello moved to "adopt a Resolution establishing a Business
License Fee Schedule. Mayor Pro Tem Dickens seconded the motion, and on, the
following roll call vote, to wit:
CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
NOVEMBER 11, 2003
PAGE 6
AYES: Costello, Dickens, Lubin, and Ferrara
NOES: None
ABSENT: Runels
There being 4 AYES, 0 NOES, and 1 ABSENT, the motion is hereby declared to be
passed.
11.b. Consideration of Fiscai Year 2003-D4 First Quarter Budget Status Report.
[COUNCIURDA]
Financial Services Director Snodgrass presented the staff report and recommended
the Council/RDA Board: 1) Approve carryover appropriations as detailed; 2) Approve '
detailed budget adjustments and recommendations; 3) Approve/Deny requests for ',
additional appropriations in the General Fund as detailed; and, 4)Approve Schedules
A through F included in the First Quarter Status Report.
Mayor/Chair Ferrara opened up the item for public comment, and when no one came
forward, he closed the floor to public comment and brought the item back to Council
for consideration.
Council/Board Member Lubin moved to 1) Approve carryover appropriations as
detailed; 2) Approve detailed budget adjustments and recommendations; 3)
Approve/Deny requests for additional appropriations in the General Fund as detailed;
and, 4) Approve Schedules A through F included in the First Quarter Status Report.
Mayor Pro Tem/Vice Chair Dickens seconded the motion, and on the following roll-
call vote, to wit:
AYES: Lubin, Dickens, Costello, and Ferrara
NOES: None
ABSENT: Runels
There being 4 AYES, 0 NOES, and 1 ABSENT, the motion is hereby declared to be
passed.
9.c. Consideration of General Plan Amendment Case No. 03-005 — City of
Arroyo Grande Housing Element.
. Acting Community Development Director ("Acting Director") Heffernon presented an
overview of the.goals, policies and programs contained in the 2003 Draft Housing
Element and recommended the Council adopt a Resolution approving the 2003
Housing Element, adopting a Negative Declaration, instructing the Director of
Administrative Services to file a Notice of Determination, and approving General Plan
Amendmen.t 03-005.
Mayor Ferrara opened the Public Hearing.
CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
NOVEMBER 11, 2003
PAGE 7
John Foundis, 2"d Vice President of SLO County League of Women Voters, spoke in
favor of the draft Housing Element and expressed strong support for providing
workforce and affordable housing.
Risa Kaiser, Arroyo Grande resident, spoke in support of programs to provide low
and moderate income housing as described in Housing Element programs A.2-2,
A.9-1, A.11-1, B.1-1, 8.2-1, C.4-2, D.1-1, F.1-1, H.1-2, J.5-1 and P.1-1.
John Keen, Arroyo Grande resident, referred to page 4 of the staff report, item 6.4-1
and expressed concem with increasing the residential height limit to three stories or
30 feet, whichever is less. He stated this could be too high for single-family
residential districts. He suggested modifications to Policy B.4. on page 10 of the draft
Housing Element and Program B.4-1 on page 12 of the draft Housing Element to limit '
this requirement to Mixed Use and Multi-Family districts.
Carol Hatlev, Arroyo Grande resident and Finance Director for the San Luis Obispo
Housing Authority, spoke in support of the draft Housing Element programs and
policies, and stated that the Housing Authority is working with the City on ac�
agreement for monitoring affordable units.
Hearing no further public comments, Mayor.Ferrara closed the Public Hearing.
Council Member Lubin asked for clarification on Program A.4-1. Acting Director
Heffernon explained that the intent is to intensify appropriate residential land use by
establishing a minimum residential density.
Council Member Lubin asked for clarification on Program B.1-1 and expressed
concern about the "roll-over" provision of the 30-year restriction upon the sale or
change of ownership of affordable units. He also agreed with Mr. Keen's comments
regarding the suggested modification to the residential height limit by specifying that
it applies only to Mixed Use and Multi-Family residential districts. He then asked for
clarification on Program J.4-1. Acting Director Heffernon explained that the intent is to
allow larger homes on smaller lots to encourage development of housing to support
large families.
Council Member Costello referred to Policy A.4 which would establish minimum
residential densities and inquired if this could cause economic hardship. Acting
Director Heffernon responded that only exceptions for environmental constraints
could be considered.
Council Member Costello referred to Policy A.6. and inquired about the process for
assuming regulatory control from the State for manufactured housing, manufactured
home parks and mobile home parks. Acting Director�Heffernon replied there would
be paperwork to process through the State to assume regulatory control.
Council Member Costello referred to and asked for clarification of Policies F.1-1 and
G.1-1 and also referred to the Table on page 64 and inquired as to where the
_._.�
CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
NOVEMBER 11, 2003
PAGE 8
numbers in the Table came from. Acting Director Heffernon clarified that Policy F.1-1
requires at least 10% of every new housing project greater than nine (9) units to
contain inclusionary housing, ensuring that for every ten (10) homes constructed, at
least one (1) would be affordable; clarified that in Policy G.1-1, an administrative
Minor Use Permit would be processed for projects including affordable housing to
allow for reductions within ten percent (10%) of Development Code standards, similar
to the existing Minor Exception process; and provided an overview of the preliminary
estimated figures listed in the Regional Housing Needs Allocation Comparison on
page 64 and indicated that the estimates would likely change.
Mayor Pro Tem Dickens referred to the Regional Housing Needs Allocation by
Income Table on page 2 of the staff report and inquired whether any of the permits
� issued for the 331 residential units since January 2001 were for moderate-income
units. Acting Director Heffernon replied that moderate-income units are deed-
restricted and that none of the 331 units were deed-restricted to moderate-income
families.
Mayor Pro Tem Dickens agreed with the deletion of Program B.3-2 as noted in the
draft Housing Element. He also inquired about density bonuses and Acting Director
Heffernon explained that programs in the Housing Element acknowledge and identify
the need for very-low and low-income housing units.
Mayor Ferrara submitted in writing his recommended modifications to the Housing
Element. Following review and discussion, the Council unanimously concurred to
make the following modifications to the Housing Element:
- Policy A.2. — Direct staff to insert language regarding circumstances where
density bonuses would be granted or applied.
- Program A.11-1 — Direct staff to ensure that there is consistency regarding
Density Bonuses, specifically with regard to Policies A.1., A.2. and A.9.
- Modify Policy C.1. to read as follows: "The City shall establish criterion for
allocating financial resources from its In-Lieu Affordable Housing Fund and
Redevelopment Agency (RDA) Low and Moderate Housing Fund to augment
very low and low-income hausing development."
- Modify Program C.1-1 to include a statement that the City shall allocate
financial resources to augment very low and low-income housing development
based on the financial projection from the RDA housing set-aside fund and In-
. Lieu Affordable Housing Fund for this planning period (through June 2008).
- Modify Program D.1-1 to read as follows: "The City shall encourage specific
plans for land within its Sphere of Influence that includes increased residential
capacity for multi-family development."
- Modify Program F.3-1 to read as follows: "The City shall conduct a study to
determine the appropriate inclusionary housing requirement for commercia9
development and to promote mixed-use development and a jobs/housing
balance.
CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
NOVEMBER 11, 2003
PAGE 9 �
- Modify Policy H.2. to read as follows: "The City shall ensure zoning
compatibility when integrating public affordable housing projects into existing
residential neighborhoods. Adverse impacts relating to neighborhood stability
and quality of life issues shall also be considered."
- Modify Program J.5-1 to read as follows: "The City shall further study the
housing needs of farm workers and, if determined necessary or appropriate, ;
update the Development Code to include provisions for development of farm
worker housing on properties zoned Agriculture, Mixed-Use, and Apartments."
- Page 34, Table 6 - Industry, emphasize the following categories
Transportation and warehousing, and utilities; Educational, health and social
services; and Public administration by directing staff to use bold-face type on
these specific categories and expanding on these industry categories in the
paragraph below the table.
- Page 69, Water, modify the last sentence in the second paragraph to read as
follows: "Without additional water supplies or a substantial reduction in current
usage, it is unlikely that an adequate water supply will be available to
accommodate the assigned regional housing allocation."
- Page 69, Water, modify the third paragraph by deleting the last sentence and
inserting the replacement sentence as follows: "This program will be closely
monitored and the results will be evaluated in terms of water supply impact."
- Page 71, Government Constraints, modify the second paragraph to correct the
number of basic costs (i.e., change to "six" or"several").
- Page 71, Government Constraints, fourth paragraph, last sentence. Direct
staff to research the NFPA Building Codes.
- Page 75, third paragraph, direct staff to include a Policy Statement regarding
unfunded mandates.
- Page 85, Water Availabilitv, Is the City currently using more than 91% (or 94%
as indicated on page 69) of its available average annual water resources?
Direct staff to modify for consistency.
- Page 86, Financial Costs, Delete the phrase "As a rule of thumb,..." and
modify the sentence to read as follows: "Construction loans are generally two .
or more percentage points above the prime rate."
- Page 92, #14, Direct staff to expand/amplify the statement to describe the
benefits of creating a South County or Inter-city Housing Authority to address
the potential of ineeting categorical housing needs as a region, as well as
providing a reasonable approach to a "jobs-housing" balance.
- Policy B.4 and Program B.4-1 — Modify to specify "Mixed-Use and Multi-
� Family" Residential Height Limit,
- Page 1, 1.1 Purpose, Correct typographical numbermg error (i.e., use 1., 2.,
3., or a., b., c.)
- Page 64, Table 15, lower the Regional Housing Needs Allocation numbers to
be more in line with the original numbers obtained from HCD.
_
CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
NOVEMBER 11, 2003
PAGE 10
Council Member Lubin moved to continue the Pualic Hearing for General Plan
Amendment 03-005, consideration of the 2003 Housing Element, to the next regular
City Council Meeting of November 25, 2003. Council Member Costello seconded the
motion, and on the following roll-call vote, to wit:
AYES: Lubin, Costello, Dickens, and Ferrara
NOES: None
ABSENT: Runels
There being 4 AYES, 0 NOES, and 1 ABSENT, the motion is hereby declared to be
passed.
12. CITY COUNCIL MEMBER ITEMS:
None.
13. CITY MANAGER ITEMS
City Manager Adams announced that the next City Hall Feasibility Study and Needs
Assessment public workshop would be held this Thursday, November 13�' at 6:30
p.m. in the City Council Chambers to identify the advantages and disadvantages of
site altematives and design characteristics in order to select preferred altematives for
further analysis.
14. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
15. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
None.
16. COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS
John Keen, Arroyo Grande, referred to farm worker housing on agricultural land and
inquired how the proposed 100-foot buffer. would affect that.
17. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor/Chair Ferrara adjourned the meeting at 11:08 p.m.
Tony M. Ferrara, Mayor/Chair
ATTEST:
Kelly Wetmore, Director of Administrative Services/
Deputy City ClerklAgency Secretary
(Approved at CC Meeting )
o� PRROY�c S�e■
� 1NCORiOAATEO i
" " MEMORANDUM
* .�,�� ,o. ,o„ *
c���FORN�P
TO: CITY COUNCIL '
FROM: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: CANCELLATION OF DECEMBER 23, 2003 CITY COUNCIL
MEETING
DATE: NOVEMBER 25, 2003 �
s
�
�
�
RECOMMENDATION: �
�
It is recommended the City Council cancel the regularly scheduled Council
meeting of December 23�d due to the holiday.
FUNDING:
There is no fiscal impact.
DISCUSSION:
Past practice of the City Council has been to cancel the second regularly
scheduled December meeting due to scheduling conflicts with the holidays.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration:
- Cancel the December 23rd meeting;
- Reschedule the December 23�d meeting;
- Do not cancel the December 23rd meeting; or
- Provide direction to staff.
o� PRROro� 8.f.
� INCORPOAATED i
V T
�t JULY 10, 1811 *
c���FORN�P MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL '
FROM: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER��'' �
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENTS TO TRAFFIC �
COMMISSION AND SENIOR ADVISORY COMMISSION j
DATE: NOVEMBER 25, 2003
i
�
RECOMMENDATION: �
It is recommended the City Council approve: `
• The recommendation of Council Member Lubin to appoint Scott Metcalf to the
Traffic Commission, replacing Heather Jensen; and
• The recommendation of Council Member Lubin to appoint Paul Toms to the
Senior Advisory Commission, replacing Scott Metcalf.
FUNDING:
There is no fiscal impact.
DISCUSSION:
On January 14, 1997, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 481 amending the
composition of applicable Commissions and Boards from seven to five members
and also adopted Resolution No. 3192 establishing Council policy as it relates to
the appointment procedure to the Boards and Commissions. The Ordinance
states that the Mayor and each respective member of the Council shall appoint a
representative to the various Commissions and Boards subject to the approval by
a majority vote of the Council. All Commission and Board members serve at the
pleasure of the CounciL
Council Member Lubin's appointment to the Tra�c Commission, Heather
Jensen, has submitted her resignation. Council Member Lubin is recommending
the Council approve the appointment of Scott Metcalf to the Traffic Commission,
replacing Ms. Jensen.
Mr. Metcalf is currently serving on the Senior Advisory Commission, which
means a vacancy will result on that commission. Council Member Lubin is
recommending the Council approve the appointment of Paul Toms to the Senior
Advisory Commission, replacing Mr. Metcalf.
S:\CITY MANAGER\STEVE\Council Reports\11.25.03 Council Member Lubin Commission
Appointments.doc
CITY COUNCIL
APPOINTMENTS TO TRAFFIC COMMISSION AND SENIOR ADVISORY
COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 25, 2003
PAGE 2
The application forms for each applicant are attached. The form for Mr. Metcalf
is the original form submitted when he applied for the Senior Advisory
Commission. Please let us know if you would like updated information or have
any questions.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration:
- Approve the recommended appointments;
- Do not approve the recommended appointments;
- Provide direction to staff.
Attachments:
1. Scott Metcalf application form
2. Paul Toms application form
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
RESERVOIR OF CITIZENS TO SERVE
Planning Commission �
Parks and Recreation Commission - � • �
�Traffic Commission Years Lived in Arroyo Grande �l Z
�Senior Advisory Commission � Registered Voter of Arroyo Gran e
Special Committees (Architectural Review, etc.) Yes�_ No
NAME C��dt—� ,v'�TC�}L,�
HOME ADDRESS_ ��� �Vi�,e%SL� � PHONE �fQ�-- �9 T�--
PRESENT ,� / � PRESEN7 .
EMPLOYER �� T1��iD POSITION �
OFFICE � BUSINESS
ADDRESS � • TELEPHONE
� i
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND
. i
Fiigh School � College ��,0.
ADDITIONAL EDUCATIONAL INFORMATION
COMMUNITY AND CIVIC tNTERESTS �
�� � ' .
�
�
The City Council would like to have the names of three (3)Arroyo Grande References:
NAME ADDRESS •
1.
2.
3. '
ARE YOU WILLING TO SERVE ON THE COMMISSION/COMMITTEE MEETING TIMES SHOWN BELOW:
Planning Commission, First and Third Tuesday of each month, 7:30 p.m. Yes No__�__
Parks and Recreation Commission, Second Wednesday of each month,6:00 p.m. Yes No�
Traffic Commission, Monday Previous to Third Tuesday of each month, 7:30 p.m. Yes No�
Senior Advisory Commission, First Wednesday of each month, 6:00 p.m. Yes,� No
Special Committee (i.e.Architectural Review Committee, etc.),Various meeting
times and dates Yes� No
Signature � .eTa�lo;�.'.�G� � Date ���
.- - - - -
The Arroyo Grande City Council req��`"sts�ation about your interest(and education, if applicable), in serving on
a commission or committee, speci Eally your comments and views relative to the role and responsibilities of the
Planning Commission, Parks an Recreation Commission, Traffic Commission, Senior Advisory Commission, or a
Special Committee. Please note such information on the reverse side of this form. Thank you for your interest.
THIS FORM IS A MATTER OF PUBLIC RECORD
IF APPOINTED COMPLETION OF A STATE CONFLICT OF IN�FEREST FORM IS REQUIRED (11/02/98)
l oz�p/
` � � �,�, .�.. � �c.��- `'�
•'��. .
. _ .
. . .�:o �-
�- �
- . , . � ,,1,�.
Q - . .
. � �� �
.� " ' �G�.�' .�'
G�� �� .�� � � - � �" �0,�`�'�'`'
. , � � t
�� �' � : ��
� �a� �,,,�:u .�'� a�
� - .
.��.
� �� ?
�
� i
�
I
f
I
p
v
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
�������.
RESERVOIR OF CITIZENS TO SERVE
�►-�� �M ������ �,��_,a��
• �_l
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
������
RESERVOIR OF CITIZENS TO SERVE
����r�����b`4�������
_������i�i�p�Sp�o�o�Commission �
b lifs'�i Years Lived in Arroyo Grande��-
_�_ Senior Advisory Commission Registered Vote�of Arroyo Grande
A�chitectural Review Corr�mittee Yes '� No
Special Committees(Long Range Pianning Committee,etc.)
NAME �Av � �. o-� 5
HOME f '
ADDRESS � � `"� � "� °� �'� � �' ��` PHONE `� $j ' � a `r S�
PRESENT EMPLOYER ��''�-��- w°' ' � !`�- �� �"'�- POSITION �`'��M�s�F�•� S�''��
BUSINESS AODRESS ���a �tr� +� �-�-� PHONE � � � � Z- � `�
EOUCATIONAL BACKGROUND
Hiqh School � College �
ADDITIONAL EDUCATIONAL INFORMATION �✓a4 ��{ ��-�r� 2 -� �-x i.•''�c<-���.,D�
D - p -( r"L�2 D /'S/� � . �--e� . ( f'�.a-rt_M'�--1 / � .
D s c{o r ✓{ D��✓•/':•!-'Y 'D 6��!-+s r �y L-et.�✓S
COMMUNITY ANO CIVICJNTERESTS f?rh,6��- - �3.�. '�•►� 4 �-F'¢r-� -�-���- G`�"`'`
S�C�-� L.5 r4-�'� Cc� t i7' �� C�( t/r e�C.-
The City Council would like to have the names of th�ee(3)Ar�oyo Grande References:
�� ADDRESS
1. �- �"��'�. � -� � O `�-E" �r4.e..- B��-Qe/ �.v rc4/- Qa c�o-a 'a�-..�e_- t�-�..
2. G�.e� �rr,«� �-i (� t�j� '7 ��-- �a�er�" - �• ("T'
3. � F��R �B-a� d oi �J �j- 2Z V�q "f�.t.e�vlol�ro - A • ��
ARE YOU WILLING TO SERVE ON THE COMMISSION/COMMITTEE MEETING TIMES SHOWN BEIOW:
Planning Commission� First and Third Tuesday of each month, 7:00 PM Yes_N�_
Parks and Rec�eation Commission, Second Wednesday of each month,6:30 PM Yes�.No
Traffic Commission�the day(Monday)before the third Tuesday of each month� 7:00 PM Yes, ,.No
Senio�Advisory Commission,First Wednesday of each month,3:00 PM Yes�No
Architectural Review Committee Fi�st Monday of each month, 3:15 PM Yes_1do
Special Committe (Long Range Planning Committee,etc.)Meeting dates vary Yes___No`—
Signature �--�- �- D e l�-- � - a 3
The Arroyo G�ande City Council requests information about your interest(and education� if applicable), in serving on a
commission or committee, speciflcally your comments and views relative to the role and responsibilities of the Planning
Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission, Traftic Commission, Senior Advisory Commission� Architectural Review
Committee or a Special Committee. Please note such information on the �everse side of this form. Thank you for your
interest.
THIS FORM IS A MATTER OF PUBLIC RECORD '
IF APPOINTED.COMPLETION OF A STATE CONFLICT OF INTEREST FORM IS REQUIRED
04/02I01
�
�
!
o� PRRO��c S■,� ■ I
� M�CORiOAA7ED Z :
" ° MEMORANDUM
� .�,�Y ,o. ,.,, ,,
c4��FOR��P
TO: CITY COUNCIL '
FROM: DON SPAGNOLO, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER „�}('
v -��
SUBJECT; CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION TO REQUEST A COOPERATIVE
WORK AGREEMENT (CWA) FOR TFiE BRIDGE STREET BRIDGE
FEASIBILITY STUDY
DATE: NOVEMBER 25, 2003
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City CounciL• '
A. adopt a resolution requesting a Cooperative 1�Nork Agreement(CWA)with Caltrans for
the Bridge Street Bridge Feasibility Study thereby extending the Federal funding for
an additional year; and
B. direct staff to forward the resolution to Caltrans by December 1, 2003.
FUNDING:
In 1998, Caltrans authorized the City to spend $37,440 ($29,952 Federal plus$7,488 local
ma�ch) on a feasibility study of alternatives for the rehabilitation or replacement of the
Bridge Street bridge.
Federal funding for the project totaling$29,952 has been appropriated. To date$3,262 has
been expended leaving a balance of approximately$26,690 of unused funds.
DISCUSSION:
The Bridge Street bridge is a unique facility in that the City upgraded the bridge structure in
1990 to the standard H-20 Caltrans designated loading for large truck traffic, but the bridge
deck and portions of the foundation remain at an H-3 or 3 ton load limit. Because of the
unique situation of partial rehabilitation already accomplished and its historical significance,
the City was successful in getting Caltrans to fund an alternatives analysis. The purpose of
the analysis is to identify alternatives available for upgrading the entire bridge to H-20
loading (e.g., rehabilitation vs. full replacement). Usually an alternatives analysis is not
eligible for reimbursement; however, Caltrans has made an exception forthe Bridge Street
bridge.
Staff met with Caltrans several times over the past few years to determine the bridge's
deficiencies. This information is necessary for the feasibility study and was to be provided
by Caltrans. The City has now received a Bridge Inspection Report from Calt�ans that
generally outlines the deficiencies and will use this information in completing the feasibility
study.
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION TO REQUEST A COOPERATIVE WORK
AGREEMENT (CWA) FOR THE BRIDGE STREET BRIDGE FEASIBILITY STUDY
NOVEMBER 25, 2003
PAGE 2
The City has been waiting for a report from Caltrans detailing the deficiencies of the bridge
structure. That report has been received and the City will now begin working with a
structural consultant to investigate the loading potential for review by Caltrans.
In the past, if an agency was unable to complete a project and expend the funds within the
life of the appropriation, an extension was requested though Caltrans during the annual
Budget Act process. Government Code(GC)Section 16304.3 outlines a new requirement
for extending any unspent encumbered funds. If approved, the extension would grant a
maximum of eight (8) years of budget authority in the form of a Cooperative Work
Agreement (CWA).
The CWA is a binding contract befinreen agencies for work which cannot be completed for
valid or substantial reasons during the period of time for which funding is available for
liquidation. The CWA must be approved by the Department of Finance (DOF)and makes
the funds available for a maximum of eight (8) years. For the Bridge Street Bridge
Feasibility Study, the eighth year is FY 2004-05.
To extend the life of the funds for the Bridge Street Bridge Feasibility Study for an additional
year, the City must request a CWA by completing the Caltrans form entitled "Projects with
Lapsing Funds(Attachment 2)." This form, along with the City Council's approval indicating it
concurs with the request, must be submitted to Caltrans by December 1, 2003. The form
must include a detailed, project specific justificatiort on why funding for the project needs to
be extended.
The DOF will review the justification and determine whether an extension should be
approved. The DOF has indicated that responses on extension approval/ denials will be
provided to Caltrans in June 2004 and that there is no appeal process.
If funding is not extended for the project, the City is responsible for completing the project
using its own funds. In addition, the City may need to refund the $3,262 of Federal funds
spent to date on the project.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration:
• Adopt the resolution requesting a Cooperative Work Agreement (CWA)to extend the
funds for the Bridge Street Bridge Feasibility Study for an additional year; or
• Reject the resolution and perform the study with City funds;
• Provide direction to staff.
Attachment:
-Letter to Jerry Gills, Local Assistance Engineer
-Caltrans form "Projects with �apsing Funds"
RESOLUTION NO. ,
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ARROYO GRANDE REQUESTING A COOPERATIVE
WORK AGREEMENT FOR THE BRIDGE STREET
BRIDGE FEASIBILITY STUDY
WHEREAS, the City is eligible to receive Federal and/or State funding for certain
transportation projects through the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans);and
WHEREAS, the City was successful in securing Federal funding for the Bridge Street
Bridge Feasibility Study and all funds for the project have been encumbered; and
WHEREAS, due to budget short#alls the State is facing the new requirement for extending
any unspent encumbered funds will be through a Cooperative Work Agreement (CWA);
and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to request a Cooperative Work Agreement for the Bridge
Street Bridge Feasibility Study thereby extending the Federal funding for an additional year.
NOW,THEREFORE,.BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande
requests a Cooperative Work Agreement for the Bridge Street Bridge Feasibility Study.
On motion of Council Member , seconded by Council Member
,
. and on the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this day of
2003.
;
__ __,--- �
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 2
TONY M. FERRARA, MAYOR �
ATTEST:
KELLY WETMORE, DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES/
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY
�
November 26, 2003
Mr. Jerald T. Gibbs, Local Assistance Engineer
Caltrans District 5
50 Higuera Street
San Luis Obispo, California 93401-5415
Subject: Lapsing Funds on Local Assistance Projects
Bridge Street Bridge Feasibility Study- BHLO-5199(005)
Dear Mr. Gibbs:
In accordance with Terry Abbott's letter dated September 29, 2003, the City is
requesting an extension of budget authority for the subject project. The project may not
be completed this fiscal year and the funds may not be fully liquidated by May 1, 2004.
The subject project is listed as a Category 1 project on Attachment A to the September
29, 2003 letter. Therefore, the City is requesting a Cooperative Work Agreement �
(CWA)to extend the budget authority. ;
I
Enclosed please find the Caltrans form (electronic and hard copy) entitled "Projects with �
Lapsing Funds" along with the City Council staff report and resolution requesting a I
Cooperative Work Agreement.
Please call me at 473-5440 if you have questions regarding this request or if you require
further information.
Sincerely,
Don Spagnolo, P.E.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Enclosures (3)
M:�232-Arroyo Grande�232-5608-Bridge Street Bridge\Grants\Transmittal Letter for Lapsing Funds.doc
`
i
� Projecta wkh Lapalny Funds on Juna 30,2004 Altachment A
� for Fiscal Yoar 2004-05
As of Saptember 11,2003
� �y�N� 6MnlPnjm UdiqNluN ry�NPryen/Pn�en �njwCwhuK�Y Id�wiuriwpedlnawlnr WIGNe�xa�w4eswMMed fl�meufL.eJA�' ,�
� PnhrrNrWv Anwt E�eo�nMutt �� Mr�ka'M4JI.aminMr�c Mi�iWScaPeWhT�N PewehrDelq' CaA1�4O• �IRrMN�)xiiYU4e roo�aclprnidisR AJJif alCamokw ���WNDoF\"o IfaaA��'MNProvNk
t�^aName IhrPYI IFYhV�lY.1 � AlqroDrimio�: (Murcl m1�leJwavinP�rW 4fornsOw
� Cily al.{�yGaNe �B11L[}t1991011) ' 29.95:.00 36bi9.0J,&id{r RN�biliiLiou FeuAtlx�:In tlie Cin'of Moya G�adc o�Brid{c 51 o�'cr�be Anu�a Ys� .Cin un axy�m6 Bismrl. None \'a Unn Sppolo.P.E..D'vttm�
�� �SOd,v jGrydeCrtekBN.Nai9C-01% :' &id�elopectbsRtpn.i � ' ofPuElkWOrkdCiry :
. � j �, ' fmm4Aauln�t Eap.ea .
�! � i I I�f imcia.7te Cu��Aa�i i I
i
� �� .m�enNOercpenawd� ; � I �.
� � �' �� � I'' i, i aY mMY kl..'ald wMY ',' I I � �i
) J I ,mu9k�ccofMsfs�sL�lilt� I
I
I f � I i I ��� t � � I
CWANl7:f41�PM11-RTqM . 3'1�7JU ..M.6A.6S.
' Signature of Approving Agency's Board or Council Member.
Print Name: '
Date:
�
i
I,
. _
,
Lapsing funES�Allachmenl A�10.03 � �
o� PRROVOC $.h.
� INCORPOAATE Z
v D
�
1� .Nxr �0. io» ,�,
c4��FOR��P MEMORANDUM �
�
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: DON SPAGNOLO, DIRECTOR 4F PUBLlC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER„�( t
�.�. �
�
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION FOR RELIEF BY MID STATE PLUMBING AND
DRAIN CLEANING, lNC. AND AUTHORIZATlON TO RE ADVERTISE �
BIDS FOR PHASE I OF THE WATER CONSERVATION PROGRAM
DATE: NOVEMBER 25, 2003
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City Council:
A. consent to the relief of the low bid by Mid State Plumbing and Drain Cleaning, Inc.; and
B. authorize the re-advertisement of bids for Phase i of the Water Conservation Program,
without the bond requirements.
FUNDING:
The amended FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program budget includes$275,515 forthe
plumbing retrofit program construction contract.
DISCUSSION:
The plumbing retrofit program is part of Phase I of the City's Water Conservation Program
and consists of retro�tting the following plumbing fixtures: 1.6 gallon ultra-low-flow toilets,
2.0 gallon per minute (gpm) indoor faucet aerators, and 2.5 gpm showerheads. The
program will also include checking and adjusting or installing new pressure regulators, not
to exceed 80 pounds per square inch (psi), where applicable.
On May 13, 2003, the Council authorized the solicitation of public bids for the plumbing
retrofit portion of th�City's Water Conservation Program. On July 29,2003,four bids were
publicly opened for the project. The apparent low bidder, Mid State Plumbing and Drain
Cleaning, (nc. submitted a bid of$275,515 and on August 12,2003,the Council awarded a
contract to Mid State Plumbing.
On September 24, 2003, Mid State Plumbing faxed a letter formaliy requesting withdrawal
of their bid due to the inability to meet the contract performance bond requirement, without
an extremely large cash collateral deposit. �ailure by the contractor to execute a contract
and file acceptable bonds as provided for in the special provisions is cause for the
annulment of the award by the City.
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION FOR RELIEF BY MID STATE PLUMBING AND DRAIN CLEANING,
INC.AND AUTHORIZATION TO RE-ADVERTISE BIDS FOR PHASE I OF THE WATER
CONSERVATION PROGRAM
NOVEMBER 25, 2003
PAGE 2
With the withdrawal by Mid State Plumbing, the Public Works Department contacted the
second low bidder, Waterboys Plumbing, and was informed that they also would not be
able to meet the bonding requirements. The City will still be protected from claims for
damages as well as injuries to persons or property,which may arise from the performance
of the work,through a$2 million insurance requirement even though the 50% performance
bond cannot be obtained by these types of contractors.
It is recommended the City relieve Mid State Plumbing of their contract with the City and
re-advertise the project with minor modifications to the toilet specifications and without the
bonding requirements.
Due to the length of the contract and project specifications these documents are available
for review at the Public Works Department.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration:
• Approve staff's recommendations and re-advertise for public bids;
• Do not approve staff's recommendations and do not move forward with the project;
• Modify as appropriate and approve staff's recommendations; or
• Provide direction to staff.
Attachments:
Letter from Mid State Plumbing dated September 24, 2003
1I►ID STATE PlUMBtNG AND DRAiN CLEANiNG. INC.
=.��. Box 1807
rismo Beach, CA 93448
805 473-8270 Fax 805 473-82fi:.
Contractors License No. 7792��
September 24, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande
P.O. Box 550
Arroyo Grande, CA 9342�
Attn: Don Spagnolo ,
Re: Piumbing Retrofit Program
Dear pon,
We regret to inform you that we wiU have to withdraw from the Plurnbing
Retrofit Program. Our reason for same is not being able to receive a bond
without an extremely large cash colla#era! deposit.
We extend our apologies for any inconvenience and appreciate your
patience with our extension.
Since��
��� ���� r .
Rex Springer `�-'
President-Mid State Plumbing and Drain Cleaning, Inc.
�
;,�� i��
:,.s�R(�yr. c.;R/��1�F:
"��" ,` . . :��.l�
� I� 't'�'�.J!'��.� ?,.1�1,-,�:t
i�1LrF... �, .
8.i.
� pRRO��
o ��,
� INCORPORATEO 9Z
" ° MEMORANDUM
� JULY 10, 1911 *
P
���FORN`
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: DON SPAGNOLO, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER�
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF ACCEPTANCE OF EASEMENT AGREEMENTS,
AND AUTHORIZATION OF PAYMENT, FOR THE RESERVOIR NO. 1
PROJECT, NO. 2000-04
DATE: NOVEMBER 25, 2003
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City Council:
A. accept an easement agreement with the Central California Conference
Association of Seventh Day Adventist and authorize payment in the amount of
$25,762.00; and,
B. accept permanent and temporary easement agreements with the California
Pacific Annual Conference of the Methodist Church and authorize payment in the
amount of$19�,342.77.
FUNDING:
Funding for the payment of the subject easements, ($25,762.00 + $19,342.77 =
$45,014.77), shall be on a percentage basis from the following contributing funds: 40%
from the Water Fund ($18,005.91) and 60% from the Water Facilities Fund
($27,008.86). � .
DISCUSSION:
The Water Master Plan, adopted by the City Council on July 13, 1999, classifies three
stages of capital improvement projects for the water system. Stage 1 includes the
highest priority projects that will provide upgrades to existing facilities that are
substantially undersized or unreliable and impact a large number of users. The
Reservoir No. 1 replacement project is identified as the highest priority Stage 1 project.
The Reservoir No. 1 Replacement Project includes demolition and removal of an
existing reservoir and the excavation and construction of a new partially exposed
reservoir. The existing reservoir, constructed in 1929, is deteriorating and will not meet
the City's future supply needs. The project will demolish the existing resenroir and
replace it with a new 2,000,000 - gallon concrete resenioir in the same location. The
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF ACCEPTANCE OF EASEMENTS AGREEMENTS AND
AUTHORIZATION OF PAYMENT FOR THE RESERVOIR NO. 1 REPLACEMENT
PROJECT, PW 2000-04
NOVEMBER 25, 2003
PAGE 2
project includes the installation of runoff facilities for reservoir overflow, reservoir
drainage, storm water runoff, and reconstruction of the existing access road (Reservoir
Road). The project requires the acquisition of easements and/or right-of-way from finro
adjacent property owners: the Central California Conference Association of Seventh
Day Adventist Church to the west and the California Pacific Annual Conference
Commission
of the Methodist Church to the east (see Attachment No. 1). Currently, Reservoir No. 1
is on a site with a 99-year lease. The City will release its leasehold interest for the
remaining 26 years of the existing lease. Staff obtained appraisals for the properties
and participated in negotiations with both property owners. The easement documents
are as follows:
Seventh Day Adventist Church
The project requires permanent and temporary easements from the Seventh Day
Adventist Church (see Attachment No. 2) to install and maintain the new water
reservoir. The Easemerit Agreement identifies and defines four specific parcels:
• Parcel 1 — Permanent Easement
• Parcel2 — Permanent Public Utility Easement and Permanent Access Easement
• Parcel 3 —Temporary Construction Easement
• Parcel 4 — Permanent Easement
Compensation in the amount of $25,762.00 was offered and accepted by the
Seventh Day Adventist Church based on the property appraisal and negotiations
with church representatives.
Methodist Church
Two separate easements (see Attachment Nos. 3 and 4), identifying three separate
parcels, are required for construction of the larger water reservoir as follows:
• Parcel 5 — A permanent easement to enable expansion of the site for the larger
water reservoir.
• Parcels 6 and 7 - A three-year temporary construction easement to support
construction operations, which will permanently revert to the Methodist Church
upon project completion.
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF ACCEPTANCE OF EASEMENTS AGREEMENTS AND
AUTHORIZATION OF PAYMENT FOR THE RESERVOIR NO. 1 REPLACEMENT
PROJECT, PW 2000-04
NOVEMBER 25, 2003
PAGE 3 �
The total compensation in the amount of $19,342.77 has been accepted by the
Methodist Church for the combination of the permanent easement and the temporary
construction easement. Also; provisions in the existing lease with the Methodist Church
required the City to provide 20,000 gallons of water yearly free of charge. The City will
provide an additional $1,903.77 as full compensation for the water (as the church has
paid for its water).
Acceptance of the easements will enable the City to proceed with the construction of the
Reservoir No. 1 Replacement Project. The design of the project is nearly complete
and, once the Council considers and authorizes appropriate funding for the construction
portion of the project, the Public Works Department anticipates the solicitation of bids at
the beginning of next year. The construction duration is estimated to be nine months.
Staff recommends acceptance of the easements.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration:
• Accept the easements as proposed from the property owners;
• Do not accept the easements as proposed;
• Modify the easements and re-negotiate with the effected property owners; or
• Provide direction to staff.
Attachments:
1. Vicinity Map
2. Easement Agreement— Seventh Day Adventist Church
3. Permanent Easement— Methodist Church
4. Temporary Easement— Methodist Church
ATTACHMENT 1
Legend
� Found 1" IP LS 6192 per 77/LS/20
� unless noted otherwise
��� � —L 1— Temporary Construction Easement Parcel 3
�� �0 � — Temporary Construction Easement Parcel 5
� �/�s �`������ — Tem ora Construction Easement Parcel 6
�i�v,i�ti P rY
J
5�6,os�1. 9,/
�A F O�
r,9 �C'.� �,3 S/�
�� L, j�8 ,� Fd 1 1/4" IP
RCE 1007a
p�j ��6�5 � Fd 6°x6"
Wood Post
� 2J \ 8Q,0�0. •� and Tag
�j �• � F '� `rc�6. LS "6192"
F— �iQ \ c' 6`�' �6'�
U / `r�,DO Sp, �, � 1� I F �'
� 26� :���F�6�09, ���6-
�- _s � �� �o� .�'�6
� � � �. IS
V?�g, �,�� u�j�Oi9 .�� 18SOO' S g�6,,
� � -� , � �u? Q �,,:,� p �
� � � � ������ �� �������� ��� �
� , �� � � .,
� � �, j
� � f.!'o�� '� 6'°'� . �.... �x►sting �6� s� % �
� �
�_ �G�' ` 6F �� �hlc�ter Tank o ,Lb�'
� '� 4, , ti
;��o � �� "°c,� ;7� �� ��
;n� �� �� � �3 . � � y \. (o� 0� � `S0,
� ^ � v �8 � ��� � �, i `� p
� .A `� A ��9- `���� � �� Y ,2
y �� �� � �__�e�- ��C, �r " o
o :�
N C�� �6•��` S ��.�? �` h�o°` r�, /� S�O�
i\ �i Sr �6�`� �� b^� q0, V� �Cv � /
\ ! � O �
— u� V �j�`\ \� �, ,h D�� , ��
:u � 1��'' V Dc� � b`��`�� y �o`L�,� �'�j'�
c�u p.,, �I �� 2' IP `� ��b h� ��� �
Z I� �'RE 323' �
� oo `� 20.00' \ ��� ,� �,����
Z� `'� �� ._ 68.48' ,w so- �'p L��',�,,��'��,?,
N�3•03'S1 ,����f � ,�.
����"��,
LINE TABLE
PARCEL 2 LINE LENGTH BEARING
Ll 21.05 S07'S8'31'E
C16' Wide) L2 31.58 S07'S8'31'E
John L. Wallace & Associates
232.5903 7THDAY+METHODISTEXHIBIT 1"=60' 11-19-03
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE Attachment 2
WHEN RECORDED, RETURN TO:
Director of Public Works
City of Arroyo Grande
208 E. Branch Street
Arroyo Grande, California 93420
EASEMENT AGREEMENT
�.�p�►,� THIS EASEMENT AGREEMENT ("Agreement") made this day of
��`�� 20 ; by and between, THE CENTRAL CALIFORNIA
• """"" • CONFERENCE ASSOCIATION OF SEVENTH DAY ADVENTIST, a Califomia Nonprofit
��<<roa���
Corporation, (hereinafter referred to as "SDA"), and the CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE, a
Municipal Corporation in the State of California, (hereinafter referred to as " CITY"):
WHEREAS, CITY desires to remove the existing water tank and construct a larger water tank and related
facilities and obtain temporary rights for said construction activities, and to establish a permanent right to
the water tank site; and
;
WHEREAS, SDA desires to grant the necessary easement to facilitate the removal and reconstruction of '
a water tank; i
NOW, THEREFORE, for valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which is hereby f
acknowledged, SDA and CITY agree, covenant and promise as follows: ��
1. The above recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein.
2. SDA is the owner of the real property described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated
herein by reference.
3. City shall pay to SDA$25,762 within ten (10) days of the effective date of this Agreement: �
�
4. SDA does hereby grant to City an exclusive permanent easement on, in, over, under,across, and �
above the real property described as Parcel 1 in Exhibit B attached hereto (°Parcel 1") for the �
:
purposes of a constructing a public water tank, and related facilities, including, but not limited to '
communication antennas (as long as it does not interfere with existing church radio
communications devices), drainage facilities, landscaping and incidental uses. Said permanent
easement shall include the right to install, repair, maintain, replace, operate, and improve any and
all facilities necessary for the use and operation of a public water tank and related appurtenances.
Notwithstanding the terms of this provision, SDA reserves the right to use Parcel 1 in a manner
consistent with City's free use and enjoyrnent of the easement described in this paragraph.
EASEMENT AGREEMENT
PAGE 2
5. SDA does hereby grant to City an easement, on in, over, under, across, and above the real
property described as Parcel 2 in Exhibit B attached hereto ("Parcel 2"), for the purposes of
constructing a public water tank and related facilities, including, but not limited to communication
antennas, drainage facilities, landscaping, public utility lines, access, and incidental uses. Said
permanent easement shall include the right to install, repair, maintain, replace, operate, and ;
improve any and all facilities necessary for the use and operation of a public water tank and related
appurtenances. The easement granted in this paragraph is nonexclusive. SDA retains the right ;
to make any use of Parcel 2, including the right to grant concurr�nt easements in Parcel 2 to third �
parties, so long as this does not interfere with City's free use and enjoyment of the easement
described in this paragraph. Should SDA grant any such concurrent easement or otherwise make '
use of the easement,then SDA shall be responsible for a pro rata share of all maintenance, repair
and replacement of facilities within the easerr�ent.
6. SDA does hereby grant to City a temporary construction easement on, in,over, under, across,and
above the real property described as Parcel 3 in Exhibit B (°Parcel 3"), for the purposes of ;
constructing a public water tank and related facilities, including, but not limited to communication
antennas, drainage facilities, landscaping and incidental uses. Said temporary construction
easement shall be in effect for a period of three (3) years following the date of this Agreement.
7. SDA does hereby grant to City an exclusive permanent easement on, under, across, and above
the real property described as Parcel 4 in Exhibit B ("Parcel 4")for the purpose of constructing a '
public water tank and related facilities, including, but not limited to communication antennas (as
long as it does not interfere with existing church radio communications devices),drainage facilities,
landscaping,and incidental uses. Said permanent easement shall include the right to install,repair,
maintain, replace, operate, and improve any and all facilities necessary for the use and operation
of a publicwatertank and related appurtenances. Notwithstanding the terms of this provision,SDA
reserves the right to use Parcel 4 in a manner consistent with City's free use and enjoyment of the '
easement described in this paragraph.
8. Prior to construction City will pave the existing dirt road located in Parcel 2 with asphalt concrete
over rock base. Upon completion of the project, the City will provide 2-inch overlay of asphalt
concrete. The City shall maintain the roadway in a reasonably safe condition.
9. City will install a permanent chain-link fence along the access road and linking to the existing site
fencing. The fencing will be 42 inches high with a pedestrian access gate.
10. CITY and SDA agree that the purpose of this Agreement is to enable City to use the permanent
easement property for public utility purposes, or other valid public purpose, and that at such point �
in time as the City in its sole discretion ceases to require the use of the permanent easement
property for such purposes then the City permanent easement shall be terminated.
EASEMENT AGREEMENT
PAGE 3
11. Should any provision of the Ag�eement be held by a court of competent jurisdiction or by a
legislative or rule making act to be either invalid, voir or unenforceable, the remaining provision of '
this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect, unimpaired by the holding, legislation or rule. ;
12. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and supercedes all prior ':
discussions, negotiations and agreement whether oral or written. Any amendment to this ;
Agreement, including an oral modi�cation supported by new consideration, rnust be reduced to
writing and signed by both parties before it will be effective. ;
13. The Agreement runs with the land and inures to the benefit of, and is binding on, the parties, their
respective heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns.
14. Masculine, feminine or neuter gender and the singular and the plural number, shall each be
considered to include the other whenever the context so requires. If either party consists of more
than one person, each such person shall be jointly and severally liable. ,
15. This Agreement and all matters relating to this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the '
State of California in force at the time any need for the interpretation of this Agreement or any '
decision or holding concerning this Agreement arises.
16. This Agreement may be executed in two ormore counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an ;
original, but all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument.
17. Each parly and its counsel shall have participated fully in the review and revision of this Agreement.
Any rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafti�g party
shall not apply in interpretation of this Agreement or any amendments or exhibits thereto. '
18. The pa�ties hereby represent that the individuals executing this Agreement are expressly
authorized_to do so on an in behalf of the parties. '
19. Amendments to this Agreement shall be in writinq and shall be made only with the mutual written
consent of all the parties to this Agreement.
;
,
EASEMENT AGREEMENT
PAG E 4
1N WITNESS WHEREOF, this agreement is hereby executed on the day and year first above written.
SIGNATURE BELOW INDICATES AGREEMENT WITH THE TERMS HEREIN
THE CENTRAL CALIFORNIA CONFERENCE ASSOCIATION OF SEVENTH DAY ADVENTISTS
K� � 7/,/ • " ��%'�-G"�+ ... ��
Name, Title Nam itle
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Tony Ferrara, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kelly Wetmore, Deputy City Clerk
�
�
i
EASEMENT AGREEMENT
PAGE 5
STATE OF CALIFORNIA: ss
COUNTY OF r=���:��
._.._.�.. .
On �-i�I , 20�, before me, i ��1 Ia - � ,��' ,:P , a Notary Public,
personally appeared �Jcu-,e�- L. �s ��� , personally known to me (
' to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that�e executed the same in�s�authorized capacity and that byh#ssignature on the '
instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. ;
'.�.------ "' ��t:•�cr '�t' . . . . . . .
. . a.�.'.�. . . . . . . . . . .� . . . . . Witness my hand and official seal
� T���A�3E
CcrtuMss�on�13602pp i
� NohuY Pablk-CaNFom(a � i
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MyCa��r�My 2Dpg �
STATE OF CALIFORNIA: ss
COUNTY OF �i=���.
On q-i"1 , 20C33 , before me, � �� �c� , a Notary Public,
personally appeared t=r�c�r�'c�c 5���~�x , personally known o me (
) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity and that by his signature on the '
instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, e�cecuted the instrument. �
• �
i
i
.�E t'`: .:�:`-� . . . . . . Witness my hand and official seal
T000 a P,�toE
Conxnission�1360200
_ � Notary Public-Califomts �
Frs�no Counly
� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . My Corrim.EkAUss Jun 8,2C06
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' i
�
�
�
jaf:232:S:lPUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING SHARED ITEMS1LinnlCapital ProjectslReservoir 11EasementslSeventh DaylSeventh Day Adv �
Easement Highlighted Revisions 7-25-03.wpd €
,,.. �R��
'�` �- •
:?% •� -
' :�` SLO-931734 LG
. �
�:
;�,., w y
._::
4: � EXHIBIT A
��: _
�a*.pa�ion of I.ots 20 a3nd 3a in the City of Arroyo Grancie, in the Co�nty of San Lt�is Ubispo,
State o�Califamia, accotding tr�;map of the liesvbdivisions of a part of the Ranchos Corral �e
Piedra,;�isma and Bolsa dc ChcJni,sal, che property of E.W. Steele, Esq. and surveyed by R.R.
"-ar;is i� 1885, filed November:24, 1886 in Book A, Pagc 63 af Ma�s, in the office af tt�e
�°
��o�.z�[y�'�tecorder of said Count�; describad as follows: ,.
� •
Begin�g at ihe inters�eedon of the Northeasterly tine o�f$tock?� according to map of the Valley
Yiew`I'��ct, recorded 3uly 22, ���26 in Book 3, Page 78 of Maps, records of said Co�nty ancE
tha No; wesierly I.ine of said I;�t 30; rt�ee Norm a9°2S' East along.t� Narthwcsteriy linc
of said� 30 and 29 to th� ri�ost Westerly corncr of the property conveyed to the City af
Arroyo: nde by deed dated N;i�p ?.2, I929 and record�cd in Book 2�1, Page 263 of Official
R,eco records of said County*thonc:e South 25°55' East aiang the Savthwcsterly l�r�c of tb�e
laad so , nvcy� 3Qx.94 �eet t��the mast 5outherty cc�rner th�rcof; rhence Narrh 64°05' East
aiong '. Sarthrasoerly,line af tti+�Property sa cauveyod 90 fieet to tti,c most Wcstcrfy line of the ,
_ anveyed to Coast Sid��Campmxtit�g A.SSOCiatio�t of the Methodist Episcopal Church,
a corpo� 'on by de�d datcd June:;�9, I 913 and rocardal in Book 97,Page 370 of Deeds, rccorrclss
• af said. ovnty; thenc� South �'°�7' �ast a}ong said naost Westerly line a�c�id its txtonsion
- Southcr to the.No�th li�e af t�said Valley View Tract; tthence'W�st and Northwest along the
rro� �s of sa�d v�t�y vi�,� �r�c co ct� ��c of��;�;�.
�
:s,YC thosc portions camreyd�by docds recorded Mat�ch 10. I965 ir� Bovk I341, Paga 1 t3
��d 134�2, Paga 124 a t� i�Book 134x, Page 115 of Offacial Recorcls.
y� '� l,TT** .
• � 1
� �
� �
� . f
� i
�FC �. ;
�
� #
�
,t • �
�s • ' - •
.� ..
�. .
,e°
�:
a�Z =:
:i^ €
-M�
�:
C�}��
,1�.:
� _ ✓
�; pAGE 4
<�
��
�
���
�'
�
� �` -
�
;�.. . . .._._.
,.�� /
� - �xhibit �'�8��
nt
;�[.
File no:=�32.S�Q3 _ September 14,2001
:;,
�,.�
,:n :=.
PQrtioa�of the land describeci iri.t�e dccd recorded in Book 248, Pa.ge 41 of Official Records in the
��t .
San L�Obispo County Recardec's O�cc,also beirig portions of Lots 29 and 30 of RR Harris'
:�� -
Resubdi�vision of Ranchos Con�Fde Piedra,Pismo and BoLsa dc ChernisaI as�stiown on the map filed
;;: _
in$ook£A of Maps at Page b3,in:�said Recorder's 4ffice,in the City of Amoyo Crrande,�ounty of
� :
San Lus�Ob�ispo, State of Califomia,said porkio�os descrit�ed in Parceis 1 through 4 inclusive as
iF
:�;
follows;t;
�
3�
�
:�:�rcei
A strip tand 20.00 feet wide tli�northerty�ine dcscribed as fallaws:
:..
r
The y li�e ofthe la�desc�"i�ed in deed recordai in&wk Z�2,�age 263 of Offiaia!Records
in thc ce of said Couiity Recoii�tkkr.
=;: �
The , Iy termini of Parcel 1 ta��+ennin�te on the easterly Iine o�'first said dcod.
Parctl2� � - -
.�
'I'he 16:44 feet of the taa�:�iescribed in first said decd. '
, - . ;
rN � , �
Paxccl3 � . .
s i
Tbat po n of said land lying nordi�crty af thc following descr�bed line: � • �
��.
Coma� at the most soudicrly i�rner of Iand des�xibed in deed recarded in Book 209,Page 254
��� ' rds it�the Office of�id County Recorder,said corner beiag marked by a one ineh f
.;r. I
c::z.azetet n pipe and plsstic plu�:�tamped"LS 6I92"as shown on the Recard af Survey filcd in �
_ ;
��ok 77, e 20 of�,icensed Surv�+s in the Qffice o�said Co�mty Recorder; � `
�;
'�enoe al t�e e�asterly line of�i�'st said dad soui3�7°58'31"east 52.63 feet to a point tbat lies
�: �
�::
SU,OQ fcct ` uftxrly of the nartherly':�'me of Parcxl 1 as hereia de:�ccn'b�d above and the Trae Poiat
oi B ' , g; -
Thencx pal�lel with said north line��uth 63°SO'24"west 73.62 feet;
�
'i'iience noi�h 73°43'51"west 6$.4$ftet to a point that lies 50.40 feet south,eriy of the easterly line
>
of first sai��ieed; � _
,�� ;_
`�"^e�ce '; el with said easterlylin�north 26°0?�6"west 27i.23 feet to a point on the northwest
,�;
!ine of firsC�aid deed.� ..
,,.•
:r.,
:3`:
�"
�3
K�
��
- . �:� Exh��it "8�`
:�� �
�;: cantinued
Fifa no: �3,32_5903 September 14,200�
�a
iti
�Yy
�xc�p 'tt�ig therefrom hereinbefore:described Parcei I,Parcel2,and Parcel4 described bclow.
��rcel�:
,,:
That po�tion vf said land lying no�eriy of the foll�wing d�scribed line: '
::;:: -
�e�mme�ing at the norFherly corncr of thc tand descn`bed in first said deed also being on the ea.�terly .
�iae of'�#act 1390 as shown on saifi Record of Survey; ,
�.
Thence�ong the easterly Iine af�rst said decd south 2b°07'26"east 53.74 feet to the'�'ruc Point
3,s
of Begini�iing; -
Thence�a right a.+agtc south 63°52."34"wcst Z8.26 fcct io a point oa the northwest lina of first said
�eed. �
:��
Exceptin�therefrom that portion o#'hereinbefore desuibed Pasce1213+iag nort�Zeriy of the Above
Y
�escribec��ine.
{Y
The abc� . d�bcd parc�is o�Ea��re�raphicalty shown on Exhibit"e" attached 2�ereta��made
a part b f. �� .
� - �►"�' � f
--�! ��` '��.
Joseph T.'� oxris�LS p,«,�«��� � �
�k �• ;�--��� *� .
� � rTo. 61�2 �.
� , ,
�� End Description �� �"i,�v^: �
. � . -- �
�. . .
� ;� •
:�
�� _
�
:�
;�i .
�
;��
;� .
;,� ' -
; �
�: .
:'i� •
.�
-�a.
�.. .
�T
.,.•
� . ..__.
;�r . • � -.�, ..,�.�...,,
'°:� EXHIBIT":C"
�C
;e, -
:;u
�:1
:a� �3j►
�:; �2
�-� t :..,��,Q/
�� ?s�
' � � � � - �o���
`;� '--,� .
:� o
:e s-.,� .
}� .�a
� �'Q�,. .
� � - �
� � � ��l ��r�
V � P.O.C� '�'�i�'' ��5�
�6 �9 ! .
� � a o�,
r,�� � " � ����
. ' . �'.�, �' U
:•;. � ��r�� �
�cp �` s�p�, _ tx:s��r;c
� ` �� � �,•� ' �� ''K P.O.C.
� �� :i � �'��E� '�
' � �'..,
f •
n�� .:�:} ,• ;: �. �4� � • Sfl7•58'31`E
�o :.:,� � ..:s C�- D. 21.D'"j�
,�` �,2, : � � ��,."�.. �e,g�, �� i
� �,� '- � ���� �� �' .��, •�, ,S07'S8'31'£
:�, 'N �',� o>. � ��r'�3 �� o � 33.SB•
. ti : 26 �:.. � �� . -,�� T.P.CI.B.C3>
;7 ��:'1 � Z.
_ � :� �� � I
� �! ;���` `' � 4�.�'�► Zo
� :a " . f�'�•.�`2� iP , �a'`� �!!�`-�
z QQ;� � 3E3 ��
� f � 20AQ'
. Z��. c� L�. �'
�° � - 6a yl�
. ` �
� . N?�
. �;:.,�. � -
.
::�; . Leg�nd
.�:..t . � Found 1` (P IS fi192 per 77/l5/20
�:�;�'.z unlass noted atherw�se
�,, `: PARC�.2 P.O.C.— Point of Coi�nmencamerst
'����' C16' Wlde) T.P.0.8.— True Point ofi Beginning �-
' `�3.•1..�— Temporory Cor+atnaction Easement Porcei 3
� - Jaba L. �va�co 8t '
_ :� ��,
-:i�_�303 70AYE]�lIBIT.OWG 1 +�60' �t4�-01
4`�`
.�
;� _ �
.,�
'�,,",�x !
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
CITY OF ARR�YO GRANDE Attachment 3
WHEN RECORDED, RETURN TO:
Director of Public Works
City of Arroyo Grande
208 E. B�anch Street
Arroyo Grande, California 93420
EASEMENT AGREEMENT
THIS EASEMENT AGREEMENT, made this � day of �21(�-rIAS'� 204L,; by and
between, the CALIFORNIA PAClFIC ANNUAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED METHODIST
CHURCH, a Ca{ifomia nonpro�t corporation, (hereinafter referred to as "TMC"), and the CITY O�'
ARROYO GRANDE, a Municipal Corporation in the State of Califomia, (hereinafter referred to as "
CITY"):
WHEREAS, CITY presently owns and operates a public water tank and related facilities on real
property leased from TMC pursuant to that certain 99 year lease dated May 24, 1929, and recorded in
February 18, 1937, in Book 209 at Page 250 in the Official Records of the Qffice of the County '
Recorder of the County of San Luis Obispo, State of Califomia, (hereinafter referred to as "Lease"),
and;
� � (
i
WHEREAS, CITY desires to modify the boundaries of the area occupied by CI1Y's public water tank �
and related facilities, and;
WHEREAS, CITY desires to demo(ish the existing water tank and cons#ruct a larger water tank and �
related facilities, and obtain all necessary rights for said water tank a�d related facilities; and; �
WHEREAS, TMC and CITY desire to terminate all provisions of the Lease, and to hereby establish a
new agreement containing mutually agreeable provisions; _ �
NOW, THEREFORE, for valuable consideration, the receipt �and adequacy of which is hereby
acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. The above recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein.
2. TMC is the owner of the real property described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated
herein by reference r
_ . __ .� _�.y...
EASEMENT AGREEMENT
PAGE 2
3. TMC does hereby grant to City an exclusive permanent easement on, in, over, under, across,
and above the real property described as Parcei 1 in Exhibit B {"Parcel 1") attached hereto and
incorporated herein to construct, maintain and operate a pubfic water tank, and related facilities,
including, but not {imited to communication antennas, drainage facilities, landscaping and
incidental uses. Said permanent easement shall include the right to install, repair, maintain, •
replace, operate, and improve any and all fiacilities necessary for the use and operation of a
public water tank and related facilities.
4. CITY shall pay to TMC a one-time fee in the amount of Seventeen Thousand Four Hundred
Thirty Nine Dollars ($17,439.00) as full compensation for all rights granted herein.
5. CITY will also pay to TMC a one time fee in the amount of One Thousand Nine Hundred Three
Dollars and Seventy Seven Cents ($1,903.77) as full compensation for the City's obligation to
supply TMC water under the Lease.
6. CITY and TMC agree that the purpose of this Agreement is to enable City to use the permanent
easement property for public utility purposes, for the operation and maintenance of a water
storage facility, and that at such point in time as the City in its sole discretion ceases to �equire
the use of the permanent easement property for such purposes then the City permanent
easement shall be extinguished. Upon extinguishment of the permanent easement, CITY shall
remove only the above ground portion of CIN facilities at its sole expense, upon written request '
from TMC that the facility is to be removed or as otherwise agreed by the parties.
7. CITY shall pay for all utility services it consumes or uses in its operations on Parcel 1 at the rate �
charged by the servicing utility companies. ;
8. CITY agrees that it will not use, generate, store or dispose or permit the use, generation,
storage or disposal of any hazardous material on, under, about or within Parcel 1 in violation of
any 1aw or regulations. To the best of C1TY's knowledge without investigation, CfTY represents,
warrants, and agrees (1) that neither the City nor any third party has used, generated, stored or
disposed of , or permitted the use, generation, storage or disposal of any Hazardous Material,
and (2) the C1TY will not and will not permit any third party to use, generate, store or dispose of.
any Hazardous Material on, under, about or within Parcel 1 in violation of any law or regulation.
CITY and TMC each agree to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the other and the other's
partners, affiliates, agents and employess against any and all losses, liabilities, claims and/or
costs (including reasonable attomeys fees� and costs) arising from any breach of any
representation, warranty or agreement contained in this paragraph. As used in this paragraph,
"Hazardous Materia(° shall mean petroleum or any petroleum product, asbestos, any substance
known to cause cancer and/or reproductive toxicity, and/or any substance, chemical or waste
that is identified as hazardous, toxic or dangerous in any applicable federal, state or local !aw or
regulation. This paragrapM shall survive the termination of this Agreement.
__._._ _
EASEMENT AGREEMENT
PAGE 3
9. Should any p�ovision of the Agreement be held by a court of competent jurisdiction or by a
legislative or rule rnaking act to be either invalid, void or unenforceable, the rernaining provision
of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effec#, unimpaired by the holding, legisfation or
rule. �
10.This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and supercedes all prior
discussions, negotiations and agreement whether oral or written, Any amendment to this
Agreement, including an orai modification supported by new consideration, must be reduced t�
writing and signed by both parties before it will be effective.
11.The Agreement runs with the land and inures to�the benefit of, and is binding on, the parties,
their respective heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns.
12. Masculine, feminine or neuter gender and the singular and the plural number, shall each be
considered to include the other whenever the context so requires. If either party consists of
more than one person, each such person sha11 be joint{y and severally liable.
13.This Agreement and all matters relating to this Agreement shall be govemed by the laws of the
State of Ca(ifomia in force at the time any need for the interpretation of this Agreernent or any
decision or halding conceming this Agreement arises.
14.This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of whicfi shall be deemed
an original, but all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument.
15. Each party and its counsel shall have participated fully in the review and revision of this
Agreement. Any rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the
drafting party shal{ not apply in interpretation of this Agreement or any amendments or exhibits
thereto.
16. The parties hereby represent that the individuals executing this Agreement are �c�ressl�
authorized to do so on an in behaif of the parties.
17.Amendments to this Agreement shall be in writinq and shall be made only with the mutual
written consent of all the parties to this Agreement. Y
EASEMENT AGREEMENT
PAGE 4
IN WITNESS WHERE4F, this agreement is hereby executed on the day and ysar first above written.
SIGMATURE BELOW INDICATES AGREEMENT W1TH THE TERMS HEREIN
THE CALIFORNIA PACIFIC ANNUAL CONFERENCE OF THE METHODIST CHURCH
............... . ..... . . . . .
..�� �, f�;��'.�tt�
. S/�
Name, itle................................... Name, Title
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE.......
Tony Ferrara, Mayor
ATTEST: '
Keily Wetmore, Deputy City Clerk
i
STATE OF CALIFORNIA: ss '
i
COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO (
r
�
r
f
On , 20_, before me, , a Notary Pubiic, �
personally appeared, personaliy known to me (or proved to me on the basis of safisfactory evidence)to
be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowfedged to me that he
executed the same in his authorized capacity and that bjr his signature on the i�strument the person, or
the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument
.....................................................
..............:...................................... Witness my hand and official seal.
.....................................................
.....................................................
STATE OF CALIFORNIA: ss
,.,... ,.,.r., ..� .,.., , ,.,.., ....,.,...,
EASEMENT AGREEMENT
PAGE 5
On , 20_, before me, , a Notary Public,
personally appeared, personaliy known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to
be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowiedged to me that he
executed the same in his authorized capacity and that by his signature on the instrurnent the person, or
the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument.
.....................................................
..................................................... Witness my hand and official seal
.....................................................
.....................................................
1
I
�
(
_�,_,_ �, ^__ ._..,
• SLO-9�!;�2 'LG
�1 ir
EXHIBIT A
Be;inniq, at posc South i5' at the ZVest corazr of iot 28 oi Ha�:is' tZesubdivis;ons oi par a�
the Ranehos Corral de Pied;a, E? Pismo and BoIsa de ChemisaI, the progerty af E_�V. Ste�l�,
made in 1.885 in accardaace with map rtcarded Navem�e:24, 18$E in Boak A, Pa;e 53 of
�taos, i�.thc o�ftce of the Ccunty �ecorc�er of said Carsnry and running thenc� aI�ng old i�nce
an u%�st�:�rly Iine or the said Lat 28, (,)- Norrh 28°32' F�:c, �Io.2 ;�et to poir.t in cente:Iin�
produc��� of a So foot road runnin; Norch 5�°�0' East and fmm whic:� point a staka in rhe
Nartheriy line of rhe said mad bears North 28°32' F�st, 56.7 feet disrant; the3ce on �he
centeriin� of SO foot raad, (2) -Nurth 54°40' East,428.1�feet to paint frorn whi�h an iroa post
bears Nqrth 22°03' Wesi; 25.7 feet distant and an iran post bears Sout�i 81°l�' Wesr,�5.9 feet
distant; �"3} - Nortii 81°IS' East, 394.1 feet ta poi�from which an iron post on Fast side of
road bea�s Narrh 8I°15' East, ZS feei distant and aa iron post beazs lYorth 36°15' East, 35.35
feet dis��at; (4) - South 8°�S' East, 1 d25 feet to an iron post from which an iron post beazs
l�torth 2�°45' F.ast,44.1 foet disant;thence teaving centerlme of road; (5)-South 29°45'A�est,
80.6 fecF ta an iron post; (b) -Sonttt 52°SS' West, 56.6 feet to aa iron post; ('7) -South 8°00'
.. _ East, 6Q,6 fcct to sc�]ce on Nocthaly side of a road 70 feet wide; the�ce running along the
Northerl;�► side aE'said ro�, �-South 80°I7' Wcst, 150 fte� th�n�ce leaving said road; (9} -
Suurh 9923' East, 1T6.6 feet tv stake in Northerly liae of Ia�of�V.H. Ryan: - thence nmaing
along azj oid fen,ce the geaeral coursc of which is Sauth 57° W�st; (10� - South S7°QO' Wesc,
526.9 fe�t W stake: - (Il) -North 9°44'W�st, I88.6 feei to stake; {12)- South 81°24' Vitest,
250 feec to point ia center of 50 foot road fivm which aa�mn post beazs Sourh 81°2a� wesc,
25 feet e�istant;:- then� on ceaterIine of the Iast�mad road; (13) - North 8°49' West, 854.? _
#eet to �oint ia West line of I.at 29 of tt� Harris' Resvbdivisiaz�s herein befare named from •
•w�ich a s�se at th�e iatersection of ihe Wesi line of re�d with �e said Iot Ii.ne bears Santh '
28°32' West, 41.2 f'eet distant: - thance along o!d fr.�e on the said tot line; (14) - North
28°32' �ast, 204.9 feet ta poi�oE begiaaiag, the tract descn'bed being a part of Lots 26,28 and �
29 of th�; said Hazris' Resubdivision.
. . ,
EXCEP`�aay po�tioa as descnbed in.deed recorded March 1, I963 in Book'L2Z8,Page 256 of � �
Official�tecords. . .
� ���* . -
. . r
_ __ _�,....�._........
__ ___ _ '� ���, iV �IiJJ��.�. �1 ��
� ..����� ��� ��� `
SLO-9�1733 LG
EXHIBIT �A� C o W r� N vco
Thac pc�rtion of Lot 24 of the Resvbdivision of the Rancho Cortai de Piedra, Pismo and Bolsa
de Che�nisal, in the City of Arroyo Gcande, in the County of San Luis Obispv; State of
Califor�ua, as sunreyed by RR. Harris, November, 1885, according ro map thereof recorded
Novem)�er 24, 1885 in Book A, Pa�e 63 of il�faps, in the office of the Connty Recorder af said
County, describad as fol�ows: ,
Begitm�pg at S.75 on the NQrthwesterly line of Lot�9; thence aiong� the Northwesterly line of
said LoF 29, South 29°22' West, 161.18 faet to a point; ih�nce along the Noctheasterly line of
the lane� conveyed Lo the City of Arroyo Gtande by deed�record�d in Book 211, Page Zb3 of
Officia� Records, Soath 26°06' Fast, 335.37 feet to a point on thc Westerly Iiae of land
convey�to the Arroyo Graude Methodist fipiscupal Church by deed recorded in Book 87, Page
42 of�lceds; the�e North 8°49' West aloQg the Westerly line of the land conveyed to said
church, 446.92 feet to the true poim of beginning. �
*�***
. .
�� �
�
�
j
__ _.
..� _ ... ��.�.
��� ._ . ..,..__
•Y fJJ't .J .._...-..-,.-�....,�„.,,,e„.r
r:_C� __
J , Exhibit rcBisi
- Fite no:2�2.59Q3 751) Se tember 14, 2001
Portions pf the iand described in t�e de�ds recorded in Book 209, Page 250 of Official Records and
Book 97,Page 370 of Deeds in the San Luis Obispo County Recorder's Offic�, also being a portion
of Lot 29 of R.R. Harris' Resubdivision of Ranchas Comal de Piedra,P9smo and Botsa de Chernisa!
as show��� on the map fi(ed in Book A of Maps at Page 63,in said County Recardet's Offtce, in the
City of A��rayo Grande* Co�nty of San Luis Obispq State of Califomia, said portions described in
Parcels i, 2, and 3 as follows: �
� Parcei �} .
� That per�ion af the tand described as follows:
. � Beg�nnir�g at the southeri�r come� of first said deed, sa�c! comer being marked by a oae incfi
diameter iron pipe and pla��c plug stamped"LS. 6192"as shown on thc Record of Sunrey filed
in Book 77, Page 20 of Licensed Surveys m the Of�ce of said County Recorder, �
Thence�long the westerly�iine of said deed north T°58'31"we�t 173.68 feet;
Thence horth 63°50'2�"east 23.00 feer
Therx;e�t a right angte scuth 26°09'40"east 185.Q0 feet to a paint that lies 20.Q0 feet southeriy
of the�utherty li�e of first said deed;
Thence parallel with said southerly fine south 83°50'20"west 83.77 feet to a point on the westerty
� tine af s�cond sa�d deed;
Thence plong the w+esteriy�ine of last said deed north 7°58'31"west 21.05 feet to the True Point
of Begiq�ing. .�
Parc�!� '. ' __ _
A�of tht� land in said itrst deed and a strip of land tying 5fl.00 fest southerly of the southeriy line �
r .
of said�eed. � f
The we�te�ly termi�i of said strip fi�terminate aR the westerfy 6ne of second said deed. �
The nohherly tecmini oisaid strip to terminate an the northeasterly projedion of the northedy line �
of Parc� 1 as h�rein described above. ;
Except�rtat por�on lying within Par�cel 1 as herein desp�ibed above.
Parcei� �
Aa of th� tand�rt said first deed. , - . -
Except�hat po�io�lying w'ithin Parcels 1 and 2 as herein descn'bed above. � � � �
The ab�ve clescribed pieces af land are graphically shown an Exh�bi#"B-1"attached hereto and
- made a part hereo#.
` End Description �,pNp .'
• . ��L9`
t �' ,� �
r� ` � �
. �
J eph . Morris P.L.S. � .* ���, �
Ato. 8192 3.
,_.
��OF CAU� _
� page t
��.�1 4t���11
_ 1 .
. ���
�'j 4.�.�
� U,� �,o
. s�-'s ��
� 6�� � ��Q .
. . l-� os .
_ �'-�� � �`�� ��'.> �
o p � � � �
� ' '1$' . � Fd 1 '1/4" iP.
� �_ � � � RCE i 0070 ;
.
� �J �f� '�-`�a'��� f,� Fs! 6 xs'
� N F 6• W o o d P a s t
F— `(� . �6'� A �� , and�Tag �
U �j,,��} �s �"��• ''�� JF LS 6192
� � �"� "•. �` �9�- � '
,
� s1 � ....�.—� �,�j t� l`�x;2
F— �,.�r,;' j' ,� � 8�� 6;
. ' rt� `�� � j �°� �
,
. Existing �'� � .� h� i
� Wate� Tonk � � Zb� _ :
ti i
�7� �.,..�� f'.,,' -� '� �' , i
,`_
V ., ye' Z�
/a y4~ �� t •y� +
�/ T.P:O.B.-� �c,�O� (
. �, � � . �
. � �ros
- Legend _
,
�
� Found 1" lP LS 6192 ,per 77/lSf 20 -
i unless noted otherwise
T.P.0.8. – True Point of 8eginning
II/ – Ternporory Construction Easement (Pv�cel :Z} �
�,� -- Temperory Construct�on Eosemeat tPercet 3}
Joha L. Walla+ce &As,sociates
1,32.5803 E'�{fiIBILDMIG 1'=60' 9-14-07
CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
.r- �:- - - �- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --�;
�� �
� State ofi Ca�ifornia �
� County of �5 (� � ss. t�
�
�; � � / � ,,i \, �
� On Y: � , before me, _ ��� G-. y-1 R��. /V.0�..1 �L��l� �
<� 0 e .�� Neme and Title of Officer(e.g.,"Ja Doe,Notary Public")
personaily appeared , �
�� � N�igner(s) �
�
�personaiiy known to me �
❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory
�
evidence
' to be the person/�dj whose name(�a'j is/afa '
'' subscribed to the within instrument and '
��, acknowledged to me that he�executed ;
,, �py��„n� the same in his/�ie�eif authorized �
�� Coenmt�ton�12969T� capacity�iaej�; and that by his/#e�+ie+�
� �!I�-�b� � signature,(�on the instrument the person{�, or .�
'` � ��°��O°"� the entity upon behalf of which the persoraks�'
��� ��m����'� acted, executed the instrument. '
�' �
i�, _ :,
;: WITNESS my hand and official seal. �
i� . • '�
i, � � '�
�' Place Notary Seal Above Sig ature of Not Pu ic '�
I, .•�
�� OPT/ONAL �
�, '
i: Though the information be%w is not required by law,it may prove valuable to persons retying on the document .i .
i and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this forrn to anather document ;i '
,, Description of Attached Document �
�; Title or Type of Qocument: '
i
i�
i� Number of Pa es: '�
Document Date: 9 �,�
i�
���
i; Signer(s)Other Than Named Above: ?
r�
�
�� Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer '
'' Signer's Name: ��
,
'� ❑ Individual Top of thumb here
� i
,; ❑ Corporate Officer—Title(s): �
❑ Partner—� Limited ❑General ��
❑ Attomey in Fact '
'� ❑ Trustee
'' ❑ Guardian or Conservator
�
; ❑ Other. ,
� �
Signer Is Representing: �
_�.- - - - - - - - - _ - - - - _ _ - - - _ - _ - = - - -s.�
A 199.9 Na6onel Notary 0.ssacietlon•9350 Oe Soto Ave..P.O.Box 2402•ChalswoM,CA 91313-2402•www.nationalratery.org� Prod.No.5907 Reortlar:Cetf TofV-Free 1•800-876-6827
. _. .. __.. ... ...__..___ . .
_ . _.. _ ._ . , _..._.....
` RECORDING RECtUESTED BY Attachment 4
C1TY OF ARROYO GRANDE
WHEN RECORDED, RETURN T0:
Director of Pubiic Works
City of AROyo Grande
208 E. Branch Street
Arroyo Grande, California 93420
TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT AGREEMENT
o��RO►o�} THIS EASEMENT,made this � dayaf �,(�-!,(�jT 20�;by
� .roav 7Z
�.�� and between, CALIFORNIA PACIFIC ANNUAL CONFERENCE CAMP
� M�r,�11� �
�,�„o�,,.► COMMISSION OFTHE METHODISTCHURCH,a California nonprofit corporatiAn,
(hereinafter referred to as "TMC"), and the CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE, a
Municipal Corporation in the State of California, (hereinafter referred to as" CITY"):
WHEREAS, City desires to expand the public water tank and related fiacilities and in order to
accommodate said water facility expansion project the parties have entered into or will enter into
a new lease agreement which redefines their rights and obligations.
;
WHEREAS, CITY presently owns and operates a public water tank and related facilities on real
property leased from TMC pursuant to that certain 99 year lease dated May 24, 1929, and :
recorded in February 18, 1937, in Book 209 at Page 250 in the Official Records of the Office of
the County Recorder of the County of San Luis Obispo, State of Califiornia, (hereinafter referred j
to as "Lease"), and; i
�
�
WHEREAS, by this agreement the parties intend to establish all necessary rights required to �
effectuate said construction activities for the water facility expansion project.
NOW, THEREFORE, for valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which is hereby
acknowledged, TMC and CITY agree, covenant and promise as follows:
1. The above recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein.
2. TMC is the awner of the real property(hereinafter referred to as the"Properlyn) described
in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 3
3. TMC hereby grants to City a temporary construction easement in, over, on, under, across,
and above the portion of the Property described as Parcel 2 in Exhibit B attached here#o
and incorporated herein by this reference,for the purposes of a constructing a pubiic water
tank and related facilities and incidentaf uses. Said temporary construction easement shall
be in effect for a period of three {3) years foflowing the date ofi this Agreement.
4. Said temporary construction easement shail include the right to construct, lay , operate,
maintain, reconstruct, modify, enlarge, remove and replace a public watertank and related
faci(ities. Said temporary construction easement shall include right- of- way for the
purpose of using construction equipment and vehicies and shall allow for storage of
vehicies equipment and materiais, including excavated materials.
5. TMC hereby grants to City a Temporary Construction Easement on, under, across, and
above the real property described as Parcel 3 in Exhibit B for the purposes of a
constructing a public water tank, and incidental uses. Said Temporary Construction
Easement shall be in efiFect for a period of three 3) years foQowing the date of this
Agreement.
6. ClTY agrees during the term hereof to abandon its interest in the water line easement ,
crossing the Property, as recorded in 211 O.R. 261 on February 18, 1937. !
I
e with the �
7. CITY and TMC agree the replacement of existing trees will be in complianc ;
attached letter, and may be modified by written agreement.
8. Shou(d any provision of the Agreement be held by a court of competent jurisdiction or by a
legislative or rule making act to be either invalid, voir or unenforceable, the remaining
provision of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect, unimpaired by the holding,
legislation or rule.
9. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and supercedes all prior
discussions, negotiations and agreement whether oral or written. Any arnendment to this
Agreement, including an orai modification supported by new consideration, must be reduced
to writing and.signed by both parties before it will be effective.
10. The Agreement inures to the benefit of, and is binding on, the parties, their respective
heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns.
_ . _ _. . . _ ,, �...,.._. ,.�.�.�.,..
11. Masculine, feminine or neuter gender and the singular and the p(ura! nurnber, shall each
be considered to include the other whenever the context so requires. If either party
consists of more than one person, each such person shail be jointly and severally liab[e.
12. This Agreement and all matters relating to this Agreement shall be governed by the laws
of the State of California in force at the time any need for the interpretation of this
Agreement or any decision or holding concerning this Agreement arises.
13. This Agreement rnay be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shali be
deemed an original, but all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument.
14. Each party and its counsel shall have participated fully in the review and revision of this
Agreement. Any rule ofi construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved
against the drafting party shall not apply in interpretation of this Agreement or any
amendments or exhibits thereto.
15. The parties hereby represent thatthe individuals executing this Agreement are expressly
authorized to do so on an in behalf of the parties.
16. Amendments to this Agreement shall be in writinq and shall be made only with the mutual
written consent of all the parties to this Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this agreement is hereby executed on the day and year first above
written.
SIGNATURE BELOW 1NDICATES AGREEMENT WITH THE TERMS HEREIN
CALIFORNIA PACIFIC ANNUAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED METHODIST
CHURCH �
.#��,� �. �.r�
�
Name, ' le Name, Titie
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Tony Ferrara, Mayor .
ATTEST:
� �
�
t
Kelly Wetmore, Deputy City Clerk
STATE OF CALiFORNIA: ss
COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OB(SPO
On , 20 , before rne, , a Notary
Pubiic, personally appeared , personally known ta me (or proved
to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the
within instrument and acknowledged to rne that he executed the same in his authorized capacity
and that by his signature on the instrument the persan, or the entity upon behalf of which the
person acted, executed the instrument. �
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Witness rny hand and officiai seal
�
{
STATE OF CALIFORNIA: ss
. ;
COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
On , 20 , before me, , a N ota ry
Public, personally appeared , personafly known to me (or proved
to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the
within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity
and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the �
person acted, executed the instrument.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Witness my hand and officiaf seal
,
jaf.232:C:tWINDOWSITEMPIMethodist Temporary Consfruction Easement.wpd
,.� ��.,� _.._ _
- - --� .. i u:�� , ,_ .._ _..._.w...•,.....,........�..,�.,.,,
r. i n-_'
• SLO-931732 LG
E7tHIBIT �A�
Be;inniq� at post South i5° at the West corner of Lot 28 of Harris' Rcsubdivisions of par� af
the Ranehos Corzal de Piedra, El Pismo and BoIsa d� Chemisai, the property of E_W. Ste�le,
made in 1885 in accordaiice with map recorded Novemb+cr 24, 188b in Book A, Page 63 af
Maos, ir{,the off ce af tI�e Counry Rec4rder of said Caunty and nu�.ting thence aIong old fence
on Westt:,rly line of the said Lot 28, (1) - North 28°32' East, 216.2 #'eet to point in ccnterlin�
producec� of a 50 foot road running North 54°44' Ea�st and from wbich point a stake in the
Northeri� iine of rhe said mad bears North 28°32' East, Sb.7 feet distant; thence on the
centeziiu�of SO foot rnad, (2) -North 54°40' East,428.1 feet to point frorn u►hich an iroa post
bears Nqrth 22°43' West, 25.7 feet distani and an iron post bears South 81°15' West,55.9 feet
distant; �3) - North $1°15' East, 394.1 foet to point frarn which an iron post on East side of
coad bea� I�tarth 81�°15' East, 25 feet distaat and aa irvn post bears North 36°15' East, 35.35
feet dist;}nt; (4) - 5outh S°45' East, I025 feet to an iroa post from which an iron post bears
Atorth 2�°45' Easc,44.1 fxt disCant;tt�nce leaviag centerline ofroad; (5) -Sauth Z9°45' RTest,
80.6 fec� to an 'von post; (6) -3onrh 52°55' West, 56.6 feet to an iron post; (7) -Sauth 8°00'
_. . East, 60�6 feet to stake oa Noctherly side of a road 70 feet wide; thenc� mm�ing along the
Northeriy sid�of saia roaa, (8�- south 80°lr west. lso feet: chence leaving saia road; ts) -
South 9'�23' East, 176.6 feet to scalae ia Northerly liae of land of W.H. Ryan: - chence running
along a�q oId femce ihe geueral course af whiclt is South S7° wcst; �io� -South 57°00' V�est, .
� 526.9 fe�t to stake: - (11) -North 9°44''ofrest, 188.6 fect to stake; (l2) -South 81°24' oiTesz,
250 fcet to po's�t in ceater of SQ foot road from whicb an lron post beazs South 81°24' West,
25 fcet��israar,:- theo,ce an ceat�rIine of the last � road; (13} - North 8°49' West, 8�4.7 -
feet ta poisit in West Iine of Lot 29 of the Harris' Resubdivisions herein before named from •
�which a stake at the it�ersection of the West Iiue of radd with the said lot Iine beazs South
28°32' yVCSt, 41.2 feet dist�: - thttncc along old fe�nce on the said lot line; (14) - I�Forth
28°32' �ast, 204.9 fect t�poiffi of beginning, the ttact described being a part of Lots 26, 28 and
29 of th4; said Harris' R�esvbdivision_
EXCEP`�'arry Portion as descn�bed in deed recorded March 1, 1963 in B�ook'12�8,Paoe 25f of
Official�tecords- . -
�***
• .
!ii
ev
i�G -
fl.;
i' .
��F -
�� . . ..�.��� ` . . .
;�l
;'�� - SI.O-3317�; LG
.kr
•>s
��w
u��_ y
r
+r; BX�iIBIT ,4 C o�7� N��A
.�.
;��r �':
'lhat po`�an of Lvt 29 of ihe�bdivision of the Ra.t�2ao Corral de Fiedra, Pismo ard Bulsa
�K Ct�sal, ia rha City �f A�oyo Grande, ia�the Caunty af 5art £,uis �bispo, �rate of
..�:;;:rn��., as surve}�ed b�3�R.R�..�arris, Navet�ber, 188�, ac�cordiag to mag �f recnrded
=:? ' 24, IS$6 irx Booic A, �ge b3 af 11+Iaps, m tt�e affic� of thc County R�corder of sai�
�ounty.� .�s�'ibai as foi3ows: � ,
,
Begiani at 5.75 on the Northw+esFCrly liae of Lot 29; tt�ence aloug fite Narrhwesterly�e af
said Lot , Sau�h 29°22' WesC;:;�fI.18 fc�ct to:a poia� thrnce al�ag the Northe�aet�rty Iit�e of
the land meyad ta tl�a �ity �f.�lirr�ayo Grapd� by dee�rcco� in .Hc�ok 211, Page 2b3 af
�f1C38� �GQi�S, .�'OZE1� ,�(�la�'':.'-�� �5.37 fe�et oo a poiat on the Westcrtp lin� of land
convay o che A►rroyo Ge�e�todist Egiscopal Church�y deat res:ot�dad in Book 87,Page
42 of ; � North�8"d3'�'4Vest aloag the Westerly Iine ofF the lsad conr�cyc3 ta said
�ur�h, .92 fat m th�e true p�t of begianit�g.
, �.�
f �-
.�
' �k: �***
'� .
�: .
.ii
�'
M1`
�
.q..
. �� q
y
ci
'�
•C
. 'i'"'
, :l
...�
. �i
�
1 +�]
�:
.�
:.y:
� _�+.
rv�
, A
, „y� .
`ys
..�
. ..�� .
1 .� �
i-:
�
� .�
� ' i.;
� �•
' � •��t�
r
1�6 ••�,s ..r
�}� �
PT , -
� •
� .:ti•
� •
� .;
�
_.__ _ ,._ .v..,.,....�....�.�.w...r
%N -
,�
� ; EX�Ib1'� `c���
Fila no:2�'2.59�3(?51) ,�Septerriber 14 ZQa4
�
Yz �
F�
?�rtions�f tt�e fand de9Cribed in th8 deeds recorded in 8�ok 2i?9, Page 2S0 of t7fficiai Reca�ds and
��.�
�aok 97,`�?age 370 of�eds in the�`5an L�is Qbispo County Recorcler's C?f�ice,alse peing a Qartiat�
ot Lot 2��if R.R. Harris'Res�dnii�on of Ranchos Carral de Rfedra,Pismc and @olsa de Chemisai
as sttowr�cn the ma�ftted�n 8001�=�of MaQs at Page 63, i�3 said C�trrrtyr Reccrdet's Qffice, in the
City of A�ipyo �r�nde, Co�nty of S�r+ Luis 4bispa, State of Califomia, s�id�ortions desCribed in
P�rce�s '�2, and 3 as foitows: �
..;,
'�TGR1 �'j�.
That po �� n ai t�e la�d desarib�;�s follows:
� Bagin�ti � at the s�uthert� come�of first said derd, said comer f�ing rnarkect by a one inch
�'�an'teter; n pip�and isla5�ic pttt��st�mpad"t..S. 61 S2"as shown on tne Record of Survey frled
', IBook , Pa�ga 24 af L,icensed.�rvays irt the t?ffice of said County Recarder,
Th� t!u r�arly�I�te o�P:i�aid daed north T°38'3i"west 1�3.68 feet;
���G��G� ��JY LO~viW�i�. V �� i
Thence a right artgle so�th 26�'40"east 985.00 faet to a pofnt tha#lies 20.00 faet sautherly ,
��fhe so erly line��'st s�+ic!d�d; � � I
'°,�noe w#h said so�hedy�ne aouth 63°�'2�'west 83.�7�et3o a paint on the wresterhr �
line of nd s��d deed; �
.x:
� the uvest��ine of l�t s�id deed north 7°5�31"west Z'f.Q5 feet to the True Pant
�''�eg• 9, � ': �
4
"'��a12 . • r.
�AU of#he nd in said flrst cle�d an�t a strip ot land iying 54.OU feet sautherty of the�outherEy lir�e
of said . �• ,. ��
The west #srmini oi aaid sMp ta��rminate on the westerry Nne of second said deed. ;,
�, t�rmirti of asid afip�terminate on the northeaste�lY PcojQCtion of�ttte nort�uer�y line
af Parc� as hereln cfescribed�ba�+e.
F.�ccept por�a�hM9�n Paroe! 1 �s herein described abave.
Parcei 3 7 .
:��;a�the in srid first c3eed: �� " .
^?=;�; i�or�on�Yir�vv�n Par+�els 9 �d 2 as herein deacribed above.
-.:::a desctibed pie'ces�f lani� are graphfcatly shown an Exhib�"B-1"attached her+eto and
made a , hereo#. . :� ,
� 7: End Description �
� ,,,�p.� .
� . ��
� � �ti �
...f � ' �� r
J eph .�{ottis P.L.S. � * �-•f�----� '*
.�� 61�
� Hb.
�� ' �aF COy� -
:�t
�:
�� � paSe 1 ---
:;
t� -
�.
� -
� .
� .;.
J�
iy: - �t
' ,� t
- � : �Xlilb�� "Bi" ;
File na:2��t.5903t751 � i
,; , 5e �ernber 14,2001 �
;�. ;: • 4
?�rtions�`the 1�nd descxit�ed in the�eds reco�ded ir�Qook 209,Page 2S0 of Qff'�ciaf Rer,�c�ds and !
�_. �
�aok 97,��age 37�of Dee+ds in the`�5acr Lui�Obispo County Recar�ler's Uffice, also bein9 �PQrtion
of tat 29r�if R.R. Ffards'Resubdn�isicn of Ranchcs Carr�t de Piedra.Pismo and 9vlsa c�e�hemisat
as showr�on the m�p ftied in doak:�4 of Maps at Page 63, in said Caa►ny Reccrde�g Office, in the
City of,4tipyo Grsnde, Cv�nty af San Luis Obispo, State of Califomia, said portions dascribsd En
Parcefs '�2, and 3 as foitoavs:
.N
:=accet 1�x. :
:�� �`�
That po _ n o!the land desaribe�;�ss follows:
� Baginni � at the sauther�r come�:af first said deed, said comer beir�g rnarked by a cne inch
�'iarrieter; n pi�and pla's�c plu�:stamperl"�.5. 6192" aa shown an the Record of Survey fited
':� 800k , Page 2Q of Licensed.5�%nreys in the Difice of said Ccunty Recorder, � :
�
Thence ih�w�estarly�l#te aP i�deed north 7°68'3i"wes21?3.68 feet;
ThertCe a3°�'20"esat 2�.0�fee�
T�� ��9��9��� �g°�'40"east 985.00 feet to a point tha#ties 20,OQ#eet sautheriy
�#t h e so e r�y I t t�e o��s t said�d; �
�'�noe with said sa.�hedy�e south 83°5I?'24"west 83.�7 i�et�to a poittt on the westerly
line of nd s�id desd; w .
.x:
Th�x the westerly�ine of ��l�st said deed r�orth 7°58'3'!"west 2'I.QS#�iet to the True Point
�'� 9• �� ��� .
���cei 2 . „; f
r��
AtF af the nd ir�said�rst deed and a stcip of land iying 50.00 f�et sauthedy of the southerly fine
, ; .
of said . • }:
.q�
The west t+srmini�f said sMp tc�terminaEe on the westerly�ne ot s�cond said deeci.
The �ini of ae�atrip#o�bsrminate on the northe�sterly projec�o�of�the north�rly!fie
oi Parxl as her�desr.ritx�d�bave.
Ex�Pf P���9� Pat'�e! 9 as he�in dascrlbed above. '
Parcei 3
h=;af the in said f,rst deed: �: - �
�--•� ; por�on lyir�within Pat�els 1 and Z as herein described above. �
-';.:a described pieces oi(attc� aro graphic�tly shown on �xt�ib�"B-1"attached hereto and
made a hereo#. . - �
._ � �r . �
!� - End Description �Ip.� .� '
� y �
� � :�: � �
�:: t
� � � f
, ,� ;
R
J �ph .��IHatrEs P.L.S. �nooa `
;�� * �it'.�.. � �'
� . . NO. 61�8 �
;a . � � ?
dF CA1. . �
� s
.� �
T� !�S$ 1 �
� � .
. �•. �.��n��l!� �
, �� �
� � �
��� � . �
;��. �� �
. ��• �i�': ���
- , r= C�,,r� �
- �_: .���� c��
�K � $�� 1 .��'�
y �� ' �S' �
� ;; - rs `� ,,,�" .
;4*: ` �� � �� .
� �t' � •, ��� � �
` � �
.+�� ` u�
•
'� � �°> ��� �t� RCEi t�70 ��i
� �.� � �
: �
_ _ ° � ,2� �!��_ `�'�j, f Fd 6"�t$"
� i � � �, `'�-�. c'�.� Wood t�t
= , � and Tog
.
�Q ��- � �° �k �1�- 4s "a��z'
,i; �r,�, -, a�, '�''
.,
. : � `..
:.�:. ;:�j'� �✓- . �„�'�,�� �` ��,
�""' . �{• �,,� ��,� �'�
, �\. j� �� ������ .
+ ' �C�� � ��1 � . �� ' {/ .
EXIai,;��C] .r"� � ¢3
- ;. Wat�r Tc��c ; , � �
�-: � -.�R � � 'y
� '� �`�� ' `�'
�p "'�..., �= �i
�� z, r. r�0
. �/ • �
: `.+�''� T.P.O.B.� r ��
��: ( �
� . . N�
�
� �
. ;F Le�emd .
1
.� � Faund 1" IP !.S 6i92 ,per 77 f LSj24
� untes� Roted otherwise
��� T.P.�:B. — True Poirtt of 8eginning
� — Tamporary Gonstruc#ion Easement �Parce! :2}
.�� ,r��a
� �,,;,,�� — Tsmporcry �anstruction Eosemertf (Pcresl 3)
� - ci�t+vs
� Jalm I�.'V�allace 8t A�Bo
:�+ EXHI91T�i�MG 1 =BQ' &�3!—Of
�
� ,
�" :Y.
,
;wt ...
CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT �
_ ;�. - �- - - - - - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ._�. . � �
� �
' � State of California �
�
�, County of �a S �j1sE1.�5 SS_ � i
� ,�
� � �;
�(� On , before me, ,�� � I(ZKt.�. � G/ � �
<��' D te Name aod TiUe of Officer(e.g "an�e.Notary Public') '� ��j� '
2`; �'""' k?
� personally appeared ��� �r L�' , �
�
� Name(s)of Signer(s) �
• �personaliy known to me �
❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory
evidence
' to be the persor�j� whose name(,s�J is/are
` subscribed to the within instrument and
� �
,; acknowledged to me that he/sqeltqey executed
i� JOYCE L.ZIRfQ.E the same in hisl.k�cN#�teif authorized �
�� � Commi�ion#129s87S capacity.(,iss};- and that by hisf#�er�4iei{� �
r•: Notary Pubnc-CaRfortah � signature�(df on the instrument the person(,� or '
�; ������� the entity upon behalf of which the person�,g'j �
,; _ acted, executed the instrument. ,
�� �
�� WITNESS my hand and official seal. �
I� a �I
I� �l
�� Place Notery Seal Above Signature of No ublic �
I� � " -- � � �I
;, OPTIONAL .� .;
Though the information below is not required by law,it may prove vafuable to persons relying on the documenf i
i� and could prevent fraudulent remova!and reattachment of this form to another document. i
;� Description of Attached Document ;
i� Title or Type of Document: i
; i
'' Document Date: Number of Pages: '
r; ��i
i� i
,; Signer(s)Other Than Named Above: - �
I
��� ���
�� Capacity(ies) Ctaimed by Signer �
'' Signer's Name: '
�; O Individual Top or cnumb nere ;,
,; O Corporate Officer—Title(s):
,.: ❑ Partner—�Limited ❑General ;
� ❑ Attamey in Fact �
' ❑ Trustee �
' ❑ Guardian or Conservator �
� Other. �
. " �
� Signer Is Representing: �
� �
_�.- - - - - - - - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - = - - = - - - - -�
O 1999 Nanonal Notary Association•9350 De Soto Ave.,P.O.Boz 2402•ChaLSwoM,CA 91313-2402•www.natianalnotary.org Prod.No.6907 Reorde�Call Toll-Free 1-800•876-6827
� PRROro 8•'�•
° c�+
� INCONPOAATED 92
� ° MEMORANDUM
i� .xnY ,o. ,•„ ,�
c4��FOR��P
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: DON SPAGNOLO, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER �
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE A SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR THE
CITYWIDE TRAFFIC MONITORING PROGRAM AND RETAINER
SERVICES TO PREPARE AND REVIEW TRAFFIC STUDIES
DATE: NOVEMBER 25, 2003
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City Council:
A. approve a three year consultant services agreement with Omni-Means in the
amount of$71,998 for the Citywide Traffic Monitoring Program and retainer services
to prepare and review traffic studies;
B. authorize the City Manager to approve and execute contract amendments in the
amount of$7,200 for unanticipated services during the three term of the agreement;
and,
C. appropriate $46,998 for the consultant services agreement and $7,200 for
unanticipated services for a total of$54,198 from the Transportation Facility Impact
Fund.
FUNDING:
The amended FY 2002-03 Capital Improvement Program budget includes $25,000 for a
traffic monitoring program. An additional amount of$54,198 will need to be appropriated
from the Transportation Facility Impact Fund to provide the total amount of the three year
service agreement. The unaudited amount of Transportation Facility Impact Fund as of
June 30, 2003 is $1,857,887. An appropriation of $54,198 will leave a balance of
$1,803,688 in this fund.
DISCUSSION:
On April 8, 2003, the Council authorized the distribution of a Request for Proposal for the
Citywide Traffic Model Program and Retainer Services to prepare and review traffic
studies.
Four proposals were received by the City. The applications were evaluated and interviews
were held with the top two firms. Based on the reviews of each proposal and the
interviews conducted, it is recommended that the Council approve a consultant services
agreement with Omni-Means to provide traffic monitoring and retainer services. The major
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE A SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR THE CITYWIDE
TRAFFIC MONITORING PROGRAM AND RETAINER SERVICES TO PREPARE AND
REVIEW TRAFFIC STUDIES
NOVEMBER 25, 2003
PAGE 2
items of the work program include updating the City's existing Traffic Model by creating a
base line nefinrork including new traffic counts and preparing a technical report as itemized
in Phase A of the program (Exhibit "A") to consultant services agreement. Phase B
includes preparation of an annual report for the next two years and Phase C provides for
the preparation of traffic studies on an as needed basis for applicants proposing
development projects within the City. Traffic studies will be funded separately by each
applicant. The advantage of this approach will be to better standardize traffic studies and
the consultant can utilize data from ongoing traffic studies to update and maintain the
traffic model on an ongoing basis. Exhibit D is a description of the experience and
qualifications of the recommended firm submitted as part of their proposal.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for the City Council consideration:
• Approve a service agreement with Omni-Means;
• Do not approve a service agreement with Omni-lVleans and solicit new proposals;
• Modify the scope of work as appropriate and approve a service agreement with
Omni-Means; or
• Provide direction to staff.
Attachment:
1. Exhibit A— C, Consultant Services Agreement
2. Exhibit D, Sections 6 — 8 of the Proposal prepared by Omni-Means
�
' �
i
i
AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT, is made and effective as of November 25, 2003, between Omni-Means
("Consultant"), and the CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE, a Municipal Corporation ("City"). In
consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as
follows: �
1. TERM
This Agreement shall commence on December 15, 2003 and shall remain and continue in
effect until December 15, 2006, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the provisions of this
Agreement.
2. SERVICES
Consultant shall perform the tasks described and comply with all terms and provisions of
the Consultant's scope of work set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as
though set forth in full.
3. PERFORMANCE
Consultant shall at all times faithfuIly, competently and to the best of his/her ability,
experience and talent,perform all tasks described herein. Consultant shall employ, at a minimum
generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar
services as are required of Consultant hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement.
4. CITY MANAGEMENT
The Public Works Director, or his designated representative, is hereby designated as the
Contract Manager for the City. The Contract Manager shall be the representative of the City for
all purposes under this Agreement and shall supervise the progress arid execution of this
Agreement. ,
5. PAYMENT
(a) The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with E�chibit B, attached hereto
and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on
the above tasks. This amount shall not exceed Seventy One Thousand Nine Hundred Ninety Eight
dollars ($71,998.00) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as
provided in this Agreement.
, (b) Consultant shall not be compensated for any services rendered in connection with its
performance of this Agreement, which are in addition to those set forth herein,unless such additional
services are authorized in advance and in writing by the Contract Manager. Consultant shall be
compensated ior any additional services in the amounts and in the manner as agreed to by Contract
Manager and Consultanf at the time City's written authorization is given to Consultant for the '
performance of said services. Consultant will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed.
�
�
(c) Invoices shall be submitted on or about the first business day of each month, or as soon
thereafter as practical, for services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within
thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice as to all non-disputed fees. If the City disputes any of
Consultant's fees it shall give written notice to Consultant within thirty (30) days of receipt of an
invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the invoice.
6. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT
6.01 TERMINATION ON NOTICE. Notwithstanding any other provision of this
Agreement, any party hereto may terminate this Agreement, at any time, without cause by giving at
least thirty- (30)days prior written notice to the other parties to this Agreement.
6.02 TERMINATION ON OCCURRENCE OF STATED EVENTS. This
Agreement shall terminate automatically on fhe occurrence of any of the following events:
a. Bankruptcy or insolvency of any party;
b. Sale of Consultant's business;
c. End of the Agreement to which ConsultanYs services were necessary: or
d. Assignment of this Agreement by Consultant without the consent of City.
6.03 TERMINATION BY ANY PARTY FOR DEFAULT: Should any party default
in the performance of this Agreement or materially breach any of its provisions, a non-breaching
party, at its option, may terminate this Agreement, immediately, by giving written notice of
termination to the breaching party.
6.04 TERMINATION: This Agreement shall terminate on upon completion of services
unless extended as set forth in this section. City, with the agreement of Consultant, is authorized to
extend the term of this Agreement beyond the termination date, as needed, under the same terms
and conditions set forth in this Agreement. Any such extension shall be in writing and be an
amendment to this Agreement
7. LAWS TO BE OBSERVED. Consultant shall:
(a) Procure all permits and licenses,pay all charges and fees, and give all notices which
may be necessary and incidental to the due and lawful prosecution of the services to be performed
by CONSULTANT under this Agreement; '
(b) Keep itself fully informed of all existing and proposed federal, state and local laws,
ordinances,regulations,orders, and decrees which may affect those engaged or employed under this
Agreement, any materials used in CONSULTANT'S performance under this Agreement, or the
conduct of the services under this Agreement;
� (c) At all times observe and comply with, and cause all of its employees to observe and
comply with all of said laws,ordinances,regulations,orders, and decrees mentioned above;
;
(d) Immediately report to the CITY'S Contract Manager in writing any discrepancy or
inconsistency it discovers in said laws, ordinances, regulations, orders, and decrees mentioned
above in relation to any plans, drawings, specifications,or provisions of this Agreement.
8. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS
(a) All original drawings, videotapes, computer data, files and other materials prepared by or
in possession of Consultant pursuant to this Agreement shall become the permanent property of the
City,and shall be delivered to the City upon demand.
(b) Upon completion of, or in the event of terniination or suspension of this Agreement, all
original documents, designs, drawings, maps, models, computer files, surveys, notes, and other
documents prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this
Agreement shall become the sole property of the City and may be used,reused, or otherwise disposed
of by the City without the permission of the Consultant. With respect to computer files, Consultant
shall make available to the City, at the Consultant's office and upon reasonable written request by the
City, the necessary computer soflware and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling,
transferring, and printing computer files.
9. INDEM1vIFICATION
(a) Indemnification for Professional Liabilitv. When the law establishes a professional
standard of care for Consultant's Services, to the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall
indemnify, profect, defend and hold harmless City and any and all of its officials, employees and
agents ("Indemnified Parties") from and against any and all losses, liabilities, damages, costs and
expenses, including attorney's fees and costs to the extent same are caused in whole or in part by
any negligent or wrongful act, error or omission of Consultant, its officers, agents, employees or
subConsultants (or any entity or individual that Consultant shall bear the legal liability thereo fl �
in the performance of professional services under this agreement:
(b) Indemnification for Other Than Professional Liabilitv. Other than in the performance
of professional services and to the full extent permitted by law, Consultant shall indemnify, ,
defend and hold harmless City, and any and all of its employees, officials and agents from and
against any liability (including liability for claims, suits, actions, arbitration proceedings,
administrative proceedings, regulatory proceedings, losses, expenses or costs of any kind, '
whether actual, alleged or threatened, including attorneys fees and costs, court costs, interest,
defense costs, and expert witness fees), where the same arise out of, are a consequence of, or are
in any way attributable to, in whole or in part, the performance of this Agreement by Consultant
or by any individual or entity for which Consultant is legally liable, including but not limited to
officers, agents, employees or subConsultants of Consultant.
" (c) General Indemnification Provisions. Consultant agrees to obtain executed indemnity
agreements with provisions identical to those set forth here in this section from each and every ,
subConsultant or any other person or entity involved by, for, with or on behalf of Consultant in
the performance of this agreement. In the event Consultant fails to obtain such indemnity
obligations from others as required here, Consultant agrees to be fully responsible according to !
I
the terms of this section. Failure of City to monitor compliance with these requirements imposes
no additional obligations on City and will in no way act as a waiver of any rights hereunder. This
obligation to indemnify and defend City as set forth here is binding on the successors, assigns or
heirs of Consultant and shall survive the termination of this agreement or this section.
10. INSURANCE
Consultant shall maintain prior to the beginning of and for the duration of this Agreement
insurance coverage as specified in Exhibit C attached to and part of this agreement.
' 11. INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT
(a) Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent
Consultant. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant
shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Neither City nor any of
its officers, employees, or agents shall have control over ti�e conduct of Consultant or any of
Consultant's officers, employees, or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant
shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees, or agents
are in any manner officers, employees, or agents of the City. Consultant shall not incur or have
the power to incur any debt, obligation, or liability whatever against City, or bind City in any
manner.
(b)No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with performance �
of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Consultant as provided in the Agreement, City
shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Consultant for performing services
hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for
injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder.
12. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES
The Consultant shall keep itself informed of State and Federal laws and regulations,
which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its
service pursuant to this Agreement. The Consultant shall at all times observe and comply with all
such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or '
in equity occasioned by failure of the Consultant to comply with this Section.
13. UNDUE INFLUENCE .
Consultant declares and warrants that no undue influence or pressure is used against or in
concert with any officer or employee of the City of Arroyo Grande in connection with the award,
terms or implementation of this Agreement, including any method of coercion, confidential
, financial arrangement, or financial inducement. No officer or employee of the City of Arroyo
Grande will receive compensation, directly or indirectly, from Consultant, or from any officer,
employee or agent of Consultant, in connection with the award of this Agreement or any work to
be conducted as a result of this Agreement. Violation of this Section shall be a material breach of
this Agreement entitling the City to any and all remedies at law or in equity. �
I
�,
i
14. NO BENEFIT TO ARISE TO LOCAL EMPLOYEES
No member, officer, or employee of City, or their designees or agents, and no public
official who exercises authority over or responsibilities with respect to the Project during his/her
tenure or for one year thereafter, shall havP any interest, direct or indirect, in any agreement or
sub-agreement, or the proceeds thereof, for work to be performed in connection with the Project
performed under this Agreement.
15. RELEASE OF INFORMATION/CONFLICT'S OF INTEREST
(a) All information gained by Consultant in performance of this Agreement shall be
considered confidential and shall not be released by Consultant without City's prior written
authorization. Consultant, its officers, employees, agents, or subConsultants, shall not without
written authorization from the Contract Manager or unless requested by the City Attorney,
voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to
interrogatories, or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement or
relating to any project or property located within the City. Response to a subpoena or court order
shall not be considered "voluntary"provided Consultant gives City notice of such court order or
subpoena.
(b) Consultant shall promptly notify City should Consultant, its officers, employees,
agents, or subConsultants be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of
deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions, or other discovery
request, court order, or subpoena from any person or party regarding this Agreement and the
work performed thereunder or with respeci to any project or property located within the City.
City retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent Consultant and/or be present at any
deposition; hearing, or similar proceeding. Consultant agrees to cooperate fully with City and to
provide the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by Consultant.
However, City's right to review any such response does not imply or mean the right by City to
control, direct, or rewrite said response.
16. NOTICES
Any notice which either party may desire to give to the other party under this Agreement
must be in writing and may be given either by (i) personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable
document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express; which provides a receipt
showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail,
postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below '
or at any other address as that party may later designate by notice: ;
, To City: City of Arroyo Grande
P. O. Box 550 �
Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 �
I
i
�
I
r
�
To Consultant: Omni-Means
2237 Douglas Boulevard, Ste 100
Sacramento, CA 95661
17. ASSIGNMENT �
The Consultant shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof,
without prior written consent of the City.
18. LICENSES
At all times during the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall have in full force and
effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this
Agreement.
19. GOVERNING LAW
The City and Consultant understand and agree that the laws of the State of California
shall govern the rights, obligations, duties, and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and
also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall
take place in the superior or federal district court with jurisdiction over the City of Arroyo
Grande.
20. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the
obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements,
understandings, representations, and statements, or written, are merged into this Agreement and
shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into this Agreement based solely '
upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of
any and all facts such party deems material.
21. TIME
City and Consultant agree that time is of the essence in this Agreement.
22. CONSTRUCTION .
The parties agree that each has had an opportunity to have their counsel review this
. Agreement and that any rule of construetion to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against
the drafting party shall not apply in the interpretation of this Agreement or any amendments or
, exhibits thereto. The captions of the sections are for convenience and reference only, and are not
intended to be construed to define or limit the provisions to which they relate. j
23. AMENDMENTS I�
I
�
�
�
�
Amendments to this Agreement shall be in writin� and shall be made only with the mutual
written consent of all of the parties to this Agreement.
24. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT
The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Consultant warrants and
represents that he/she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Consultant
and has the authority to bind Consultant to the performance of its obligations hereunder.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed
the day and year first above written.
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE CONSULTANT
By: By:
Tony M. Ferrara, Mayor (Signature)
Marty Inouye
Principal
Attest:
Kelly Wetmore, Director of Administrative Services/
Deputy City Clerk
Approved As To Form:
Timothy J. Carmel '
, j
i
i
�
�
i
�
Exhibit "A"
� CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
TRAFFIC MONITORING SERVICES
SCOPE OF WORK
This Contract Work Program to be included in the_Agreement with OMNI-MEANS,
reflects the negotiation of specific tasks outlined in the original proposal work program
and therefore, supersedes any representations made within that document.
This Work Program has been created to update the Citywide traffic model and assist the
City in the review and/or preparation of traffic studies as well as to update and to
maintain proper capital improvement programming to maintain Level of Service "C"
standards throughout the City. Included in this update of the Citywide Traffic Model will
be a change from the use of a traffic modeling software package, called MINUTP, to an
updated software package, called TransCAD. This new modeling software is consistent
with the software package that is being used by the San Luis Obispo Council of
Governments for the development of the San Luis Obispo County Regional Traffic
ModeL
Differing from the proposal work program,this Contract Work Program clearly
distinguishes the first year effort to update the Citywide Traffic Model from the
subsequent two yeaxs of annual updates. In addition, OMNI-MEANS will provide other
traffic engineering services to prepare traffic impact studies, signal design, neighbor.hood
traffic calming studies and other traffic related services, as requested, needed and
authorized.
Work Program �
TASK 1 - PROJECT COORDINATION, MANAGEMENT AND
MEETINGS.
OMIVI-MEANS will perform the following project management services:
. • OMNI-MEANS, as required in the Request for Proposal,will attend at least one
� (1)City Council meeting and two(2)informal City staff ineetings per year for three
(3)years. OMNI-MEANS would make ourselves available for any additional '
public or staff meetings with notification/authorization. . ;
• Supervise, coordinate and monitor progress of the study and design elements far
conformance with City and State standards.
' • Prepare and maintain, as needed, a master schedule.
• Prepare progress reports and invoices. At the end of each month, ONINI-MEANS
will report the progress of the work,update the schedule, and invoice for the i
previous month's work. i
,
;
f
i
1.1 Study Initiation Meeting.
The agenda for the study initiation meeting will include:
• Introduction of the project team
• Review of Study Purpose and Overall Scope of Work. Any potential changes in
the scope of work will be discussed in this initial meeting.
• Review traffic data collection plan, scope of traffic analyses and intersections and
street segments to be studied, and current status of capital improvement
programming.
• Definition of lines of communication
• Finalization of Study Schedule
• Verification of approval process
Agreement on the intended scope of the project,methodologies, assumptions, design
standards and processing procedures will be reached as a part of the study initiation
meeting. A memorandum will be prepared to summarize the agreed understandings.
PHASE A - CITYWIDE TRAFFIC MODEL UPDATE
(FIRST YEAR)
TASK 2 BACKGROUND REPORT.
2.1 Review Existing Transportation Reports and Related Data.
ONINI-MEANS will obtain copies of past transportation studies, and related planning and
engineering studies,reports and documents,to achieve a general background of knowledge
concerning the City of Arroyo Grande circulation system. It is our understanding that the
existing traffic model will be updated with a new soflware package,called TransCAD,
from which future travel forecasts will help deternune the planned circulation
improvements to meet the specific needs of the community and achieves the City's Level
of Service"C"goal. Use of the existing traffic model should help"jump-start"the traffic
model update process. ONINI-MEANS will also use our experience with other
communities to help in this evaluation.
2.2 Prepare Background Report. (VVorking Paper#1)
ONINI-MEANS will compile the information obtained in Task 2.1 and prepare a
Background Report, summarizing our review of previous transportation related work ',
within the City. A copy of the report will be sent to City staff as a first step in the proper
documentation of this update process. '
, TASK 3 CREATE TRANSPORTATION BASELINE NETWORK.
The following data will be collected within the City of Arroyo Grande to establish and ;
fully define the transportation baseline of circulation network and travel characteristics: '
3.1 Traffic Counts. �
F
I
Existing daily and peak hour traffic counts will be obtained from both the City and
Caltrans. In addition, on a limited basis, daily counts on critical roadways, and peak hour
turning movement counts at key intersections will also be obtained as needed. The count
data collected may have varying requirements and may include the following:
• Vehicle classification counts,
• Daily and AM and PM peak hour traffic counts for summer and winter months,
and
• Vehicle speed, (OMNI-MEANS may utilize our own radar equipment)
• Pedestrian counts,
• Truck and bus counts.
PETRA soflware may be used as appropriate.
3.2 Transportation Corridor Data. ,
Available transportation corridor data will be obtained from all available sources,
including the City, County and Caltrans files. This information would include:
• Right-of-way widths
• Pavement width
• Travel Lane Configuration
• Traffic Control
• Daily and Peak Hour Traffic Count Data
• Level of Service(Volume to Capacity and/or average vehicle delay)
� Travel speed(85%or posted speed) •
• Pedestrian activity and other special conditions
• Traffic warrant review
• Grades
• Planned Improvement Projects
Based on the availability and creation of the above data for this study, future conditions
will be projected using the traffic model to develop the following recommendations:
• Recommend capacity improvements for intersections that fall below LOS "C".
• Recommend turn channelization improvements.
• Recommend other miscellaneous improvements,which may improve LOS ar
safety.
3.3 Obtain AutoCADD Digital Image (Mapping) Files.
OMNI-MEANS will obtain from the City available AutoCADD mapping of the study
area in digital format. These files will be used to create base mapping for presentation
purposes of analyses, findings and improvement recommendations.
. TASK 4 TRAFFIC MODEL UPDATE. �
4.1 Update Tra�c Model. �
The Citywide traffic model will be updated using a new traffic modeling software packgage,
called TransCAD,which will be then consistent with the Countywide regional traffic model !
6I
E
E
being developed by SLOCOG. Upon updating the Citywide traffic model,it will then be
used to provide future traffic volume forecasts based on the current General Plan Land Use
Plan. Close coordination will be maintained with local and regional transportation agencies
including; Caltrans, San Luis Obispo Council of Governments(SLOCOG), San Luis Obispo
County and City Planning and Public Works Departments to insure that the update of the
model is acceptable to a11 appropriate agencies. The following work tasks are required to
update the Citywide traffic model. �
4.1.1 Refine Existing and Proposed Future Roadway Data.
Existing and future roadway system information as obtained in Task 3 will be refined and
documented to form the basis for the traffic model roadway network.
4.1.2 Obtain Existing and Future Land Use Data.
Existing and future land use data will be obtained from the City and other
appropriate agencies,related reference material and field reviews. This data will be
divided into separate categories for use in determining land use trip generation
characteristics. ONINI-MEANS will work closely with City staff in obtaining
accurate and realistic land use projections.
4.1.3 Update Existing Conditions Traffic Model.
Based upon the information obtained in Task 3,Tasks 4.1.1 and 4.1.2,the
TransCAD traffic model will be updated to simulate daily conditions. The updated
traffic model's roadway network will include all significant changes to the existing
roadway facilities. The existing land use data will be updated as appropriate with
the appropriate number and configuration of Traffic Area Zones(TAZ's). These
updated zones will be connected to the network to realistically simulate vehicular
traffic loading.
Baced upon the existing updated traffic volume counts obtained in Task 3,the Existing
Conditions Traffic Model will be recalibrated to match these volumes. The accuracy of
this recalibration will match the standards set forth by Caltrans.
4.2 Prepare 2025 Daily Traffic Projections.
Based on the updated calibrated traffic model created in Subtask 4.1.3, OMNI-MEANS
will update 2025 daily traffic projections over the Citywide transportation network. The
existing General Plan Land Use Plan that was used as the basis for determining future
2025 development conditions will be updated with any recently approved development
projects within or in the vicinity of the City. From these updated daily traffic projections
overall circulation capacity needs will be projected such that any needed changes to the
City's Capital Improvement Program can be identified. '
Upon incorporating the updated circulation changes, OMNI-MEANS will work with City i
` staff in establishing a baseline of circulation impro�ements that will formulate the 2025 �
circulation system that will be needed to support projected growth within the City at �
Level of Service"C". All assumptions and analyses will be closely coordinated with !
City staff. �
I
�
;
�
- _ _
From these traffic model projections and evaluations,the scope and timing of needed
capital improvements to accommodate grov�rth will be identified.
4.3 Update Project Priorities and Capital Improvement Program.
To maintain Level of Service "C", OMNI-MEANS will identify needed circulation
improvements and their priority. The basis and criteria for their selection and priority
will be first fully documented in Working Paper#2 and then appropriately incorporated
into the technical report.
4.4 Prepare Working Paper#2.
Working Paper#2 will be a comprehensive report summarizing the work completed in
Tasks 2 through 4. This working paper will incorporate the Background Report previously
prepazed. Additionally,the results of all technical analyses will be presented in appropriate
text,tabular and graphical format. It is intended that this working paper will be the initial
chapters of our Technical Report.
TASK 5 TECHNICAL REPORT PREPARATION.
5.1 Technical Report.
O1VINI-MEANS will compile the information presented in Working Paper#l,#2, along
with the all appropriate revisions obtained as a part of previous City staff input, and prepare
a comprehensive Technical Report that fully documents the entire Citywide Traffic Model
Update process. The information in the report will document intersection and street
segment volumes and levels of service,basic accident statistics and intersection and street
segment geometrics. It will also provide the technical data required to identify existing
deficient locations and suggest improvements. It will describe the program methodvlogy,
results, supportive data,capital improvement requirements and future monitoring
recommendations and other pertinent information. The report will include an Executive
Summary and three copies will be submitted to City staff for their review and comment.
Following City staff review,the annual technical report and appropriate exhibits in GIS
(ArcView format,EXCEL, etc)will be provided for documentation and presentation
purposes.
5.2 City Council Meeting.
ONINI-MEANS will make one formal presentation on our final technical report. ,
PHASE B - PREPARATION OF ANNUAL TRAFFIC �
I
, MONITORING REPORT (YEAR TWO AND TH"REE) �
i
�
6.1 Annual Report (Two Years). �
Following the first year when the Citywide Traffic Model is updated,OMI�II-MEANS will
then monitor changes in land use and traffic condirions,based on available information as
k
[
__.. .w .. ..,. .�._ . . .
_ ._ .._.._.,......�..
development and transportation improvements occur throughout each year, for two years.
OMNI-MEANS will obtain approved applications for General Plan Amendments, Tentative
Maps,Use Permits and other development related information to update and maintain an
understanding of planned growth of the City of Arroyo Grande community. Similarly,
OMIVI-MEANS will work with City staff to maintain a current Citywide traffic counting
program that will be supplemented with Caltrans and SLOCOG traffic count data.No
specific traffic counts will be obtained by ONINI-MEANS. Also, for strategic traffic
facilities and corridors within the City, OMNI-MEANS will provide Level of Service
Threshold monitoring graphs so the City can monitor when facilities will be exceeding �
acceptable Levels of Service so that proper phasing and funding of capital improvements
can be anticipated..
The information in the annual reports will document any changes from the information
originally presented in the Technical Report,including but not limited to intersection and
street segment volumes and levels of service,basic accident statistics and intersection and
street segment geometrics. It will also identify newly occurring deficient locations, if any,
and suggest improvements. Three copies of a draft annual report will be submitted to City
staff for their review and comment.
Following City staff review,the annual report and appropriate exhibits in GIS (ArcView
format,EXCEL, etc)will be finalized for documentation and presentation purposes.
6.2 City Council Meeting.
ONINI-MEANS will make one formal presentation on our final annual report each year for
two years.
PHASE C - PREPARATION OF TRAFFIC STUDIES -
RETAINER SERVICES
TASK 7 RETAINER TRAFFIC STUDIES i
7.1 Prepare Traffic Studies. , �
ONINI-MEANS will be available to provide either peer review or prepare traffic studies �
�
for development projects within the City of Arroyo Grande. Our traffic studies and/or �
our review will follow the City of Arroyo Grande Public Works Department"Traffic
Impact Study Policy"Guidelines, revised March 12,2002. ONINI-MEANS will use f
any specialized sof�ware as needed, including TRAFFIX,VISSIM and Synchro. OMNI- #
MEANS will make recommendations for on-going monitoring of intersections and streets �
, to assure acceptable Levels of Service are maintained in the vicinity of the proposed
projects. This information will be included as required in the project's traffic study. ;
;
PROJECT TIME SCHEDULE
The OMNI-MEANS Team will provide Task 1 —Project Coordination,Management and
Meeting services consistent with our Work Program throughout the life of our three-year
contract. The following provides a general schedule for each phase of our Work Program.
Phase A—Citywide Traffic Model Update(First Year)
• Project Authorization by City Council November 25, 2003
• Traffic Model Update December, 03 to September, 04
2004
• Draft Report September,2004
• Approve Final Report October, 2004
Phase B—Preparation of Annual Traffic Monitoring Report(Years Two and Three)
• Initiate Traffic Monitoring March,2005 and 2006
• Draft Report September,2005 and 2006
• Approve Final Report October,2005 and 2006 �
Phase C—Retainer Traffic Studies
� Conduct Retainer Traffic Studies on schedules set forth at the time they are
initiated.
i
i
,
�
�
i
�
'�
b
, �
I
City ofArroyo Grande
Tra�c Mode!Update and Retainer Tra�c Studies o�-No�•-os
Proposa!Worksheet for Phases A and B-Tra�c Mode!Update
Asst Proj Traffie Outside
Principal ManaEer F.ngineer Technieal Staff Clerical Services/
Task Task DescNptlon 5161 S103 590 S74 S49 Purchases Hours Totals
TASK 1 PROJECT COORDINATION,MANAGEMENT AND MEETINGS.
I.l ProjeM Management l2 12 51,932
Staff Meetings(3) 12 12 8 4 5600 36 yt,556
PHASE A CITYWIDE TRAFFIC MODEL UPDATE
TASK 2 BACKGROUND REPORT. $Q
2.1 Review Transportation Reports and Rclated Data. 2 S 4 14 51,506
I 2.2 Prepare Background Report(Working Paper#i). 2 t2 8 12 4 38 53,362
' TASK 3 UPDATE TRANSPORTATION BASELINE SO
3.1 TrafficCowts. 2 2 51,020 4 51,548
3Z Transportallon Cortidor Data. 2 6 9 i7 SI,750
33 Obtain Aerial Phow Digital Image Files. 4 4 5411
TASK 4 TRAFFIC MODEL UPDATE $�
4.1.1 Refine Existing and Proposed Futurc Roadway Data. 2 8 4 14 51,506
4.L2 Obtain Exisdng and Futuro Land Uu Data.. 2 l6 4 22 52,330
4.I3 Update snd Cal'brate Existing Coaditions Traffic Model. 8 48 56 56,232
4.1.4 Update 2025 Daily TratTic Projectians. 4 40 44 y1,764
4.2 Working Paper#2 4 16 12 2 34 53,278
TASK 5 TECHNICAL REPORT PREPARATION (First Year) SO
5.1 Proparo Teclmical Report. 8 28 8 24 4 72 56,864
5.2 Prcunt Technical Report.(I Ciry Council Heazing) 6 6 4 2 18 51.978
PHASE B PREPARATION OF ANNUAL TRAFFIC MONITORING REPORT
TASK 6A SECOND YEAR ANNUAL REPORT PREPARATION SO E42,018
6.1 Preparc Annual Report.(Including 3 Shff Meetings) 16 58 24 I S 7 5600 120 512,763
6.2 Presrnt Annual Report.(1 City Council Hearing) 6 6 4 3 5200 19 S2,227
TASK 6B THIRD YEAR ANNUAL REPORT PREPARATION SO S 14,990
6.I Prepatt Annual Report.(Including 3 Staff Meetings) 16 58 24 I S 7 5600 120 512,763
6.2 Prcsent Annual Report.(1 City Council Hearing) 6 6 4 3 5200 19 52,227 $���
Subtotal 110 334 85 98 36 663 542,018
S17,710 534,402 S7,650 57.252 51,764 53,220 s71,99g
check 571.998 �
,.�'
r.
�
�.
�
W
v
v
1
�
f
�
P25686UD00] �
EXHIBIT C
1NSURANCE REOUIREMENTS
Prior to the beginning of and throughout the duration of the Work, Consultant will maintain
insurance in conformance with the requirements set forth below. Consultant will use existing
coverage to comply with these requirements. If that existing coverage does not meet the
requirements set forth here, Consultant agrees to amend, supplement or endorse the existing
coverage to do so. Consultant acknowledges that the insurance coverage and policy limits set
forth in this section constitute the minimum amount of coverage required. Any insurance
proceeds available to City in excess of the limits and coverage required in this agreement and
which is applicable to a given loss, will be available to City.
Consultant shall provide the following types and amounts of insurance:
Commercial General Liability Insurance using Insurance Services Office"Commercial General
Liability"policy from CG 00 O1 or the exact equivalent. Defense costs must be paid in addition
to limits. There shall be no cross liability exclusion for claims or suits by one insured against
another. Limits are subject to review but in no event less than$1,000,000 per occurrence.
Business Auto Coverage on ISO Business Auto Coverage from CA 00 O1 including symbol 1
, (Any Auto) or the exact equi�alent. Limits are subject to review,but inno event to be less than
$1,000,000 per accident. If Consultant owns no vehicles, this requirement may be satisfied by a
non-owned auto endorsement to the general liability pclicy described above. If Consultant or
Consultant's employees will use personal autos in any way on this project, Consultant shall
provide evidence of personal auto liability coverage for each such person.
Workers Compensation on a state-approved policy form providing statutory benefits as required
by law with employer's liability limits no less than$1,000,000 per accident or disease. I
I
Excess or Umbrella Liability Insurance (Over Primary) if used to meet limit requirements, shall p
provide coverage at least as broad as specified for the underlying coverages. Any such coverage j
provided under an umbrella liability policy shall include a drop down provision providing G
G
primary coverage above a maximum$25,000 self-insured retention for liability not covered by �
primary but covered by the umbrella. Coverage shall be provided on a"pay on behalf'basis, �
�
with defense costs payable in addition to policy limits. Policy shall contain a provision obligating ;
insurer at the time insured's liability is determined,not requiring actual payment by the insured ;
first. There shall be no cross liability exclusion precluding coverage for claims or suits by one
insured against another. Coverage shall be applicable to City for injury to employees of
, Consultant, subConsultants or others involved in the Work. The scope of coverage provided is
subject to approval of City following receipt of proof of insurance as required herein. Limits are
subject to review but in no event less than$1,000,000 per occurrence.
Professional Liability or Errors and Omissions Insurance as appropriate shall be written on a
policy form coverage specifically designated to protect against acts, errors or omissions of the
Consultant and"Covered Professional Services" as designated in the policy must specifically
include work performed under this agreement. The policy limit shall be no less than $1,000,000
per claim and in the aggregate. The policy must"pay on behalf of'the insured and must include
a provision establishing the insurer's duty to defend. The policy retroactive date shall be on or
before the effective date of this agreement.
Insurance procured pursuant to these requirements shall be written by insurer that are admitted
carriers in the state California and with an A.M. Bests rating of A- or better and a minimum
financial size VII.
General conditions pertaining to provision of insurance coverage by Consultant. Consultant and
City agree to the following with respect to insurance provided by Consultant:
1. Consultant agrees to have its insurer endorse the third party general liability coverage
required herein to include as additional insureds City, its officials employees and
agents, using standard ISO endorsement No. CG 2010 with an edition prior to 1992.
Consultant also agrees to require all Consultants, and subConsultants to do likewise.
2. No liability insurance coverage provided to comply with this Agreement shall
prohibit Consultant, or Consultant's employees, or agents, from waiving the right of
subrogation prior to a loss. Consultant agrees to waive subrogation rights against City
regardless of the applicability of any insurance proceeds, and to require all
Consultants and subConsultants to do likewise.
3. All insurance coverage and limits provided by Consultant and available or applicable
to this agreement are intended to apply to the full extent of the policies. Nothing
contained in this Agreement or any other agreement relating to the City or its
operations limits the application of such insurance coverage. '
4. None of the coverages required herein will be in compliance with these requirements s
if they include any limiting endorsement of any kind that has not been first submitted ;
to City and approved of in writing. ;
5. No liability policy shall contain any provision or definition that would serve to
eliminate so-called"third party action over"claims, including any exclusion for
bodily injury to an employee of the insured or of any Consultant or subConsultant.
6. All coverage types and limits required are subject to approval, modification and
additional requirements by the City, as the need arises. Consultant shall not make any
, reductions in scope of coverage (e.g. elimination of contractual liability or reduction
of discovery period) that may affect City's protection without City's prior written
consent.
_
_ _ .,,�..,.... .,....._...
7. Proof of compliance with these insurance requirements, consisting of certificates of
insurance evidencing all of the coverages required and an additional insured
endorsement to Consultant's general liability policy, shall be delivered to City at or
prior to the execution of this Agreement. In the event such proof of any insurance is
not delivered as required, or in the event such insurance is canceled at any time and
no replacement coverage is provided, City has the right, but not the duty, to obtain
any insurance it deems necessary to protect its interests under this or any other
agreement and to pay the premium. Any premium so paid by City shall be charged to
and promptly paid by Consultant or deducted from sums due Consultant, at City
option.
8. Certificate(s) are to reflect that the insurer will provide 30 days notice to City of any
cancellation of coverage. Consultant agrees to require its insurer to modify such
certificates to delete any exculpatory wording stating that failure of the insurer to mail
written notice of cancellation imposes no obligation, or that any party will "endeavor"
(as opposed to being required)to comply with the requirements of the certificate.
9. It is acknowledged by the parties of this agreement that all insurance coverage
required to be provided by Consultant or any subConsultant, is intended to apply first
and on a primary,noncontributing basis in relation to any other insurance or self
insurance available to City.
10. Consultant agrees to ensure that subConsultants, and any other party involved with
the project who is brought onto or involved in the project by Consultant, provide the
same minimum insurance coverage required of Consultant. Consultant agrees to
monitor and review all such coverage and assumes all responsibility for ensuring that
such coverage is provided in conformity with the requirements of this section.
Consultant agrees that upon request, all agreements with subConsultants and others ;
engaged in the proj ect will be submitted to City for review.
11. Consultant agrees not to self-insure or to use any self-insured retentions or j
deductibles on any portion of the insurance required herein and further agrees that it I
will not allow any Consultant, subConsultant, Architect, Engineer or other entity or �
person in any way involved in the performance of work on the project contemplated �
by this agreement to self-insure its obligations to City. If Consultant's existing �
coverage includes a deductible or self-insured retention, the deductible or self-insured s
,
retention must be declared to the City. At the time the City shall review options with
the Consultant,which may include reduction or elimination of the deductible or self- ;
insured retention, substitution of other coverage, or other solutions.
12. The City reserves the right at an}�time during the term of the contract to change the
, amounts and types of insurance required by giving the Consultant ninety(90) days
advance written notice of such change. If such change results in substantial additional
cost to the Consultant, the City will negotiate additional compensation proportional to
the increase benefit to City.
13. For purposes of applying insurance coverage only, this Agreement will be deemed to
have been executed immediately upon any party hereto taking any steps that can be
deemed to be in furtherance of or towards performance of this Agreement.
14. Consultant acknowledges and agrees that any actual or alleged failure on the part of
City to inform Consultant of non-compliance with any insurance requirements in no
way imposes any additional obligations on City nor does it waive any rights
hereunder in this or any other regard.
15. Consultant will renew the required coverage annually as long as City, or its
employees or agents face an exposure from operations of any type pursuant to this
agreement. This obligation applies whether or not the agreement is canceled or
terminated for any reason. Termination of this obligation is not effective until City
executes a written statement to that effect.
16. Consultant shall provide proof that policies of insurance required herein expiring
during the term of this Agreement have been renewed or replaced with other policies
providing at least the same coverage. Proof that such coverage has been ordered shall
be submitted prior to expiration. A coverage binder or letter from Consultant's
insurance agent to this effect is acceptable. A certificate of insurance and/or
additional insured endorsement as required in these specifications applicable to the
renewing or new coverage must be provided to City within five days of the expiration
of the coverages.
17. The provisions of any workers' compensation or similar act will not limit the
obligations of Consultant under this agreement. Consultant expressly agrees not to
use any statutory immunity defenses under such laws with respect to City, its j
employees, officials and agents. '
18. Requirements of specific coverage features or limits contained in this section are not �
intended as limitations on coverage, limits or other requirements nor as a waiver of !
any coverage normally provided by any given policy. Specific reference to a given I
coverage feature is for purposes of clarification only as it pertains to a given issue, �
and is not intended by any party or insured to be limiting or all-inclusive. f
19. These insurance requirements are intended to be separate and distinct from any other i
provision in this agreement and are intended by the parties here to be interpreted as
such.
20. The requirements in this Section supersede all other sections and provisions of this
Agreement to the extent that any other section or provision conflicts with or impairs ;
, the provisions of this Section.
21. Consultant agrees to be responsible for ensuring that no contract used by any party
involved in any way with the project reserves the right to charge City or Consultant
for the cost of additional insurance coverage required by this agreement. Any such
provisions are to be deleted with reference to City. It is not the intent of City to
reimburse any third party for the cost of complying with these requirements. There
shall be no recourse against City for payment of premiums or other amounts with
respect thereto.
22. Consultant agrees to provide immediate notice to City of any claim or loss against
Consultant arising out of the work performed under this agreement. City assumes no
obligation or liability by such notice,but has the right (but not the duty) to monitor
the handling of any such claim or claims if they are likely to involve City.
�
I
;
r
�
r
3
_,_ _ .
Exhibit"D"
SECTION 6 - RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
The OMIVI-MEANS team has extensive experience in transportation projects ihroughout California. We
have seiected the following relevant experience briefs, which demonstrates our ability to perform the
scope of services required for your study.
Transportation Planning and Modeling Experience
Over the years OMNI-MEANS has been involved in the preparation of a number Transportation Flanning
and/or Modeling Studies,both new and updates. Often these studies have included both transportation
planning and the preparation and/or operation of traffic models to forecast future travel. Communities
that we have conducted transportation planning and modeling studies include:
• City of Paso Robles • City of Stockton
• City of Atascadero • City of Shasta Lake
• City of Galt • Butte County
• City of Turlock • City of San Buenaventura
• City of West Sacramento • City of Simi Valley
• City of Sacramento • El Dorado County
In addition to our experience with transportation planning and modeling,OMNI-MEANS is also familiar �
: with working with the San Luis Obispo County Council of Governments(SLOCOG) and Caltrans.
Specifically,OMrTI-MEANS prepared the South County Tra�c Models that have been used for traffic
forecasting in that part of the County. We developed the South County traffic model in 1992 by
combining four existing subarea traffic models, two that used T-Model software and two that used
MINUTP. We also developed an Arroyo Grande Traffic Model in 1988-9. We also worked with
Caltrans District#5 on Project Study Reports(PSR)at Avila Road/LJS 101 and at James Way/Price
StreeWS 101.
�
In addition to our local South County work,OM1VI-MEANS has also been very active warking in the �
North County area. Added to our Circulation Element Update work for the City of Paso Robles,OMNI-
MEANS has also assisted the City in updating their Bikeway Master Plan, updated their speed zones,
addressed neighborhood traffic calming issues and prepared the traffic study for the Chandler Ranch
Specific Plan. For the City of Atascadero,in addition to their Circulation Element Update,OMNI-
MEANS also prepared the Traffic Way/US 101 PSR,conducted the El Camino Real Signal Coordination
Study and prepared a nurnber of traffic impact studies for the City.
Lastly,in addition to working for the Cities, OMNI-MEANS has also maintained contracts with both San
Luis Obispo County and the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments(SLOCOG). For the County,
OMNI-MEANS has created two TP+Viper traffic models for County use to update the traf�c fees in
- Templeton and in Los Osos. Community-wide traffic rnodels,much the same size as Arroyo Grande
were developed using County assessor and Census 2000 data. Much of this information,for which we
are very familiar will be very beneficial in updating your traffic model. Also for SLOCOG, OMNI-
MEANS has conducted the SR 46 East Corridor Study and is presently under contract to provide traffic
model forecast information for the SR 46 WestlUS ]01 Interchange Modi�cation PSR.
Cintivide Trnffic Monitoring Progrant and Rerniner sernices ro Prepare and Revrew Trcrffic Srudies Page 12
Cin•ofArro��o Grande P2636SCP001.DOC
City of Arroyo Grande Long Range Circulation Studies
The Long Range Circulation Study was prepared to present
analysis and recommendations for alternative extension
alignments of State Route 227 through the City to US 101,and
alternative improvement modifications to the US 101/Brisco ,,,�:,,.,,... �-.-��""",
„:,
Road interchange.Through a series of working papers,public {��•.�,���, '� �`-
�,.:,;
workshops and public hearings, a total of 15 alternative �"Y'� °`
alignment options were eventually explored and analyzed
through this study process.A total of 3 alternatives were
eventually studied before a selection of a preferred modification Atroyo Grande,
to the interchange was recommended. John Wallace
(805)SS¢4011
James Way/ Price Street F�ctension PSR
�
�,��.�� ��sx����t""` ��
This PSR was developed in Caltrans District 5 to address the ��� ,, �j�;��� �'{
extension of James Way to the north of the road's current '`"��-"�����'
,
terminus and/or the extension of Price Street to the south of
this road's terminus as a frontage road to Route 101.Five �- ` ' ��
,A.,�r a..:.�.W`::z �°�= ,'W'*w¢ `m. i
primary circulation alternatives and one sub-alternative were ,
addressed. Potential improvements at the State Route 101 / ������ g����=:
�.�,:�:
Hinds Avenue Interchange,resulting from each of the '� `�"-
alternatives, were also identified. �
The studied altematives ranged in cost from a low of$7.31 �City o,f`Ptsmo eac , '
million for Altemative 2 to a high of$12.76 million for Dennis Delzeit,
Altemative 4.The proposed STIP funding for this project was (8d5) 773 11656 i
$11.2 million with the balance covered by the City of Pismo �
Beach funds. '
�
- �
,
�
City of Shasta Lake Central Business District
This project identified specific goals and strategies to effect �
beneficial change for the physical and economic development of ���
the Shasta Dam Boulevard Area. The work included:
• Existing land use analysis 'p"��� '""'� ��
- Circulation analysis '����
• Parking analysis �
• Infrastructure analysis
• Architectural analysis
• Circulation concept planning
• Goals and Strategies City of Shasta Lake,
• Eight community workshops and public hearings Alan Harvey
(530) 27�74�
Cinlvide Traffic Monitorin,g Program and Retainer Sen�ices to Prepare and Review Trnffic Studres Page 13
Ciry of Arroyo Grande P2636SCPOOI.DOC
City of Atascadero Circulation Element Update �; �=�±� F,• � �'
r� "'
As a part of an overall program to update their General Plan, the �� ' , � �"�� ��✓
Ciry retained OMI�TI-MEANS to develop a Citywide Traffic .�wr� ' t �>w° `°..
Model to help update their Circulation Element. Non-standard ""`�---������w
interchanges along US 101 and El Camino Real, a parallel major . ����w.
arterial trying to serve both as a downtown amenity and as a � �i�� � ' ��°�
.�- .�. y�,� ,�
cross town circulator were among the challenges in def'ming a
circulation plan that best met community needs. Both -
> � ,��
alternative land use and circulation concepts were tested by the � � ��kp,��. �t �
Citywide traffic model to identify plans that achieved both the City of Atascadero,CA
land use and circulation goals and objectives of Atascadero. Steve Kahn
(805)461-5020
�4 ;: �.`�� � ' ^,.,��* - _ "��r;'��c
City of Paso Robies Circulation Element Update
F,� -�
,, ;, ,. �: �
In a two step program, the City of Paso Robles first updated their '�
Circulation Element based on t�eir current General Plan Land Use � "�` j `:'
Plan. For diis initial effort, OMTTI-MEANS created a new TP+ ` �
Viper Citywide Traffic Model. Circularion improvements were � ,
identified to asswe current Level of Service policy goals were � � _ `' �.. ;�,�:,;�
being met. With the Citywide Traf�c Model in tow, the City . ��--"`�—= !
iniriated the second step in the program, which was to update a - =w _ -- ` -
total of eight elements of the General Plan, including their Land °� '
Use and Housing Flements. Alternative land use, housing and City of Paso Rables,CA
circulation concepts are currently under study to idenrify the best Bob Lata
land use%irculation plans to serve the growing Paso Robles (805)237-3970 '
community into the future. �
i
�
i
City of Galt Citywide Circulation Study
` With a City development configurarion that resembles an hour- -. � ' '
glass shape, with a freeway and railroad at its midpoint,Ga1t had �: �:
signi�cant challenges to achieve good north-south and east-west ' �r ' --
�.,:, , , .,
circulation flow within the City. Cunently very dependent on
SR 99 for local cross-town, the City is very concemed with
pending Caltrans plans to widen the freeway and remove many
of the ramps serving the City. ONIl�tI-MEANS was retained to , ,;
develop a Citywide Traf�c Model that will now be used in their �,`,?�«.�`�'"���''� ''
General Plan update that will address further land use and � � City of Galt,CA
circularion planning to develop a cohesive circulation system to Doug Gaulr
serve their growing community. (209)366-7260
Ciryx�ide Traffic Monitorrng Program and Retarner Servlces to Prepare nnd Reviex�Traffi'c Studies Page 14
Cin�of Arroyo Crande P2636SCPOOI.DOC
_.__,.�.._.a.,_v.�.._.__.y�.
SECTION 7 - REFERENCES
�
Bob Lata Jim Hamilton
Community Development Director Community Development Director
'City of Paso Robles City of Redding
(805)237-3970 (530)225-4122
Richard Krumholtz John Wallace
Advanced Planning President
Caltrans District 5 John Wallace&Associates
(805)542-4604 (805}544-4011
Darren Brown Steve Kahn
'Transportation Planner Director of Public Works
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments City of Atascadero
(805) 781-5764 (805)461-5020
Dennis Delzeit David Flynn
Community Services Director Project Engineer
City of Pismo Beach County of San Luis Obispo '
(805)773-4656 (805)781-4463
,
,
i
�
�
Cirywide Tra�c Monitoring Program and Retai�zer Services to Prepare and Review Tra�c Studies Page I S
City ofArroyo Grande P2636SCPOOI.DOC
_ _ ,_... ..�......,,.� __.._Y.
SECTION $ - QUALIFICATI�NS OF THE
PROJECT TEAM
�
ONIl�II-MEANS is a full service engineering firm providing services in a broad range of disciplines. The
t�n-oyo Grande Traffic Model Update and Retainer Services will draw upon several of our skills and
"expertise. To adequa.tely address the transportation infrastructure needs, our Traffic and Transportation
Department will be utilized in updating the traffic model. The coincident need to prioritize,cost and
update the City's Capita�Improvernent Program will also draw on our Transportation Design expertise.
The Public Meetings and Project Managernent will be lead by the Principal-in-Charge�Project Manager.
A brief description of the key team members is followed by their resumes. The team organization and
communication lines for this project are illustrated in the following Organization Chart.
Mr.Martin R. Inouye,for this project will be tt►e Principai-in-Charge,as weii as the Project
Manager and lead the team through the overall process and be a part of all presenta.tions. Marty has
been with the firm since 1981. Mariy has extensive experience within San Luis Obispo County and with
Caltrans District#5 specifically. Marty has served as Principal-In-Charge on most all of the _
transportation planning and tra.ffic modeling experience demonstrated. He was the Principal-In-Charge
of the South County Traffic Model Development Study prepared for SLOCOG.
Mr.H.Ross Atnsworth,P.E.will p�ovide the Quality Control of all products and services provided by
OMNI-MEANS to Grover Beach. Mr.Ainsworth is a founding principal of ONIl�1I-MEANS,and is
licensed as both a Civil and Traffic Engineer in the State of Califomia. Mr.Ainsworth served as City
: Traffic Engineer in Escondido, California and Reno,Nevada. Mr.Ainsworth is lrnowledgeable in public '
policy as well,he served on the Rocklin City Council,and he represented the cities of Roseville,Rocklin �
and Li�coln on the Sacramento Area Council of Governments in 1986 and 1987. �
Gary A.Miils will serve as Assistant Pro)ect Manager for thfs important project With over 12 �
years of experience in transportation planning and tr�c modeling,Mr.Mills will assist in the"day-to- �
day"management and technical analysis for the.study. ;
Mr.Ravi Narayanan will provide his Traffic Modeling expertise. Over the past four years,Mr. '
Narayanan under the direction of Mr.Martin Inouye has developed six new Traffic City and Area Wide
Models for Paso Robles,Atascadero,Templeton, Los Osos,Galt and Turlock.
Citywide Tra�c MonitoringProgra»:and Retainer Services to Prepare and Review Tra�c Studies Page 16
Ciry of Arroyo Grande P2636SCPO�I.DOC
� City of Arroyo Grande
Citywide Traffic Monitoring Program and Retainer
Services to Prepare and Review Traffic Studies
Organizationa) Chart
cinr oF
ARROYO GRANDE
Don Spagnolo
� QUALITY CONTROL �� �
H. Ross Ainsworth, P.E
PRINCIPAL IN CHARGE/ 'i,
PR07ECT MANAGER �
Martin R. Inouye
_.a,., . � . �-�
ASSISTANT
PR07ECT MANAGER ` '
�
Gary A Mills
> , � �
�
f
!
CITYWIDE TRAFFIC RETAINER TRAFFIC
� MODEL UPDATE STUDIES
Martin R. Inouye Martin R. Inouye
Ravi K. Narayanan Gary A. Mills
Trisha Dudala Paul Matos ,
ANNUAL TECHNICAL
REPORT PUBLIC MEETING ;
PRESENTATIONS
Gary A. Mills
Ravi K. Narayanan Martin R. Inouye
Paul Matos Gary A. Mills
�=��'�'��� • ����G���
E N G 1 N f E P. 5 •P L A I� h E R S
� fl�l?:�h':LT N�).�Iti1:1 Ky�yl.tii31
Citywrde Trqf)ic Monitoring Progra�n and Retnrner Sen�ices to Prepnre and Review Trq�`'ic Studies Page 17
Ciry ofArroyo Grande P2636SCPODI.DOC
Martin R. Inouye
PRINCIPAL
f
As a Principal-in-charge of many Transportation Planning projects, Mr.Inauye is responsible for staff
_management, scheduling,client relations, policy design and project quality control.
Professional Skilis
Mr.Inouye contributes a variety of professional skills that are of direct benefit to many different projects.
These skills include:
• Site Planning
• Tzansportation Planning
• Traffic Engi.neering
' • Traffic Modeling
Project Experience
Mr.Inouye has managed many Traffic Engineering,Transportation and Caltrans projects including,but
not limited to the following: �
• Citywide Traffic Circularion Study-Galt,CA
• Phase 1 -Citywide Tra.ffic Model and Circulation Element-Paso Robles, CA '
• Phase 2-Land Use and Circulation Element-Paso Robles, CA �
• Citywide Traffic Model Update and Westside Specific Plan-Turlock, CA
• Citywide Capital Facilities Fee Update-Turlock,CA
� Northwest Triangle Community Facilities District-Turlock,CA
• Citywide Capital Facilities Fee Update-Street Projec�s -Modesto,CA �
• State Route 65Blue Oaks Interchange Modification PSR,PR and PS&E-Rocklin, CA
• Interstate SBird Road PSR,PR and PS&E-San Joaquin County,CA
• State Route 132Bird Road PSR- San Joaquin County,CA
• Highway 99/Central Galt Interchange Modification PSR and PA&ED-Galt, CA
Professionaf Registration j Affifiations �
_ • Institute of Transportation Engineers—Associate Member
Education
• Masters of Urban and Regional Planning Transportation-California State University, San Jose,
CA
• Bachelors of Science,Environmental Planning and Management-California State University,
San Jose,CA
Citywide Ti•a�c Monitoring Progrm�:and Retai�:er Services to Prepare and Review Tra�c Stcrdies PaSe�8
City ofA�royo Grande P2636SCPOOI.DOC
. �e�..., _.........
�
H. Ross Ainsworth, P.E.
PRINCIPAL
f
As a Principal in the firm,Mr.Ainsworth is responsible for overall client relations,quality control,
_business development,and is typically the Principal-in-charge of transportation related projects. Mr.
Ainsworth was also the Director of Traffic and Transportation for the City of Reno,a City Traffic
Engineer in the City of Escondido, a Rocklin City Council Member(1984)and Mayor of Rocklin (198?).
Professional Skiils
Mr.Ainsworth contributes a variety of professaonal skills that are of direct benefit to many different
projects. These skills include:
• Roadway Design
• Transportation Planning
• Traffic Engineering
• Public Presentation
Project Experience
Since founding the firm in 1987,Mr.Ainsworth has overseen many Transportation Planning and Design
projects including,but not limited to the following:
• Shasta County Interchange Study-5hasta County, CA
• Caldwell Avenue Major Investment Study-Tulare County, CA
• Road 108 PA/ED-Tulare County,CA
• SR 46 East Corridor Study-San Luis Obispo County, CA
• Niles Road Corridor Improvements PS&E-Kem County, CA
• Interstate SO/Sierra College Interchange PA1ED-City of Rocklin,CA .
Professional Registration and Professionai Afflliations
• Civil Engineer in Califorxua, CA#19642,Nevada and Oregon
• Traffic Engineer,CA#TR 0708
• American Public Works Association
' • Institute of Transportation Engineers
Educatlon
• Bachelors of Science, Civil Engineering-University of Southern California
• Master of Engineering Transportation Engineering—Pennsylvania State University
Presentations
Lecturer-Califomia League of Cities Workshop,"Downtown Revitalization", 1987,Ontario, Santa
Rosa, CA
Moderator-California League of Cities Annual Meetings, 1986; Planning in Small Cities, 1987;
Creating and Using Open Space
ITE- Salt Lake City District 6 Annual Conference, 1997: State Route 299 Sacramento River Crossing
Major Investment Study.
Crtywide Tra�c MonitoringProgran:and Retai�:er Services to Prepare at:d Review Tra�c Stzedies Page 19
Ciry ofArroyo Grande PZ636SCPOOI.DOC
---, -,--••-�- �._.._.,
/
Ravi K. Narayanan, P.E.
TRAFFIC ENGINEER
�
Mr. Narayanan is responsible for preparing traffic studies utilizing the latest in traffic operations
; technologies.He has completed a variety of small and large-scale circulation analyses as part of Specific
Plan studies,Citywide Capital Irnprovement Fee Assessment studies,and focused traffic impact studies.
Professional Skills
Mr.Narayanan contributes a variety of professiona.l skills that are of direct benefit to many different
projects. Tliese skills include:
� • Geographic Information Systems
� • Transportation Planning
• Traffic Engineering
• Traffic Modeling
Project Experience
Mr. Narayanan has participated in many relevant traffic projects including,but not limited to the
following:
• Circulation Element Traffic Model Development-Paso Robles, CA
• Traffic Model Development—Atascadero, CA
• Interstate 80/Siecra.College Boulevard UC Modifications PSR,PA/ED/PS&E—Rocklin, CA
• State Route 132Bird Road UC PSR-San Joaquin County,CA
• Laguna Gateway,Laguna West and Sheldon Park Subdivision T.I.S.—Elk Grove, Sacramento
County,CA
• Forni Road Shopping Center,Summit Commercial Expansion—Placerville,El Dorado County,
CA �
• Southwest Anderson Redevelopment EIR Traffic Study—Anderson,CA
• Stillwater Business Park EIR Traffic Study—Redding,CA
Professional Registratlon and Professional Afflliations
: • Institute of Transportation Engineers,Associate Member
� American Society of Civil Engineers,Associate Member
Educatlon '
• Masters of Science, Civil Engineering—University of Califomia,Davis, CA
• Bachelors of Science, Civil Engineering—Indian Tnstiterte of Technology,India
Citywide Tr�c Mo��itoring Progrant and Retair:er Services to Prepa��e and Review Tra�c Studies Page 20
Ciryo,J'Arroyo Grande P2636SCPOOI.DOC
GaryA. Mills
PROJECT MANAGER
m
Mr.Mills will be responsible for preparing project related transportation planning/engineering analyses, �
technical appendix and report preparation. Mr.Mills has over 12 years experience as Project
ManagerlProject Planner on a variety of transportation studies. These studies have involved,
residentiaUcommerciaUindustrial development analyses,roadwaylintersection/interchange and freeway
: tra�c operarions analyses, transportation demand modeling,transportation demand management,and
traffic flow simularion.
Education:
University of California, San Diego
� Bachelor's Degree: Urban Studies and Planning
Minor: Scientific Perspectives '
Minor:Philosophy :
Professional Organizations/Affiliations:
Insritute of Transportation Engineers(TTE)
Associate Member(1996 to present) ,
ITE District 6 Central Section Vice-President(2001)
TI'E Dis�ict 6 Central Section Vice-President(2000)
ITE District 6 Central Section Secretary-Treasurer(1999)
Visalia Airport Committee (2000 to present)
American Pu.blic Works Association(2000 to present) `
�
Experience:
Following is a selection of specific projects in which Mr.Mills was(is)actively involved: �
E
Traffic Impact Studies. Preparation of/participation in more than 50 traffic impact studies throughout �
the San Joaquin Valley and central California Coast. ;
State Route 99 Corridor Study. Preparation of transportation studies for seven alternative roadway
networks for 3 interchanges and 13 intersections in Tulare County between Avenue 200 and Paige
Avenue.
Atascadero Citywide Tra�c Model and Circulation Elemen� Preparation of Viper/'I'P+travel demand
forecast model(363 traffic analysis zones)and circulation element to evaluate three future network
alternatives within the City of Atascadera
Fresno Grantland Bypass. Evaluate alternative bypass in northwest Fresno between Shields and
Herndon Avenues and provide nexus study to determine fair share of right of way costs within the zone
of benefit. Includes evaluation of future interchange at State Route 99 and grade separation at railroad
tracks.
Copper/Willow Nexus Fee Study. Deterniine zone of benefit and provide nexus study to spread costs
of improvements to.Copper and Willow Avenues in northeast Fresno. Includes analysis of existing and
future traffic conditions and deternunation of existing and future land uses.
Cirywide Traffic Monitoring Program and Retainer Services to Prepare a�id Review Tra�c Stcidies Page 21
Ciry ofArroyo Grande P2636SCPDOI.DOC
8.k.
� pRRO��
o �,�
� INCORPORATED �Z �
" � MEMORANDUM
�c �u�r io. �ei� „�
C4��FOEtN�P
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: DON SPAGNOLO, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER�
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF PARCEL MAP AG 02- 0446;
SUBDIVIDING ONE (1) PARCEL INTO TWO COMMERCIAL PARCELS;
1540 EAST GRAND AVENUE
DATE: NOVEMBER 25, 2003
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the Council approve Final Parcel Map AG 02-0446, subdividing 1.75
acres into finro (2) commercial lots.
FUNDING:
There is no fiscal impact at this time.
DISCUSSION:
The City has received Final Parcel Map AG 02-0446, owned by Santa Lucia Bank, A
Califomia Corporation. The subject parcel is located at 1540 East Grand Avenue,
between Courtland Street and Oak Park Boulevard. This map subdivides
approximately 1.75 acres into two (2) residential lots. This is consistent with the
approved Tentative Parcel Map 02-0446. The current zoning for the property is
General Commercial (GC).
ALTERNATIVES: �
The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration:
• Approve staff's recommendation;
• Do not approve staff's recommendation;
• Modify as appropriate and approve staff's recommendation; or
• Provide direction to staff.
Attachment: Exhibit 1 — Parcel Map AG-02-0446
�
�p-���� �-,�� C
viDar�zn�'t0dr'i°° � C O U R T L A N D S T R E E T,van�wt sm rsv xw��•�r2 erazotc� �wistaoa sra rex� R ._ "�P�°"�
� _ '-- — — A➢T'MR7IR1
� I!lJ-M-IM sra�rMC na 1ro�J-�q) / `\
SOJ1�'119YlJ1.lSAI NOJlS'�'[631.A0%1
� �a¢p�y i_N i,os__�,� . .� � CRAPHIA SC mIE
\ /
I fD J9°LS 1111 PfR RI � !D/Y[S IIII P[R FI �C �30"I �p, � l olnch.80 leet
` ��SEF O[1Al A �,�5� � /
� �^ Ji..M I .
� Q ne[YE.111�1 �
JO' J5• ^� /do�v� � �$
75'MIOE
� vue��c waitn Mn �h' � PARC£L 1 � $. cawnun sr.
cn
PRIVi11E Sfi.NN ORAN' pi' �� 34PRI M R.Oinss I Q a1111 �
EASEIYNI f Il,o!!Sa n./Er �
'�a a � �'a� r�,a�r�o.,�m i �� �„��,,.z�R. �
a� xccmaocnc nr�v-rxccuv�r � ��61' � '
M Y Y 7 f S 5 M/7 E C F f S S W I . g COf BCOOI N PGP A YB �4
Z�� �� �stwv�vneaa�a $ --� �— ------�=Xr'�� $ � ��A
' W�, -� � T ,�„u�,�.�„ , , �#We
>� �� � � `� ���
I Q� 8 i � f"m�o"'a"'u�'"�"°w'r REFERENCES
� ��. r Q � n�o.scs fne ux soao-avsne
,� �s �e�noe�m rw n�s r�v.s¢
� � r�smO°�w o��ew�e��w1O':---I 8 nr-aeMOrzr.accawo mn vcx..ue s
I � � I I �� Z ��I anai Y SrA2KNt �-q����a,.o a��v[x ro aw ee
; F� � PARCEL 2 \ I I �Z���+� Ai-owrz�s�Dau�iois�e
O�I � .MSN SG i/.QQSS � � Q �� RS-OfMJIF3 FECORD 0.11A PfA 80 LS IJ
a � 1 R W I R I!1.K 1 � I R6-IXMJ/FS/lECdP O M l A G E R P O C.2 0 0 2-l 0 1 1 0 6
(ry� y�—�— ------------ °1�' '�rs��s�c�ersui�vs�sa�wav�� R�'a�$
— ------y--- ------ioaaov--- —T (�qe
z.s. �Re
� �� � r v i.v.nsJS7 a�zaH nans7a7 aa2.nx. ��aw�oo�a uu wt nw I 7 ��� .
m m � ,�w..M..,,a�, ; a,.�.�.u, a LEGEND
N�Y LS:'� ,t�,3.a,.o � � .SE.5 NEBM »,�I GP 2.5.5N:•
�,�,�.s i �g; r---------------- o �•
� RI GVLS d/I)'�^l5 111] i � �� j --- I� (b�1E55 OIIKAMISE AV�D
I Ul
. J0• J0• . � �x � 0 IN GOY.CFCIE ,SYKINU/l�z•
� I � �� I BLOCK 83
� I I �4 MB 6 csaaavm er � rounn ra�w.«�cm as nn�eo
n
w°r`'n��tiv'�1 �o' a°�
� � � \ 1
� � —
� � � BAS/S OF BEARING'S
K _ O A K P A R K B O U LE V A R D _ _ _ ,,,�8,,,���,,�F�„���,..5,�,�,�,��„�
� �a r��a t e ra a�ti M 0.7�J i u o 7 l M�7 X J f D N L C£N L G Y d i f i F C p[M G Y 1/�E'�.M��`��A�M.E N A N 4 C A B E A F I M G G�5 l 6Y 5'P O'E
m aesteo xs w wa.rratwt s%entrr cr uweaie nim wn� err�e�v rawo wawwcr+rs vex eu�s u.
_ � �a�cxs v�ar i��w ea � � tis aaexv�x r rcac�ee�i°
P[R RJ
`
� C� PARCEL MAP AG-02-0446
� Q� �p •u/� LY A PoRIRW CY�OLK BI Mtl IMGIED 191M 5lREEI 0�/JAE ION1I OF
� �YD 7�M VG e�ro�2*vtx azrr A or uvs.tr PAGe a w n1e em ar.uPlroro uwrm[
NOTE.- a �,rv��.����.5..,���
�,
„��,��,«�,.�,��k o
� REGCNOS AI iAfE]K MIpC.I hS 1NAl�hC GIY Oi ARR019 a �+ n ���
arunr owr+s courn�wo sm¢r w sct�vn�s sucn'us
BEFN fXQ.LOm filW IIK GRO53 A/fEA GALCUAIIOV. �
S e S 4
T
� R BEACH °
� �R�IEC�s�E r � RRM DESIGNa G�_�ROUP
� wcx*ul[�� 7 """"�7�M�l/�IA1CA/t�"°'1^°�
�i bs I�ICINITY MAP ms s.,n��so-..�.sa.,�w�.a�,��
- Pham:!OS 1784�F�E05 1!M•�.
.�w..�.ww a��w.�n r.a a ar u�n.✓..r.i.ww ww a�.
t MO.S41LE ..Wl'H IIXU ..CiB N0. ,P010,. 9KfT 1 0�� 5,k'F,S
S
m
9.a.
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE �
CITY COUNCIL MEETING j
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING �
I
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing will be held by the City Council of !
the City of Arroyo Grande on the following item: i
PROPOSAL: The City Council will hold a public hearing and_consider approval of �
the issuance by the California Statewide Communities
Development Authority of multifamily housing revenue bonds in the
aggregate principal amount of approximately $10,000,000, the '
principal amount of which will be applied to the financing of the
acquisition and construction of a 108-unit multifamily residential
rental facility to be commonly known as the Courtland Senior
Apartments (the "Project") to be located at 1524 E. Grand Avenue
in the City of Arroyo Grande, California. The owner of the Project
will be Courtland-Arroyo Grande, L.P., a California limited
partnership.
All those interested in matters related to the issuance of the revenue bonds are invited
to attend and be heard in support of or opposition to the proposal at the time of the
hearing. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call Michaef La Pierre
of the California Statewide Communities Development Authority at (925) 933-9229.
If you chailenge an item in court, you may be (imited to raising only those issues you or
someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written
correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing.
Failure of any person to receive the notice shall not constitute grounds for any court to
invalidate the action of the legislative body for which the notice was given.
Date and Time of Hearing: Tuesday, November 25, 2003, 7:00 p.m.
Place of Hearing: Arroyo Grande City Council Chambers,
215 East Branch Street
Arroyo Grande, CA 93420
�
..� ,
C� �.�.
Kelly W mor
Director of Administrative Services/Deputy City Clerk
Publish 1T, The Tribune, Tuesday, November 11, 2003
o� p,RROYO c
9
� INCOAVOAATE �_
V T
� ,iu�r �o. �o» ,F MEMORA,NDUM
c'O��FOR�'�P
TO: CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD OF
DIRECTORS '
FROM: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER�� ''
,
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE
ISSUANCE OF TAX-EXEMPT BONDS BY THE CALIFORNIA '
STATEWIDE COMMUNITIES DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FOR
THE FINANCING OF THE COURTLAND-ARROYO GRANDE,
L.P. SENIOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT AND
DISCUSSION OF EXTENSION AND REQUESTED CHANGES TO
THE DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
DATE: NOVEMBER 25, 2003
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City Council:
1) Adopt the attached resolution approving the issuance of tax-exempt bonds
by the California Statewide Communities Development Authority for the
Financing of the Courtland-Arroyo Grande, L.P. Senior Affordable Housing
Project; and
2) Direct staff to prepare the modifications to the Disposition and
Development Agreement (DDA) requested by the applicant for
consideration at the December 9, 2003 meeting.
FUNDING:
The estimated cost to the City for consultant services related to this process is
$26,250. A reimbursement agreement has been entered into with the applicant
for the full amount. Therefore, there is no expected fiscal impact to the City for
review, preparation and approval of the Resolution or modifications to the DDA.
The DDA previously approved by the City Council sets forth financial assistance
in the form of a loan in the amount of $800,000. This amount is proposed to be
funded approximately $360,000 from the Affordable Housing "In Lieu" Fee Fund,
$40,000 from the Redevelopment Affordable Housing "Set Aside" Fund, and
deferred payment in the amount of$400,000 from development impact fees.
S:\CITY MANAGER\STEVE\Council Reports\11.25.03 Courtland Senior Housing Project.doc
CITY COUNCIL
CSCDA ISSUANCE OF TAX-EXEMPT BONDS AND CHANGES TO
DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR COURTLAND-
ARROYO GRANDE, L.P. SENIOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT
NOVEMBER 25, 2003
PAGE 2
DISCUSSION:
On March 20, 2002 the City Council/Redevelopment Agency approved a DDA
with Courtland-Arroyo Grande, L.P. for a proposed mixed-use project at 1524
and 1542 East Grand Avenue. The project includes a proposed 108-unit
affordable senior housing project. The DDA required the developer to satisfy
conditions precedent to conveyance and to obtain a preliminary reservation of tax
credits from the Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) by December 30, 2002.
At the March 11, 2003 meeting, the City Council/Redevelopment Agency
extended the agreement to September 30, 2003.
The applicant has since submitted three unsuccessful applications for 9% State
tax credits, even though the project achieved the total number of points available
in the competitive evaluation process. The applicant has now submitted an
application for 4% State tax credits. This process also awards the applicant with
issuance of tax-exempt multifamily housing revenue bonds, which will be used in
acquisition and construction of the facility. The timing of this process is critical
because on January 1, 2004, affordable housing projects will be subject to State
prevailing wage requirements, which are estimated to increase construction costs
by as much as 33%. It has been determined that projects receiving the 4% tax
credits in this round will be the last to be exempt from the State prevailing wage
provisions.
The applicant has proposed the bonds be issued by the California Statewide
Communities Development Authority (CSCDA). The City Council recently
approved City membership in the CSCDA, which makes local projects eligible for
this process. As a member of CSCDA, the legislative body is asked to conduct a
public hearing and adopt a resolution approving the issuance of tax-exempt
bonds to finance the project. Such approval is required for compliance with
federal tax laws under the Tax and Equity Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982
("TEFRA"). The TEFRA hearing provides members of the community the
opportunity to speak on behalf of or against the nature and location of the
proposed project to be financed.
The CSCDA is a California joint powers authority, organized and existing under
the laws of the State of California, and is sponsored by the League of Califomia
Cities and the California State Association of Counties. Over 350 California
cities, counties and special districts are members of the CSCDA for the purpose
of issuing revenue bonds for the financing of projects that promote economic
development. Each financing completed by the CSCDA is structured so that the
local agency completing the TEFRA hearing process has no liability with respect
to the issuance of bonds or the repayment of any debt service relating to such '
bonds. The local agency is not party to any of the financing documents relating
CITY COUNCIL
CSCDA ISSUANCE OF TAX-EXEMPT BONDS AND CHANGES TO
DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR COURTLAND-
ARROYO GRANDE, L.P. SENIOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT
NOVEMBER 25, 2003
PAGE 3
to the issuance of the bonds nor is it named in any of the disclosure documents
describing the bonds or the proposed financing.
Since the subsidy provided by the 4% tax credits is significantly less than the 9%
tax credit program, the applicant has modified the financial plan for the project
and requested modifications to the DDA. The primary impact to the project will
be a change in the number of low and very low units from 100% to 48 of the 108
total units. However, the remaining units are proposed to be restricted to
moderate-income level rents, which means the project will continue to comply
with the existing provisions of both the Conditional Use Permit and DDA.
Requested changes to the DDA include an extension of the term of the $800,000
loan from 18 to 30 years. Research by staff indicates that this level of subsidy is
still reasonable for the number of affordable units proposed and will be an
efficient use of the City's housing funds.
The interest rate on the loan is requested to be reduced from 10% to 3% simple
interest. The 10% interest was originally established in order to compensate for
the projected loss of tax increment revenue since the 100% low and very low ,
affordable units would have qualified for a full property tax exemption. With 48 of
the units now planned to be for low and very low rents, property tax will be levied
on the remaining units. Therefore, tax increment will be generated from the
project, and as a result, staff believes the interest rate should no longer be a
significant issue.
The applicant is also no longer requesting the City to participate in purchase of
the land, which will address some of the concerns previously expressed by the
City Council regarding this provision. In addition, since the DDA has now
expired, it will have to be revived and the term established through May 31, 2004. ;
The City's Redevelopment Housing consultant with the Rosenow Spevacek
Group Inc. (RSG) has completed an analysis of the pro forma submitted by the
applicant for this project. A summary of this analysis is provided in Attachment
A. In general, the analysis shows that the subsidy requested by the developer is
necessary in order to make the project financially feasible. The primary concern
identified in the analysis is that even with this subsidy, there is a significant
funding gap in the proposed financial plan for the project. Therefore, if the
applicant receives tax credits, there is still a good chance the project will not
precede. However, since the developer has agreed to pay for Redevelopment
Agency costs associated with the proposal, they have assumed the financial risk
involved in the City/Redevelopment Agency's continued participation with the
project proposal. Therefore, staff recommends the City Council approve the
CITY COUNCIL
CSCDA ISSUANCE OF TAX-EXEMPT BONDS AND CHANGES TO
DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR COURTLAND-
ARROYO GRANDE, L.P. SENIOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT
NOVEMBER 25, 2003
PAGE 4
TEFRA resolution and direct staff to prepare the revisions to the DDA for City
Council consideration at the December 9, 2003 meeting.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for the CounciPs consideration:
- Approve the TEFRA resolution and direct staff to present the
proposed modifications to the DDA at the December 9, 2003
meeting;
- Approve the TEFRA resolution and direct staff to negotiate other
changes to the DDA;
- Do not approve the TEFRA resolution;
- Provide staff direction.
Attachments: �
f
1. RSG Financial Analysis of Pro Forma for the Project �
�
a
�
I
i
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO
GRANDE APPROVING THE ISSUANCE OF MULTIFAMILY HOUSING
REVENUE BONDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF FINANCING THE
ACQUISITION AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE COURTLAND SENIOR
APARTMENTS
WHEREAS, the California Statewide Communities Development Authority (the "Authority")
is authorized by the laws of the State of California (the "Law") to execute and deliver
multifamily housing revenue obligations for the purpose of financing the acquisition,
construction and development of multifamily residential rental facilities located within the
area of operation of the Authority which are to be occupied, in part, by very low and low
income tenants; and
WHEREAS, Courtland-Arroyo Grande, L.P., a California limited partnership (the "Borrower")
has requested the Authority to issue and deliver multifamily housing revenue obligations in
the anticipated principal amount not to exceed $10,000,000 (the "Obligations"), the
proceeds of which shall be used for the purpose of financing the acquisition and
construction of a 10-unit multifamily senior residential rental facility to be commonly known
as the Courtland Senior Apartments which is to be located at 1524 E. Grand Avenue in the
City of Arroyo Grande, California (the "Project"); and
WHEREAS, the Obligations to be issued and delivered to finance the acquisition and
construction of the Project will be considered °qualified exempt facility bonds° under
Section 142(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, (the "Code"), and
Section 147(f) of the Code requires that the "applicable elected representative" with respect
to the Project hold a public hearing on the issuance and delivery of the Obligations; and �
I
WHEREAS, the City Council (the "City Council") of the City of Arroyo Grande (the °City") as j
the "applicable elected representatives" to hold said public hearing, has held said public j
hearing at which all those interest in speaking with respect to the financing of the Project i
were heard. `
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows:
1. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the foregoing recitals are true and
correct.
, 2. The City Council hereby approves the financing of the Project by the Authority with
the proceeds of the Obligations. Such approval is subject to the following conditions
and limitations: a) the approval of this Resolution does not itself constitute approval
for any provision of funding for the Project by the City or the Arroyo Grande
� Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") nor does it obligate the City or the Agency to
further consider the commitment of any moneys for the Project; b) approval of this
Resolution and its effectiveness is subject to the Agency obtaining, a reasonable
time prior to closing, covenants effective for at least 55 years, enforceable by the
Agency, assuring that units will be available at affordable rent to households eligible
for participation under Health and Safety Code Section 33334.2 and providing fo�
reporting of ongoing conforming occupancy at affordable rents as provided under the
Health and Safety Code, all in form and substance acceptable to Agency's Special
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 2
Counsel; c) approval of this Resolution shall not affect the existing arrangement
under which certain Agency and/or City costs are borne by the Borrower; and d) this
Resolution shall remain in effect so long as the Obligations are issued not later than
February 28, 2004, but shall cease to be effective if the Obligations are not issued
on or before February 28, 2004. �
3. The issuance and delivery of the Obligations shall be subject to the approval of and
execution by the Authority of all financing documents relating thereto to which the
Authority is a party and subject to the sale of the Obligations by the Authority.
4. The adoption of this Resolution is solely for the purpose of ineeting the requirements
of the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and shall not
be construed in any other manner, with neither the City nor its staff having fully
reviewed or considered the financial feasibility of the Project or the expected
operation of the Project with regards to any State of California statutory
requirements, and such adoption shall not obligate, without further formal action to
be taken by this City Council, including, but not limited to, the approval of the
financing documents by the City Council by resolution, (i) the City to provide
financing to the Developer for the acquisition, construction and development of the
Project or to issue the Obligations for purposes of such financing; or (ii) the City, or
any department of the City, to approve any application or request for, or take any
other action in connection with, any environmental, General Plan, zoning or any
other permit or other action necessary for the acquisition, construction, development
or operation of the Project.
5. The Director of Administrative Services/Deputy City Clerk of the City shall forward a
certified copy of this Resolution and a copy of the affidavit of publication of the public
hearing notice to:
Thomas A. Downey
Jones Hall, A Professional Law Corporation
650 California Street, 18�' Floor
San Francisco, California 94108
6. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.
On motion by Council Member , seconded by Council Member , and on
the following roll-call vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this day of November, 2003.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 3
TONY M. FERRARA, MAYOR
ATTEST:
KELLY WETMORE, DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES/
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY
';
�
. �
�
�
.
R O S E N O W S P E V A C E K G R O U P 1 N C .
NEAL ESTATE ECONOMICS '�
GOVENNME4T SERVICES
217 NORTH MA1N STAFET TEL: 714 541-4585 ecorvoMic DE�ELOPMENT
NEDEVELOVMENT PLANNING
SU1TE 300 FAX: 714 836-174&
HOUSING
SANTA ANA,CALIFOHNIA EMA1L: INFO�WFBRSG.COM nen�esrnre ACOUISITION
JZ�OI-�{SZZ W W W.WEBpSG.COM FINANCING
Date: November 13, 2003
To: Steven Adams
City of Arroyo Gr nde
From: Tim Mulrenan
RSG
Subject: Courtland and Grand Senior Housing Project ("ProjecY')
At your request, the Rosenow Spevacek Group Inc. ("RSG") has reviewed the '
financial projections provided by Courtland-Arroyo Grande, L.P. ("Developer").
The Developer has made an application for 4% Low Income Housing Tax Credits
("Tax Credits") in October 2003, and the California Debt Limit Allocation
Committee ("CDLAC") will be announcing the successful applications on
December 5, 2003. Preliminary scores and rankings will be posted on November
21, and proof that a Tax and Equity Fiscal Responsibility Act ("TEFRA") hearing �
was held needs to be provided to CDLAC by December 1St I
Previously, the Developer had made applications for 9% tax credits, which �
provide more financing than 4% credits. The 9% allocation process is very ;
competitive, and the 9% applications were unsuccessful. Developers are more ;
likely to receive a 4% allocation than a 9% allocation, however this last 4%
allocation round for 2003 is expected to be more competitive than usual because
of the prevailing wage requirements that will begin in 2004.
Since 4% Tax Credits provide less proceeds from the sale of tax credits than 9%
tax credits, this has created a funding gap for the Project. Typically developers
would request the local redevelopment agency to increase its assistance to cover
the gap, but in the case of the Project, the Developer has been informed that the
Arroyo Grande Redevelopment Agency ("Agency") will not increase its funding
from the level already committed. Therefore the project currently has a funding
gap of $2,151,624. In addition, the Developer is loaning the full amount of its
developer fee, $1,200,000, to the Project to keep the gap from growing beyond
this amount. This Developer loan will be repaid from the cash flow from the
project.
The Developer is requesting that the Agency reduce the interest it will receive on
its assistance from 10% to 0% per year. The 10% rate was originally imposed to
. t
Mr. Steven Adams
November 13, 2003
Page 2
compensate the Agency for the property taxes that would not have been paid by
the Project. Now that 56 of the 108 units are projected to be rented to
households with incomes above 80% of area median income, property taxes will
be paid in proportion to these higher income units. RSG's analysis indicates that
the completed project should generate approximately $50,000 per year in income
to the Agency, and this amount will increase year to year. Attachment A provides
RSG's estimate of tax increment revenue to the Agency from the Project.
Despite the shortfall in funding, and the requirement to defer its fee, the
Developer is willing to continue to invest in the development of the Project. The
Developer has provided funds to the Agency to help offset the costs incurred by
the Agency for its financial consultant and legal counsel. The reasons the
Developer is willing to continue to pursue the Project include the following:
• It is also developing a project in the City of Los Angeles, which the
Developer expects will provide economies of scale in financing:
o Combining the Arroyo Grande and Los Angeles projects for the
issuance of bonds through the California Statewide I,
Communities Development Authority ("CSCDA") will avoid the �
imposition of prevailing wage requirements for the Los Angeles
pro�ect, and improve that pro�ect's feasibility. �
o The larger amount of Tax Credits available with both the Arroyo �
Grande and Los Angeles projects will attract more interest from �
prospective tax credit investors, and possibly better pricing. f
o The cost of documenting the financing for each project will be
less due to the ability to duplicate the bond, mortgage, and '
partnership documents.
• The sizable number of units targeted to households earning above
60% of area median income provides the opportunity for substantially
higher rents in the future, which would increase the return from, and
future value of, the Project.
• The imposition of prevailing wage requirements in 2004 will
significantly increase the future cost of building the project with Agency
assistance, and effectively eliminate the chance that it can be
developed as a tax credit housing project.
There is a strong possibility that the Developer will be unsuccessful in raising the
capital to cover the funding gap, and therefore the efforts of the Agency in
support of the project will have been in vain. However the Developer is incurring
. *t
Mr. Steven Adams
November 13, 2003
Page 3 ,
most of the risk in terms of time and money; the Agency's risk is its time in
cooperating with the Developer. Agency counsel prefers that the Agency issue
the bond itself, rather than have CSCDA issue the bond. However this would
remove the prevailing wage benefit on the Los Angeles project from the
Developer, which in turn will reduce the Developer's incentive to develop the
Arroyo Grande project. The Developer has already identified CSCDA as the
issuer of the bonds in its CDLAC application.
In consideration of the above, RSG recommends the Agency continue to
cooperate with the Developer in the development of the project. The reasons
are:
• The primary burden for continuing to process the Project is being
undertaken by the Developer.
• The Agency's commitment of its $800,000 in assistance will only be
triggered upon the Developer's success in acquiring the necessary
financing and building the Project.
• The 2004 prevailing wage requirements will make it more difficult in the
future for the Agency to develop affordable housing.
• The Project will provide much needed affordable housing that the Agency
and City can use towards its affordable housing requirements.
• The project will provide annual tax increment to the Agency starting at
approximately $50,000 per year and increasing. �
;
• At $15,385 per unit for those 52 units targeted for households at or below i
60% of area median income, the project provides a cost effective
investment for the Agency. These units will rent to households eaming
$31,140 or less (2003 3-person household, 60% area median income),
that will pay $778 or less per month, including a reasonable utility
allowance (2003, 60% household, 2 bedroom unit), for their units.
I will make myself available for discussion is this will be helpful for the Agency's
consideration.
�
Arroyo Grande Redevelopment Agency("RDA)
Calculation of Tax Increment Projections Assessor's Parcel Number: portion of 077-071-024
assessed value inflation: 2.00%
Courtland 8 Grand Senior Housing Project share to other taxing agencies: 25.00%
assuming welfare exemption of property tax obligations by non-proflt owner for units provided to households at or below 80%of area median income
, Potential Adjusted net
� � assessed Share provided assessed increment
j base year value without to households value after Assessed housing set- after Share to Total to RDA
1 assessed welfare above 80°/a welfare value total poten6al aside� housing set-other taxing balance to inGuding
1 Year fiscal year value exemption AMI exemption increment tax rate tax increment 20% aside agencies RDA Housin
1 2005-06 837,200 13,651,843 51.85% 7,078,733 6,241,533 1.00% 62,415 12,483 49,932 12,483 37,449 49,932
1 2 2006-07 837,200 13,924,880 51.85% 7,220,308 6,383,108 1.00% 63,831 12,766 51,065 12,766 38,299 51,065
3 2007-08 837,200 14,203,378 51.85% 7,364,714 6,527,514 1.00% 65,275 13,055 52,220 13,055 39,165 52,220
� 4 2008-09 837,200 14,487,445 51.85°!0 7,512,009 8,674,809 7.00% 66,748 13,350 53,398 13,350 40,049 53,398
5 2009-10 837,200 14,777,194 51.85% 7,662,249 6,825,049 1.U�% 68,250 13,650 54,600 13,650 40,950 54,600
6 2010-11 837,200 15,072,738 51.85% 7,815,494 6,978,294 1.00% 69,783 13,957 55,826 13,957 41,870 55,826
7 2011-12 837,200 15,374,193 51.85% 7,971,804 7,134,604 1.00% 71,346 14,269 57,077 14,269 42,808 57,077
8 2012-13 837,200 15,681,676 51.85% 8,131,240 7,294,04Q 1.00°10 72,940 14,588 58,352 14,588 43,764 58,352 �
9 2013-14 837,200 15,995,310 51.85% 8,293,864 7,458,664 1.00% 74,567 14,913 59,653 14,913 44,740 59,653 �
10 2014-15 837,2U0 16,315,216 51.85% 8,459,742 7,822,542 1.00% 76,225 15,245 60,980 15,245 45,735 60,880
11 2015-16 837,200 16,641,521 51.85% 8,628,937 7,791,737 1.00°fo 77,917 15,583 62,334 15,583 46,750 62,334 �
12 2016-17 837,200 16,974,351 51.85% 8,801,515 7,964,315 1.00% 79,643 15,929 63,715 15,929 47,786 63,715
13 2p17-18 837,�00 17,313,838 51.85°fo 8,977,546 8,140,346 1.00% 81,403 16,281 65,123 16,281 48,842 65,123 �
i 14 2018-19 837,200 17,660,115 51.85% 9,157,097 8,319,897 1.00% 83,199 16,640 66,559 16,640 49,919 66,559 �
15 2019-20 837,200 18,013,317 51.85% 9,340,238 8,503,038 1.00% 85,030 17,006 68,024 17,006 51,018 68,024 �
16 2020-21 837,200 18,373,583 51.85% 9,527,043 8,689,843 1.00% 86,898 17,380 69,519 17,380 52,139 69,519
17 2021-22 837,200 18,741,055 51.85% 9,717,584 8,880,384 1.00% 88,804 17,761 71,043 17,761 53,282 71,043 �
18 2022-23 837,200 19,115,876 51.85% 9,911,936 9,074,736 1.00% 90,747 18,149 72,598 18,149 54,448 72,598 �
19 2023-24 837,200 19,A98,194 51.85% 10,110,174 9,272,974 1.00% 92,730 18,546 74,184 18,546 55,638 74,184
20 2024-25 837,200 19,888,157 51.85% 10,312,378 9,475,178 1.00°l0 94,752 18,950 75,801 18,950 56,851 75,801 �
21 2025-26 837,200 20,285,921 51.85% 10,518,626 9,681,426 1.00% 96,814 19,363 77,451 19,363 58,089 77,451 �
22 2026-27 837,200 20,691,639 51.85% 10,728,998 9,891,798 1.00% 98,918 19,784 79,134 19,784 59,351 79,134
23 2027-28 837,200 21,1�5,472 51.85% 10,943,578 10,106,378 1.00% 101,064 20,213 80,851 20,213 60,638 80,851
24 2028-29 837,200 21,527,581 51.85% 11,182,450 10,325,250 1.00% 103,252 20,650 82,602 20,650 61,951 82,602
25 2029-30 837,200 21,958,133 51.85% 11,385,699 10,548,499 1.00% 105,485 21,097 84,388 21,097 63,291 84,388
26 2030-31 837,2U0 22,397,296 51.85% 11,613,413 10,776,213 1.00% 107,762 21,552 86,210 21,552 64,657 86,210
27 2031-32 837,200 22,845,241 51.85% 11,845,681 11,DU8,481 1.00% 110,085 22,017 88,068 22,017 66,051 88,068
28 2032-33 837,200 23,302,146 51.85% 12,082,594 11,245,394 1.00% 112,454 22,491 89,963 22,491 67,472 89,863
29 2U33-34 837,200 23,768,189 51.85°l0 12,324,246 11,487,046 1.00% 114,870 22,974 91,896 22,974 68,922 91,896
30 2034-35 837,200 24,243,553 51.85% 12,570,731 11.733,531 1.00% 117,335 23,467 93,868 23,467 70,401 93,868
31 2035-36 837,200 24,728,424 51.85% 12,822,146 11,984,946 1.00% 119,849 23,970 95,880 23,970 71,910 95,880
32 2036-37 837,200 25,222,993 51.85°l0 13,078,589 12,241,389 1.00% 122,414 24,483 97,931 24,483 73,448 97,931
33 2037-38 837,200 25,727,452 51.85°/u 13,340,160 12,502,960 1.00% 125,030 25,006 100,024 25,006 75,018 100,024
34 2038-39 837,200 26,242,001 51.85% 13,606,964 12,769,764 1.00% 127,698 25,540 102,158 25,540 76,679 102,158
35 2039-40 837,200 26,786,841 51.85% 13,879,103 13,041,903 7.00% 130,419 26,084 104,335 26,084 78,251 104,335
36 2040-41 837,200 27,302,178 51.85°!0 14,156,685 13,319,485 1.00% 133,195 26,639 106,556 26,639 79,917 106,556
37 2041-42 837,200 27,848,222 51.85% 14,439,819 13,602,619 1.00% 138,026 27,205 108,821 27,205 81,616 108,821
38 2042-43 837,200 28,405,186 51.85% 14,728,615 13,891,415 1.00% 138,914 27,783 111,131 27,783 83,348 111,131
39 2043-44 837,200 28,973,290 51.85% 15,023,187 14,185,987 1.00% 141,860 28,372 113,488 28,372 85,116 113,488
40 2044-45 837,200 29,552,756 51.85% 15,323,651 14,486,451 1.�0% 144,865 28,973 115,892 28,973 86,919 115,892
f
TOTAL 3,940,875 788,163 3,152,652 788,163 2,364,489 3,152,652
�
t
�
�
}
9.b. �
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande will hold a Public
Hearing on the following project:
CASE NO.: General Plan Amendment 02-001; Development Code Amendment 02-002;
Planned Development Amendment 02-001; and Vesting Tentative Tract Map 02-
002
APPLICANT: Don McHaney
REPRESENTATIVE: S&S Homes
LOCATION: 10.3-acre site located on the north side of Farroli Avenue between Oak Park
Boulevard and Golden West Place.
PROPOSAL: General Plan Amendment to change the land use category of the subject
property from Low Medium Density Residential (LM) to Medium High Density
Resident�al (MH) allowing up to 9.0 dwelling units per acre;..Development Code
Amendment to change the zoning designation from Residential Suburban (RS)
to Condom'inium/Townhouse (MF), Planned Unit Development Amendment to
allow more flexibility in design and more efficient use of land; and Vesting
Tentative Tract Map to subdivide the property into sixty-five (65) residential lots
ranging in size from 3,058 to 7,672 square feet.
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION: Mitigated Negative Declaration
In compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the Community Development Department
prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration on fhe above project, which is available for review at the
Community Development Department, City of Arroyo Grande.
Any person affected or concerned by this application may submit written comments to the Community
Development Department at 214 E. Branch Street, Arroyo Grande, Califomia, during normal business
hours (8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M.) or appear and be heard in support of or opposition to the project and
the environmental impacts at the time of hearing.
If you challenge an item in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else
raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the
planning commission at, or prior to, the public hearing.
Failure of any person to receive the notice shall not constitute grounds for any court to invalidate the
action of the legislative body for which the notice was given.
Date and Time of Hearing: TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 25, 2003 AT 7:00 P.M.
Place of Hearing: Arroyo Grande City Council Chambers
215 E. Branch Street
Arroyo Grande, California 93420
' ��j�,`�4���C�-�jL�--
Kelly Wet ore, Director of Administrative Services/
Deputy City Clerk
Publish 1T, Friday, November 14, 2003
,
� p,RROy�
° ��
�' INCORPORATED 92
ti
C� T
ic �u�v �o. �9�t ,f
c���FOaN�P
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ROB STRONG, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR���
VIA: �,KELLY HEFFERNON, ASSOCIATE PLANNER
�
SUBJECT: Consideration of a General Plan Amendment to change the land use
category of a 10.3-acre property from Low Medium density residential
(LM) to Medium High density residential (MH) allowing up to 9.0 dwelling
units per acre, Development Code Amendment to change the zoning
designation from Residential Suburban (RS) to Condominium/Townhouse
(MF), Planned Development Amendment to allow more flexibility in design
and more efficient use of land, and Vesting Tentative Tract Map to
subdivide the property into sixty-five (65) residential lots, for property
located on the north side of Farroll Avenue between Oak Park Boulevard
and Golden West Place, applied for by Don McHaney.
DATE: NOVEMBER 25, 2003
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt a Resolution Approving General Plan Amendment Case No. 02-001;
2. Introduce an Ordinance Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Arroyo Grande
and amending Planned Development 1.5 in Development Code Amendment 02-
002 and Planned Development Amendment 02-001; and
3. Adopt a Resolution Adopting a Negative Declaration with Mitigation Measures,
instructing the Director of Administrative Services to File a Notice of
Determination, and Approving Vesting Tentative Tract Map Case No. 02-002,
subject to certain conditions.
FUNDING:
The applicant is dedicating a retention basin sized for public benefit (maximum volume
is 3.33 acre feet) and a mini park to the City, which will be maintained through a
Maintenance District. A reduction in impact fees is also proposed (see Condition of
Approval No. 126 for the Tentative Tract Map).
CITY COUNCIL
GPA 02-001; DCA 02-002; PDA 02-001;VTTM 02-002
NOVEMBER 25,2003
PAGE 2
DISCUSSION:
Background
The City Council considered a Pre-Application for the subject property on May 28, 2002
(see Attachment 1 for City Council meeting minutes). The proposal included a 25-lot
residential subdivision for custom home development consistent with the current Low
Medium density (LM) land use designation and Residential Suburban (RS) zoning
category. Also included was the provision for second residential units and dedication of
roughly 1.5-acres to the City for future devetopment as a park.
The Council expressed concern about the proposed second units meeting affordable
housing needs and recommended the applicant pursue a higher density project that
included a substantial affordable housing component, as required by the City's
"Affordable Housing Requirements Ordinance" with any proposed density increase.
The Council further stated that City maintenance of additional parks is a concern, that
access from this property directly to the Soto Sports Complex was not desirable, and
that landscaped pedestrian enhancements should be included along the east side and
at the entrance to the project.
On February 5, 2003 the Planning Commission considered a revised project to
subdivide the properiy into 45 residential lots ranging in size from 4,503 to 9,379 square
feet, with the main access from Farroll Avenue as an extension of Bakeman Lane, and a
second access from an extension of Dixson Street (see Attachment 2 for Planning
Commission meeting minutes). Primary concerns focused on traffic impacts and
drainage, and the project was revised to eliminate through traffic on Dixson Street,
include on-site water retention, and provide other site plan modifications (see
Attachments 3-5 for Planning Commission meeting minutes of September 2, 2003,
October 7, 2003 and October 21, 2003).
;
Project Descriqtion i
�
The 10-acre site is located on the north side of Farroll Avenue between Oak Park �
Boulevard and Golden West Place. Diverse land uses surround the property, including �
the Soto Sports Complex to the north, multi-family residential development and a mobile
home park to the south�, single-family residential development to the west, and multi- :
family residential development to the east. The property has historically been used for
the cultivation of strawberries.
The project site is within the Low Medium density residential (LM) land use category
and Residential Suburban (RS) zoning district, allowing up to 2.5 dwelling units per
acre. Because the property has a Planned Development (PD) overlay, any proposal is
subject to a new Planned Development, or an amendment to an existing PD. The
property is connected to the Okui Planned Development (PD 1.5) via a shared access
road, and therefore is proposed to be included within PD 1.5.
_. ..� .__. _
CITY COUNCIL
GPA 02-001; DCA 02-002; PDA 02-001;VTTM 02-002
NOVEMBER 25,2003
PAGE 3
The project includes sixty-five (65) residential lots, thirteen (13) of which are located
along Dixson Street and proposed as custom home lots, and 52 lots that are configured
in a higher density with four (4) separate house plans. The project is proposed to be
constructed in finro phases, with the higher density lots constructed first in Phase 1. Most
of the single-family lots are approximately 6,200 square feet in size with the largest lot
containing 7,286 square feet. The majority of the higher density lots are about 4,000
square feet in size and range from 3,154 to 5,774 square feet. Four (4) separate house
plans are proposed for the higher density lots that have an exterior treatment
reminiscent of a Mediterranean or Craftsman style.
Access to the multifamily component of the development will occur by means of a newly
constructed 36-foot wide North Bakeman Circle and a 20-foot wide private drive, while
access to the thirteen (13) single-family homes will occur through improvements and
finishing of the cul-de-sac at the end of Dixson Street. A pedestrian path is shown
befinreen custom lots 1, 2 and 3 that connect Dixson Street residents to a mini park.
Staff recommends the park be designed with passive open space uses (i.e. picnic
tables, barbeques, etc.). This pathway ultimately connects with the Soto Sports
Complex northeast of the project. Raised speed tables are indicated on the finro
northem corners of the public road to indicate approaching pedestrian space and allow for
safer pedestrian crossing to the park. The plan also shows a retention basin that is more
than double the capacity needed for the project, and therefore serves as a public benefit
to ease deficiencies currently experienced in Drainage Zone A.
Adequate parking for residents and guests is provided with a two-car garage for each �
unit and guest stalls located at garage fronts. Additional guest parking stalls are located �
along the private drive where on-street parking is not provided. On-street parking is
allowed on both sides of the proposed Bakeman Street North. ;
A finrelve-foot (12') wide landscape easement is proposed along the Farroll Avenue
frontage that would include both landscaping and fencing identical to the adjacent
residential subdivision to the west. Maintenance of all common facilities, including the
landscape strip along Farroll Avenue and behind custom lots 10 through 12 between the
fence and back of sidewalk, is to be maintained by either a Homeowners Association or
Maintenance District. Staff favors incorporating this development into the adjacent
Maintenance District that was created for a similar purpose.
Planned Develoqment 1.5
PD 1.5 encompasses a 10-acre property that was subdivided in 1990 into 32 residential
lots (Tract 1769). Although the proposed 65-unit subdivision has a higher density (9.0
dwelling units per acre) than the existing development in PD 1.5 (3.2 dwelling units per
acre), 13 of the parcels share an access from Dixson Street and the project will have
the same landscape and sidewalk treatment along Farroll Avenue. Although the City
does not intend to create any °new" Planned Developments, it was determined that
CITY COUNCIL
GPA 02-001; DCA 02-002; PDA 02-001; VTTM 02-002
NOVEMBER 25,2003
PAGE 4
because of proximity and similar development components, it is logical to include the
project within PD 1.5.
General Plan Consistencv
The project is consistent with the following Land Use Element Policies:
LU2 Accommodate a broad range of Single Family Residential (SFR) housing
densities within the City.
LU3-5 Provide adequate housing for senior citizens, low-and moderate-income
households, and other populations with special needs.
LU11 Promote a pattern of land use that protects the integrity of existing land uses,
area resources and infrastructure and involves logical jurisdictional boundaries
with adjacent communities and the County.
H1 Encourage a continuing supply of affordable housing to meet the needs of
existing and future Arroyo Grande residents in all income levels.
H3-1 Affordable housing for low and moderate-income housing shall, to the extent
practical, be distributed throughout the City and not concentrated in a particular
area or neighborhood.
Given the surrounding residential development, this project is consistent with the higher
densities to the east and south, and senres as a transition from the lower densities to the
west. The project would allow the multifamily phase to be developed with smaller lots,
which theoretically would be more affordable than larger lots at the existing tower density.
In return for the forty (40) unit density increase, the project must satisfy the City's
affordable housing requirements.
Affordable Housinq and Impact Fees
As mitigation for impacts associated with the increased density, the applicant is required
to either set aside 25% of the units for moderate income families, donate land for
construction of affordable housing units, or if allowed by the City Council, pay an in-lieu
fee. The applicant has agreed to restrict sixteen (16) of the units, or 25% of the project,
to moderate-income households. Since the project provides a number of public
benefits, the Planning Commission and staff recommend the City reduce the impact
fees up to 60% for the sixteen (16) affordable units (excluding water and sewer fees), '
and reduce the Park Development fee up to the direct cost to construct the mini park
and pedestrian path improvements (see Condition of Approval No. 126 of the Tentative
Tract Map Resolution). A condition has also been added to establish a priority system
that allows residents of and targeted workforce groups (i.e. public safety City
employees) within the City of Arroyo Grande with qualifying incomes the opportunity to
purchase affordable units within the subdivision (see Condition of Approval No. 17).
�
CITY COUNCIL
GPA 02-001; DCA 02-002; PDA 02-001;VTTM 02-002
NOVEMBER 25,2003
PAGE 5
Pedestrian Link to Soto Sports Comqlex
Access to the Soto Sports Complex and Elm Street Park is identified on the east side of
the project site between the four fields. This access location is the preference of the
Parks and Recreation Commission based on minimum impacts to the Soto Sports
Complex (see Attachment 6 for Memorandum from Daniel Hernandez to the City
Council). The Planning Commission recommended that access be provided further to the
west through the Soto Sports Complex between the basin fields and Porter Field. The '
Planning Commission further recommended that if the Council rejects this location for a '
pedestrian path, a staircase be installed at this location. The Parks and Recreation
Commission did not support this recommendation since it would conflict with
requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Staff supports the pedestrian
access location as identified on the project plans.
Traffic Analysis
Per direction of the Planning Commission, the applicant submitted an addendum to the
traffic study, included in the Initial Study as Attachment A. The consultant, ATE,
conducted traffic counts at the Farroll Avenue intersections at Bakeman and East
Bakeman Lane, which were used to determine the trip distribution estimates for the
project. A traffic sensitivity analysis was also completed using modified project trip
distribution percentages. This was used to determine the impacts to the levels of
service in the project area and the left-turn queues at the Oak Park Boulevard/Dixson
Street intersection. The updated traffic study did not change the overall conclusion of �
the original study that the existing + project & cumulative + project P.M. peak hour
levels of service for the study areas will continue to operate at a LOS C or better.
,
Drainaqe
The project site is located in Drainage Zone A, which currently has deficiencies in the
number of basins adequately sized to handle increased runoff as development and the
amount of impervious surfaces increase (Attachment 7). Therefore, all proposed ;
developments are required to retain storm water runoff on-site. �
�
i
Because the subject property is one of the few remaining large undeveloped parcels in =
Drainage Zone A, staff requested that the retention basin be oversized to accommodate �
additional runoff. As delineated on the project plans, the retention basin is roughly finrice
the size necessary to accommodate project storm water storage requirements. The !
applicant is willing to dedicate this property to the City to own and maintain. The basin
will be designed in coordination with the existing Soto Sports Complex drainage
facilities.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
Staff has reviewed this project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality A�t
(CEQA), the CEQA Guidelines and the City of Arroyo Grande Rules and Procedures for
Implementation of CEQA. Based on the review, staff does not anticipate that this project
will have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, staff has prepared a negative
declaration with mitigation measures for the Council's consideration (see Initial Study,
Attachment 8).
CITY COUNCIL
GPA 02-001; DCA 02-002; PDA 02-001;VTTM 02-002
NOVEMBER 25,2003
PAGE 6
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for Council's consideration:
- Adopt the Resolutions and introduce the proposed Ordinance as recommended
by the Planning Commission; or
- Modify as appropriate and reintroduce; or
- Do not adopt and provide direction to staff.
Attachments:
1. City Council Meeting Minutes of May 28, 2002 ;
2. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of February 5, 2003
3. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of September 2, 2003 ,
4. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of October 7, 2003
5. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of October 21, 2003 j
6. Memorandum from Daniel Hemandez to the City Council dated November 25,
2003 �
7. Excerpt from the City of Arroyo Grande Drainage Master Plan
8. Initial Study
�
;
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN
URBAN LAND USE ELEMENT MAP; GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT 02-001, APPLIED FOR BY DON McHANEY
WHEREAS, the City of Arroyo Grande Land Use Map indicates that the 10.3-acre
property situated on the north side of Farroll Avenue is located in the Low Medium
Density Residential (LM) Planned Development overlay (P-D) land use category; and
WHEREAS, the applicant, Don McHaney, has filed an application for General Plan
Amendment 02-001 to amend the Land use Map and designate the project parcel as
Medium High Density Residential (MHD); and
WHEREAS, adoption of the proposed land use designation would establish objectives,
policies, and implementation measures for development of the above described area; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Arroyo Grande has reviewed
General Plan Amendment 02-001 at duly noticed public hearings on September 2, 2003,
October 7, 2003 and October 21, 2003 in accordance with the Development Code of the
City of Arroyo Grande at which time all interested persons were given the opportunity to
be heard; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande has considered General Plan
Amendment 02-001 at a duly noticed public hearing on November 25, 2003, in
accordance with the Development Code of the City of Arroyo Grande at which time all
interested persons were given the opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the information and public
testimony presented at the public hearings,. staff reports, and all other information and
documents that are part of the public record; and
General Plan Amendment Findings:
1. Based on the information contained in the staff report and accompanying
materials, the proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with the goals, j
. object'rves, policies, plans, programs, intent, and requirements of the General Plan �
and will no# result in any internal inconsistencies within the plan. �
2. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not adversely affect the public health, i
safety, and welfare or result in an illogical land use pattern. {
,
3. The potential environmental impacts of the proposed General Plan Amendment
are insignificant or can be mitigated to an insignificant level, or there are overriding
considerations that outweigh the potential impacts.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo
Grande hereby approves General Plan Amendment 02-001, amending the Urban Lana9
Use Element Map as indicated in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by
reference. This Resolution shall take effect thirty (30) days after its adoption.
__ _ ._..._. . .._. .. � _. .._..�..._...._. ___...
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 2
On motion by Council Member , seconded by Council Member ,
and by the following roll call vote to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Ordinance was adopted this day of 2003.
�
� 1
�
�
4
�
�
t
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 3
TONY M. FERRARA, MAYOR
ATTEST:
KELLY WETMORE, DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES/
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY `
;
s
f
... -. . - .
" � �� �� ��
���
.
'�'����
�\I/
. ► /
' � �
� ��! � �
► � : - ►
s. L �,.e . � o
� ,� . � G
■ ,� � �
� � � . 0
� / .� �
/ I �.
� �
� � �
�. -�
_. .
� � �• � � �� ,
� � _ � �� �
� �, � '� �■� �� �
� �� ,� � �� .�� r� ' �
■■�/.. . � -
� � ,� � �L1�J� � �
� . �` � :.� � � ,
� ' �� . _
� �„/► ,� _ ■ i
� �� �. ,� ■ �
� :�1111 � • �
I � /
/I�r��„r.�� �II
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ARROYO GRANDE INCLUDING THE SUBJECT
PROPERTY WITHIN PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 1.5,
AND AMENDING THE ZONING MAP TO DESIGNATE
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AS CONDOMINIUM/
TOWNHOUSE (MF) WITH A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
OVERLAY; DEVELOPMEMT CODE AMENDMENT 02-002 ,
AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT 02�001, ;
APPLIED FOR BY DON McHANEY, FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED ON FARROLL AVENUE
WHEREAS, the 2001 General Plan Update Urban Land Use Element Map designates
the 10.3-acre property located on the north side of Farroll Avenue and east of Dixson
Street, Assessor's Parcel Number 077-251-005 (the "subject property") as Low Medium �
Density Residential (LM) within a Planned Development overlay; and
WHEREAS, the City of Arroyo Grande Zoning Map designates the subject property as �
Residential Suburban (RS) with a Planned Development overlay; and E
;
WHEREAS, the applicant, Don McHaney, has filed an application for Development Code �
.Amendment 02-002 and Planned Development Amendment 02-001 to amend the Zoning �
Map and designate the project parcel as Condominium/Townhouse (MF) with a PD 1.5
overlay (MF-PD 1.5); and
WHEREAS, adoption of the proposed zoning designation would establish land use,
development and design standards for the above described area; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Arroyo Grande has reviewed
Development Code Amendment 02-002 and Planned Development 02-001 at duly
noticed public hearings on September 2, 2003, October 7, 2003, and October 21, 2003 in
accordance with the Development Code of the City of Arroyo Grande at which time all
interested persons were given the opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande has considered Development
Code Amendment 02-002 and Planned Development Amendment 02-001 at a duly
noticed public hearing on November 25, 2003, in accordance with the Development Code
of the City of Arroyo Grande at which time all interested persons were given the
opportunity to be heard; and
� WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the information and public
testimony presented at the public hearings, staff reports, and all other information and
documents that are part of the public record; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds, after due study, deliberation and public hearing, the
following circumstances exist:
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE 2
A. Based on the information contained in the staff report and accompanying
materials, the proposed Development Code Amendment amending the Zoning
Map and Planned Development Amendment amending PD 1.5 are consistent
with the goals, objectives, policies and programs of the General Plan is
necessary and desirable to implement the provisions of the General Plan.
B. The proposed Development Code Amendment amending the Zoning Map and
Planned Development Amendment amending PD 1.5 will not adversely affect the
public health, safety, and welfare or resutt in an illogical land use pattern.
C. The proposed Development Code Amendment amending the Zoning Map and
the Planned Development Amendment amending PD 1.5 are consistent with the
purpose and intent`of the Development Code. Medium High Density residential
development within the project area would be required to meet development and
design standards under the MF zoning designation that insure orderly
development.
i
�
D. The potential environmental impacts of the proposed Development Code
Amendment amending the Zoning Map and Planned Development Amendmen� �
amending PD 1.5 are insignificant or can be mitigated to a less than significant �
level. �
�
,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande
as follows:
SECTI�N 1� The above recitals and findings are true and correct.
�ECTION 2� The subject property, specifically described as "Lot 17 of Pismo Beach
Gardens, recorded in Book 3 Page 45 of maps lying within the City of Arroyo Grande,
County of San Luis Obispo, State of California" is hereby included within P-D-1.5, and
shall be developed in accordance with the development plans and conditions of approval
for Vesting Tentative Tract Map 2310 (Farroll Estates).
SECTI�N 3� Development Code Section 16.24.020 (Zoning Map) is hereby amended as
shown in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
�ECTION 4� If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, or. clause of
this Ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be unlawful, such decision
shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance or any part thereof.
The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection,
' subdivision, paragraph, sentence,or clause thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one
or more section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, or clause be declared
unconstitutional.
SECTION 5: Upon adoption of this Ordinance, the Director of Administrative Ser�ices
shall file a Notice of Determination.
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE 3
sECT1oN s� A summary of this Ordinance shall be published in a newspaper published
and circulated in the City of Arroyo Grande at least five (5) days prior to the City Council
meeting at which the proposed Ordinance is to be adopted. A certified copy of the full
text of the proposed Ordinance shall be posted in the office of the Director of
Administrative Services/Deputy City Clerk. Within fifteen (15) days after adoption of the
Ordinance, the summary with the names of those City Council Members voting for and
against the Ordinance shall be published again, and the Director of Administrative
Services/Deputy City Clerk shall post a certified copy of the full text of such adopted '
Ordinance.
SECTION 7: This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its adoption.
,
�
�
�
I
i
f
�E
{
k
i
i
!
I
{
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE 4
On motion by Council Member , seconded by Council Member ,
and by the following roll call vote to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Ordinance was adopted this day of 2003.
�
i
�
�
�
�
a
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE 5
TONY FERRARA, MAYOR
ATTEST:
KELLY WETMORE, DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES/
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
i
�
�
I
� �
_
STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER �
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY
- . __.m__�._.�.�. ... .�. w.._.��.
I... -. .
�, � �� �� ��
��
•
� ���I
�� ■ �I
� /
. ► /
♦ = �
� ��� �
! o : !� ►
s. � ,,.,� � �
� � : - �
■ �„ � ►
� � � �
� �► ..,,� . �, ..
/ • .; �
r .� _ :
.. -,.
_. .
= a ." - � �� ,
` . s ; �� 1
: C� � i� �■� �■ �
� �� ,� � I� .r� r� � �
��,� . � .
� � �� = �L���� ■ �
� .�� � � ■ � �
� :,
� �► ' � ■ �
� ��/� ,� ■ �
� :�IIII � � �
I q �
�...��� ...� sr'
_ _ _.. .. _ �....,� v�w�.
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE ADOPTING A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION WITH MITIGATION MEASURES,
INSTRUCTING THE DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE
SERVICES TO FILE A NOTICE OF DETERMINATION, AND
APPROVING VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP CASE
NO. 02-002, LOCATED ON FARROLL AVENUE, APPLIED
FOR BY DON McHANEY
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande held a public hearing on
Vesting Tentative Tract Map 02-002, filed by Don McHaney, to subdivide a 10.3-acre site
into 65 residential lots in accordance with City Code; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has found that this project is consistent with the General
Plan and the environmental documents associated therewith; 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 determined that a Mitigated
Negative Declaration can be adopted; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds, after due study, deliberation and public hearing, the
following circumstances exist:
Tentative Tract Map Findings:
1. The proposed tentative tract map is consistent with the goals, objectives, policies,
plans, programs, intent, and requir�ments of the General Plan map and text, as
amended per General Plan Amendment 02-001, and the requirements of the
Development Code, as amended per Development Code Amendment 02-002.
i
2. The site, as shown on the tentative tract map, is physically suitable for the I
proposed density because all necessary easements, parking, open space, and s
setbacks can be provided. j
3. The design of the tentative tract map or the proposed improvements are not likely
to cause substantial damage to the natural environment, including fish, wildlife or ,
their habitat.
4. The design of the subdivision or proposed improvements is not likely to cause
- public health problems.
5. The design of the tentative tract map or the type of improvements will not conflict
with easements acquired by the public at large for access through, or use of,
property within the proposed tentative tract map or that alternate easements for
access or for use will be provided, and that these alternative easements will be
substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAG E 2
6. The discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into an existing community
sewer system will not result in violation of existing requirements a prescribed in
Division 7 (commencing with Section 13000) of the California Water Code.
7. Adequate public services and facilities exist or will be provided as the result of the
proposed tentative tract map to support project development.
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 Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 02-002. �
2. Based on the initial study, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for
public review. A copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and related materials
is located at City Hall in the Community Development Department.
3. After holding a public hearing pursuant to State and City Codes, and considering
the record as a whole, the City Council adopts a negative declaration and finds '
that there is no substantial evidence of any significant ativerse 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 Planning Commission finds that said
Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the City's independent judgment and
analysis.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo
Grande hereby adopts a negative declaration with mitigation measures, instructs the
Director of Administrative Services to file a Notice of Determination, and approves Vesting
Tentative Tract Map 02-002, with the above findings and subject to the conditions of
approval as set forth in Exhibit"A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. ;
This Resolution shall become effective on the effective date of Ordinance Na '
On motion by Council Member , seconded by Council Member ,
and by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: '
NOES: '
i
ABSENT: �
, (
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this day of� 2003. �
�
,
�
�
9
�
RESOLUTION NO.
PAG E 3
TONY M. FERRARA, MAYOR
ATTEST:
KELLY WETMORE, DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES/
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER
�,
APPROVED AS TO FORM: i
�
i
. �
�
TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY C
�
�
RESOLUTION NO.
PAG E 4
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
� VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 02-002
Don McHaney and S&S Homes
Facroll Avenue
�OMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
GENERA ONDITIONS
This approval authorizes the subdivision of a 10.3-acre property into sixty-five (65) single-
family residential lots ranging in size from roughly 3,000 to 7,700 square feet.
1. The applicant shall ascertain and comply with all Federal, State, County and City �
requirements as are applicable to this project. I
!
2. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of approval for Vesting Tentative �
Tract Map 02-002, General Plan Amendment 02-001, Development Code ;
Amendment 02-002, and Planned Development Amendment 02-001.
3. This tentative map approval shall automatically expire on unless the ,
final map is recorded or an extension is granted pursuant to Section 16.12.140 of
the Development Code.
4. Development shall occur in substantial conformance with the tentative map
presented to the City Council at the meeting of and marked Exhibit
"B-1"through "B-4" except as modified by these conditions of approval.
5. The applicant shall, as a condition of approval of this tentative map application,
defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Arroyo Grande, its present or
former agents, officers and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding
against the City, its past or present agents, officers, or employees to attack, set
aside, void, or annul City's approval of this subdivision, which action is brought
within the time period provided for by law. This condition is subject to the
provisions of Government Code. Section 66474.9, which are incorporated by
reference herein as though set forth in full.
SP .IA .ONDITIONS
. 6. There shall be a landscape strip along Farroll Avenue and behind custom lots 10
through 12 befinreen the fence and back of sidewalk, to be maintained by either a
Homeowners Association or Maintenance District.
7. The fence on Farroll Avenue and behind custom lots 10 through 12 should �e �
consistent with the adjacent planned development.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 5
8. Curb and gutters should align with adjacent properties on the east and west.
9. The pedestrian easement from Dixson Street to the mini park, that also serves as
the shared access driveway for Lots 1, 2 and 3, shall have a decorative concrete
surface.
10. Prior to recording the Final Map, a five-foot (5') maintenance easement shall be
recorded on the adjacent lot for all lots containing zero lot line configurations. Said
easement shall grant access to the owner(a) of the zero lot line dwelling for
purposes of maintaining the zero lot line wall.
MS2LSE
11. Construction shall be limited to between the hours of 7am and 7pm Monday
through Saturday. No construction shall occur on Sunday.
QEVELOPMENT CODE
12. Development shall conform to the Multifamily (MF) zoning requirements except as
otherwise approved.
10. All fences and/or walls shall not exceed six feet (6') in height unless otherwise
approved with a Minor Exception or Variance application.
11. The developer shall comply with Development Code Chapter 16.20, "Land
Divisions".
12. The developer shall comply with Development Code Chapter 16.64, "Dedications,
Fees and Reservations."
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMIT
13. All walls, including screening and retaining walls, shall be compatible with the
approved architecture and Development Code Standards, and shall be no more
than 3 feet in height in the front setback area, subject to the review and approval of
the Community Development Director.
14. The applicant shall submit a perimeter-fencing plan showing all perimeter fences
and/or walls. The perimeter-fencing plan shall be approved by the Community
� Development Director. Perimeter fencing shall generally be 6 feet high, unless
otherwise approved with these conditions. Any existing fencing may be used
subject to the approval of the Community Development Director.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 6
PRIOR TO RECORDING THE FINAL MAP
15. The applicant shall submit Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) that
are administered by a subdivision homeowners' association and formed by the
applicant for common areas within the subdivision. The CC&R's shall be reviewed
and approved by the City Attorney and recorded with the final map. Alternatively,
the applicant can form a Maintenance District for maintenance of all common
areas. All documents creating such a Maintenance District shall be subject to
review and approyal by the City Attorney. Common areas include, but are not
limited to, the fencing and landscaping along Farroll Ave. and behind custom Lots
10 through 12, the mini park, and the pedestrian pathway from Dixson Street to the
park. The existing lighting and landscaping district that maintains common
facilities for subdivision located immediately to the west can be amended to
include these additional common facilities.
16. A landscaping and irrigation plan shall be prepared by a licensed landscape
architect subject to review and approval by the Community Development and
Parks and Recreation Departments. The landscaping plan shall include the
following for all public street frontages and common landscaped areas:
a. Tree staking, soil preparation and planting detail;
b. Landscaping to screen ground-mounted utility and mechanical equipment;
c. The required landscaping and improvements. This includes:
(1) Deep root planters shall be included in areas where trees are within
five feet (5') of asphalt or concrete surf�ces and curbs;
(2) Water conservation practices including the use of low flow heads,
drip irrigation, mulch, gravel, drought tolerant plants and mulches
, shall be incorporated into the landscaping plan; and
(3) All slopes 2:1 or greater shall have jute mesh, nylon mesh or
equivalent material.
(4) An automated irrigation system.
17. Prior to recording the final map and to the extent allowed by law, the applicant
shall prepare a work force housing program for residents of and workers within the
City of Arroyo Grande, subject to review and approval by the City Manager and
City Attorney, which shall establish a priority system to enable targeted work force
groups with qualifying incomes the opportunity to purchase units within the
subdivision.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT
, 18. The applicant shall comply with the City's Construction and Demolition Debris
Recycling Ordinance.
19. The applicant shall allocate 25% of the project, or sixteen (16) units, to moderate-
income households through a thirty (30) year deed restriction, or other enforceable
and recorded restriction. Said document (s) shall be subject to the review an�
approval of the City Attorney.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 7 ,
20. The applicant shall submit a fencing plan for the entire development for review and
approval by the Community Development Director.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY
21. All fencing shall be installed.
PARKS AND RECREATtON DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS
22. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Ordinance 521 C.S., the
Community Tree Ordinance.
23. Linear root barriers shall be used at the front of the project to protect the
sidewalks.
24. All street front trees shall be 24-inch box and shall be located a minimum of one
(1) tree for every seventy-five feet (75') of street frontage.
25. The Director of Parks, Recreation and Facilities shall approve final plans for the
mini park.
,BIJILDING AND FIRE DEPARTMENT CONDITI�NS
UBC/UFC
26. The project shall comply with the'most recent editions of the California State Fire
and Building Codes and the Uniform Building and Fire Codes as adopted by the
City of Arroyo Grande.
FIRF I ANFS
27. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall post
designated fire lanes, per Section 22500.1 of the California Vehicle Code. Curbs
around the Farroll Avenue entrance median and both sides of the 20 foot private
access drive shall be painted red.
28. All fire lanes must be posted and enforced, per Police Department and Fire
Department guidelines.
FIRE FLOW/FIRE HYDRANTS
� 29. Project sha(I have a minimum fire flow of 1,000 gai(ons per minute for a duration of
2 hours.
30. Prior to bringing combustibles on site, fire hydrants shall be installed 300 feet
apart, per Fire Department and Public Works Department standards. Locatio��
shall be approved by the Fire Chief.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 8
FIRE SPRINKLERS
31. All multi-family units and flag lots shall be fitted with fire sprinklers.
ABANDONMENT/NON-CONFORMING
32. Prior to issuance of a grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first,
the applicant shall show proof of properly abandoning all non-conforming items
such as septic tanks, wells, underground piping and other undesirable conditions.
OTHER PERMITS
33. Prior to issuance of a building permit, County Health Department approval is
required for well abandonment.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT C�NDITI�NS
All Public Works Department conditions of approval as listed below are to be complied
with prior to recording the map or finalizing the permit, unless specifically noted otherwise.
�ENERAL GONDITIONS
34. Clean all streets, curbs, gutters and sidewalks at the end of the day's operations or �
as directed by the Director of Community Development or the Director of Public
Works. Washing soil, debris, and garbage into City storm drain systems shall not
be permitted.
35. The developer or contractor shall refrain from perForming any work that requires
City inspections outside of normal business hours (Monday through Friday, 7 A.M.
to 5 P.M.). The City may hold the developer or contractor responsible for any
expenses incurred by the City due to work outside of these hours.
IMPROVEMENT PLAN�
36. All project improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with
the City of Arroyo Grande Standard Drawings and Specifications.
37. Submit three (3) full-size paper copies and one (1) full-size mylar copy of
approved improvement plans for inspection purposes during construction.
� 38. Submit as-built plans at the completion of the project or improvements as .
directed by the Director of Public Works. One (1) set of mylar prints and an
electronic version on CD in AutoCAD format shall be required.
39. The following Improvement plans shall be prepared by a registered Ci�i9
Engineer and approved by the Public Works Department:
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 9
a. Grading, drainage and erosion control,
b. Street paving, curb, gutter and sidewalk,
c. Public utilities,
d. Water and sewer,
e. Landscaping and irriga#ion,
f. Any other improvements as required by the Director of Public Works or
these conditions of approval.
40. The site plan shall include the following:
a. The location and size of all existing and proposed water, sewer, and storm
drainage facilities within the project site and abutting streets or�alleys.
b. The location, quantity and size of all existing and proposed sewer laterals.
c. The location, size and orientation of all trash enclosures.
d. All existing and proposed parcel lines and easements crossing the
property.
e. The location and dimension of all existing and proposed paved areas.
f. The location of all existing and proposed public or private utilities.
41. Improvement plans shall include plan and profile of existing and propose�
streets and utilities.
42. Landscape and irrigation plans are required within the public right of way, and
shall be approved by the Community Development, Parks and Recreation, and
Public Works Departments.
�LAIEB
43. Whenever possible, all water mains shall be looped to prevent dead ends. The
Director of Public Works must grant permission to dead end water mains.
44. Non-potable water is available at the Soto Sports Complex for constructing and
grading purposes.
45. Each parcel shall have separate water meters. Duplex service lines shall be
used if appropriate.
46. Lots using fire sprinklers shall have individual service connections. If the units
are to be �re sprinkled, a fire sprinkler engineer shall determine the size of the
water meters.
47. Existing water services to be abandoned shall be properly abandoned and
capped at the main per the requirements of the Director of Public Works.
48. The applicant shall complete measures to neutralize the estimated increase or�
water demand created by the project by either:
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 10
a. Implement an individual water program consisting of retrofitting existing
high-flow plumbing fixtures with low flow devices. The calculations shall be
submitted to the Director of Public Works for review and approval. The
proposed individual water program shall be submitted to the City Council
for approval prior to implementation; OR,
b. The applicant may pay an in lieu fee�of $2,200 for each new residential
unit.
49. Loop an 8" water main under the proposed public street.
50. Install an 8" water main under the proposed private driveway and connect to the
main on both ends (private drive through the pedestrian link from Dixson Street).
51. Install an 8" water main connecting the existing water main under Dixson Stt�eet
to the water main at the intersection of Ash and Courtland as follows:
a. Install the necessary line across the tract to stub out to the City sports
complex.
b. Enter into a reimbursement agreement with the City to be reimbursed for
82% of the construction costs for the remaining portion outside of the tract
boundaries.
52. Fire hydrants are to be located 300 feet apart.
53. All existing water wells shall be abandoned per the City Municipal Code.
Certificates of abandonment shall be provided to the public works department.
�LEB
54. Each parcel shall be provided a separate sewer lateral.
55. All new sewer mains must be a minimum diameter of 8".
56. All sewer mains or laterals crossing or parallel to public water facilities shall be
constructed in accordance with California State Health Agency standards.
57. All new sewer mains shall be pressure tested, balled and mandreled per
Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction "Greenbook
Specifications", 2003 edition. All sewer mains shall be video inspected with a
video log of all lateral and manhole locations.
58. Existing sewer laterals to be abandoned shall be properly abandoned and
capped at the main per the requirements of the Director of Public Works.
59. Obtain approval from the South County Sanitation District for the development's
impact to District facilities prior to final recordation of the map.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAG E 11
60. Obtain approval from the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District prior
to relocation of any District facilities.
61. Abide by conditions set forth by the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation
District for remediation of impact to District facilities.
62. Obtain approval from the City of Grover Beach prior to connecting sewer laterals
under Dixson Street for Phase I homes.
63. Connect the new sewer main under the proposed public street to the sewer
manhole at the intersection of East Bakeman Lane and Farroll Avenue.
64. Install a sewer main under the proposed private driveway and connect to the
new city sewer main on the east side of the tract.
65. Install sewer manholes at the end of every main, where mains intersect, and at
, any grade breaks or direction changes. Drivable access shall be provided to all
existing and/or new manholes.
66. All sewer laterals must connect to City sewer mains.
SOUTH SAN LUIS OBISPO GOUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT CONDITIONS OF
APPROVAL
67. The developer shall be required to mitigate the impacts on the trunk sewer line
by contributing to the installation of a new trunk replacement line or providing a
relief line.
68. A licensed Civil Engineer shall design all public improvement plans in
accordance with San Luis Obispo County Improvement Standards and
Specifications.
69. The developer shall deposit or post a bond (or other means satisfactory to the
District), for the sewer facilities serving the property.
70. The developer shall enter into an agreement with the District for plan checking
and inspection services.
PUBLIG UTILITIES
, 71. Underground all new public utilities in accordance with Section 16.68.050 of the
Development Code.
72. Under ground all existing overhead public utilities along Farroll Avenue and o�o-
site in accordance with Section 16.68.050 of the Development Code. :
73. Underground improvements shall be installed prior to street paving.
�
-- ---- ,
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 12
74. Submit all improvement plans to the public utility companies for approval and
comment. Utility comments shall be forwarded to the Director of Public Works
for approval.
75. Submit the Final Map shall to the public utility companies for review and
comment. Utility comments shall be forwarded to the Director of Public Works
for approvaL
76. Prior to approving any building permit within the project for occupancy, all public
utilities shall be operational.
STREETS
77. Obtain approval from the Director of Public Works prior to excavating in any
street recently over-laid or slurry sealed. The Director of Public Works shall
approve the method of repair of any such trenches, but shall not be limited to an
overlay, slurry seal, or fog seal.
78. All trenching in City streets shall utilize saw cutting. Any over cuts shall be
cleaned and filled with epoxy.
79. All street repairs shall be constructed to City standards.
80. Street structural sections shall be determined by an R-Value soil test.
81. Overlay, slurry seal, or fog seal any roads dedicated to the City prior to
acceptance by the City may be required as directed by the Director of Public
Works.
82. The proposed public street shall be designated as a local street and shall adhere
to the following design standards
a. 36 feet street width from curb to curb.
b. 6 feet wide concrete sidewalks with concrete curb and gutter on both
sides of the street.
c. 52 feet wide right-of-way. .
d. 25 mile per hour design speed.
e. A Traffic Index of 5.5. '
i
i
83. Parking along the private street shall not be allowed unless in designated parking
, stalls. 4
84. Reconstruct Farroll Avenue as follows: �
�
a. From centerline to ultimate width of the road across the entire frontage. i
b. Determine if existing structural section is adequate, using a Traffic Index �
of 7.0.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 13
c. If existing structural section is not adequate, remove all materials to sub-
grade and reconstruct to City standards.
d. If existing structural section is adequate, overlay with a minimum of 2"
asphalt.
e. Perform any necessary measures to ensure the cross slope is constant
and does not exceed 5%.
85. Construct Dixson Street as follows:
a. From centerline to ultimate width of the road across the entire frontage.
b. Determine if existing structural section is adequate, using a Traffic Index
of 5.5.
c. If existing structural section is not adequate, remove all materials to sub-
grade and reconstruct to City standards.
d. If existing structural section is adequate, overlay with a minimum of 2"
asphalt.
e. PerForm any necessary measures to ensure the cross slope is constant
and does not exceed 5%.
f. Either continue cul-de-sac at the existing radius, or remove the curb,
gutter and sidewalk and reconstruct the cul-de-sac per City standards.
g. Apply new slurry seal when finished.
TRAFFIC
86. Provide design considerations for traffic calming measures on the proposed City
Street for review by the Director of Public Works.
87. Install "STOP" signs and all associated stenciling and striping at the intersections
of Farroll Avenue and the proposed City Street.
88. Install a raised crosswalk where the proposed sidewalk to access Soto Sports
Complex meets the proposed City Street. The raised crosswalk shall have
distinguishing decorative concrete. '
,
;
CURB, GUTTER, AND SIDEWALK �
i
i
89. Install new concrete curb, gutter, and sidewalk across the property frontage, I
extending to the east at the intersection of Farroll Avenue and Golden West I
. Place and to the west tying into existing curb, gutter and sidewalk. �
;
90. Install new concrete curb, gutter and sidewalk along both sides of the proposed i
City Street. ;
91. Color any such new facilities as directed by the Director of CommunAtgy
Development or the Director of Public Works.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAG E 14
92. Utilize saw cuts for all repairs made in curb, gutter, and sidewalk.
93. _ Install ADA compliant facilities where necessary.
94. Install tree wells for all trees planted adjacent to street, curb, gutter and sidewalk
to prevent damage due to root growth. Homeowners shall be responsible for
maintenance of parkway landscaping across their property frontage.
95. Construct sidewalks 6" thick behind driveway approaches.
96. Replace the existing storm drop inlet directly across from East Bakeman Lane
with a new 14' storm water drop inlet.
97. Replace the existing 6' chain link fence with an 8' chain link fence along the
northern property line.
98. If the proposed access to the Soto Sports Complex is allowed, construct with the
necessary fencing and improvements as directed by the Director of Public
Works. .
99. The proposed access to Soto Sports Complex shall be routed as follows:
i. A bridge structure spanning the spillway between Pond No. 2 and
the soccer field; �
ii. A dogleg to the west around the existing sewer dump for the factor
. truck; and
iii. Connect to the football field after the existing set of double gates
securing the basin.
100. Install all necessary fencing to adequately secure Pond No. 2 and the soccer
field adjacent to the access path, if a pedestrian link is installed at this location.
101. Install a City benchmark along Farroll Avenue. ;
I
GRADING ?
i
i
102. Perform all grading in conformance with the City Grading Ordinance. ;
�
103. Grading shall be performed to protect adjacent structures during and after the
grading process.
, 104. Submit a preliminary soils report prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and
supported by adequate test borings. All earthwork design and grading shall be '
performed in accordance with the approved soils report.
105. Submit all retaining wall calculations for review and approval by the Director o�
Public Works for walls not constructed per City standards.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 15
DRAINAGE
106. All drainage facilities shall be designed to accommodate a 100-year storm flow.
107. All drainage facilities shall be in accordance with the Drainage Master Plan.
108. Conduct a hydraulic analysis of the proposed development and submit to the
Director of Public Works for review.
109. The project is in Drainage Zone "A" and therefore requires on-site retention. The
drainage basin shall be fenced around its perimeter including gates for access. �
The fencing shall not exceed six feet (6') in height. The Directors of Public
Works and Community Development shall approve the design and materials of
the fencing and gates.
110. Phase I drainage shall be directed to the Oak Park West Basin. The basin shall
be analyzed to ensure capacity to handle the additional development. Improve
the basin as necessary to handle the additional runoff.
111. Improve security around the Oak Park West Basin by installing new fence and
access gates. Install a full height fence a(ong the westerly boundary atop the
existing retaining wafl. Permission from the Citjr of Grover Beach may be
necessary for constructing full height fence. The Director of Public Works shall
approve fencing type and style.
112. The applicant shall mitigate all Phase II storm water as directed by the Director
of Public Works.
113. Infiltration basins shall be designed based on soil tests. Infiltration tests 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. �
!
�
114. Any retention and retardation basin that serves the project only shall be privately �
maintained by a Homeowner's Association (HOA) and included in the CC&R's, �
. or alternatively by a Maintenance District. Any retention and retardation basin
that holds at least finrice the drainage capacity than what the project requires is
considered a public benefit and shall be maintained by the City.
�EDICATIONS AND EASEMENTS '
115. 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 leg�l descriptions, sketches, closure
calculations, and a current preliminary title report. The applicant shall be
responsible for all required fees, including any additional required City
processing.
- .
RESOLUTION NO.
PAG E 16
116. Abandonment of public easements shall be listed on the final map, in
accordance with Section 66499.20 of the Subdivision Map Act.
117. The applicant shall dedicate pedestrian access easements to the back of the
meandering sidewalk.
118. Street tree planting and maintenance easements shall be dedicated adjacent to �
all street right of ways. Street tree easements shall be a minimum of 10 feet
beyond the right of way, except that street tree easements shall exclude the area
covered by public utility easements.
119. A Public Utility Easement (PUE) shall be dedicated a minimum 6 feet wide
adjacent to all street right of ways. The PUE shall be wider where necessary for
the installation or maintenance of the public utility vaults, pads, or similar
facilities. �
120. A Public Utility Easement (PUE) shall be dedicated over all private streets (to the
back of the sidewalks). The PUE shall be wider where necessary for the
installation or maintenance of the public utility vaults, pads, or similar facilities.
121. Easements shall be dedicated to the public on the map, or other separate
document approved by the City, for the following:
a. Drainage easements where shown on the tentative map. The easements
shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide.
b. Sewer easements where shown on the tentative map. The easements
shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide.
c. Water easements where shown on the tentative map. The easements
shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide. I
�
122. A private easement shall be reserved as shown on the map, for access to lots 1, �
2 and 3 and for access to lots 11, 12, and 13. �
[
123. A 10` wide water easement shall be dedicated along the western boundary of lot ;.
1 for the installation of the water line connecting the water main under Dixson St. �
to the water main at Ash and Courtland Streets.
PERMITS
124. Obtain an encroachment permit prior to performing any of the following:
a. Performing work in the City right of way,
b. Staging work in the City right of way,
c. Stockpiling material in the City right of way,
d. Storing equipment in the City right of way.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 17
125. Obtain a grading permit prior to any grading operations on site.
FFFS
126. Pay all required City fees at the time they are due. Special considerations for this
project include:
a. Reducing impact fees up to 60% for the 16 affordable units (excluding
water and sewer fees).
b. The applicant shall submit a report detailing the direct cost of
improvements to develop the 0.3-acre park and park connection to the
Soto Sports Complex and Dixson Street. The report shall determine the
amount of credit that would be applied to the reduction to the Park
Development fee. The amount of credit shall be determined by eligible
expenses outlined in the report, and approved by the Parks, Recreation
and Facilities Director. If the cost of developing the park exceeds the
amount of the Park Development fee to be collected, then no fee would
be paid. If the cost of developing the park is less than the current Park
Development fee, the remaining balance shall be paid prior to map
recordation in accordance with City Ordinance No. 313 C.S.
127. Fees to be paid prior to plan approvaL•
a. Map check fee,
b. Plan check for grading plans based on an approved earthwork estimate,
c. Plan check for improvement plans based on an approved construction
cost estimate,
d. Permit Fee for grading plans based on an approved earthwork estimate, �
e. Inspection fee of subdivision or public works construction plans based on �'�
an approved construction cost estimate. �
I
128. Water neutralization fee, if applicant chooses (see Condition of Approval No. 45). j
�
129. Intersection signalization mitigation fee for the impact to the intersection of �
farroll Avenue and South Halcyon Road.
PROCEDURE FOR PROTESTING FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR '
EXACTIONS:
(A)Any party may protest the imposition of any fees, dedications, reservations, or
other exactions imposed on a development project, for the purpose of defraying
all or a portion of the cost of public facilities related to the development project by
meeting both of the following requirements:
(1) Tendering any required payment in full or providing satisfactory evidence o�
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 18
arrangements to pay the fee when due or ensure performance of the
conditions necessary to meet the requirements of the imposition.
(2) Serving written notice on the City Council, which notice shall contain all of
the following information:
(a) A statement that the required payment is tendered or will be
tendered when due, or that any conditions which have been imposed
are provided for or satisfied, under protest.
(b) A statement informing the City Council of the factual elements of
the dispute and the legal theory forming the basis for the protest.
(B) A protest filed pursuant to subdivision (A) shall be filed at the time of the
approval or conditional approval of the development or within 90 days after the
date of the imposition of the fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions to
be imposed on a development project.
(C) Any party who files a protest pursuant to subdivision (A) may file an action to
attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the imposition of the fees, dedications
reservations, or other exactions imposed on a development project by a local
agency within 180 days after the delivery of the notice.
(D) Approval or conditional approval of a development occurs, for the purposes of
this section, when the tentative map, tentative parcel map, or parcel map is
approved or conditionally approved or when the parcel map is recorded if a
tentative map or tentative parcel map is not required.
(E)The imposition of fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions occurs, for
the purposes of this section, when they are imposed or levied on a specific
development.
I
A�RFFMFNTS �
E
130. Inspection Agreement: Prior to approval of an improvement plan, the applicant �
shall enter into an agreement with the City for inspection of the required ;
improvements. �
131. Subdivision Improvement Agreement: The sub divider shall enter into a
subdivision agreement for the completion and guarantee of improvements '
, required. The subdivision agreement shall be on a form acceptable to the City.
132. Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions as required by the City
B�NDS
133. All bonds or security shall be in a form acceptable to the City, and shall be
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 19
provided prior to recording of the map, unless noted otherwise. The
Improvement securities shall be such that they shall not expire until one-year
after the City accepts the improvements.
134. Submit an engineer's estimate of quantities for public improvements for review
by the Director of Public Works. �
135. Provide bonds or other financial security for the following, to be based upon a
construction cost estimate approved by the Director of Public Works:
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.
This bond may be waived if the developer's surveyor submits to the Director
of Public Works a letter assuring that all monumentafion has been set.
OTHER DOGLIMENTATION
136. Tax Certificate: The applicant shall furnish a certificate from the tax collector's
office indicating. that there are no unpaid taxes or special assessments against
the property. The applicant may be required to bond for any unpaid taxes or
liens against the property. ;
;.
137. Preliminary�Title Report: A current preliminary title report shall be submitted to '
the Director of Public Works prior to checking the map. ;
E
�
138. Subdivision Guarantee: A current subdivision guarantee shall be submitted to ?
the Director of Public Works prior to recording the Map.
PRIOR TO ISSLIIN� A BLIILDIN� PERMIT
139. The Final Map shall be recorded with all pertinent conditions of approval satisfied
, by construction or bonding. �
PRIOR TO IS 11N � A RTIFI AT �F O . 1PAN Y
140. All utilities shall be operational.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 20
141. All essential project improvements shall be constructed prior to occupancy. Non-
essential improvements, guaranteed by an agreement and financial securities,
may be constructed after occupancy as directed by the Director of Public Works.
MITIGATtON MEASURES
A negative declaration with mitigation measures has been adopted for this project. The
following mitigation measures 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.
1. The applicant shall allocate 25% of the project, or 16 units, for moderate-income
households through a thi►ty-year deed restriction.
Monitoring: The applicant shall build the affordable units
and record the deed restrictions.
Responsible Department: Building and Community Development Depts.
Timeframe: Prior to issuing a eertificate of occupancy
2. As part of the tract improvements plan check, the applicant shall provide detailed
drainage calculations indicating that increased run-off can be accommodated by
existing facilities and/or provide on-site retention basins, to the satisfaction of the
Director of Public Works.
Monitoring: Review of tract improvement and grading plans
Responsible Department: Public Works Department
Timeframe: Prior to acceptance of tract improvements for
construction
3. All new construction shall utilize fixtures and designs that minimize water usage. �
Such fixtures shall include, but are not limited to, low flow showerheads, water �
saving toilets, instant water heaters or hot water recirculating systems, and drip !
irrigation with drought tolerant landscaping. Water conserving designs and fixtures �
shall be installed prior to final occupancy for each residence.
Monitoring: Field inspection of each residence
Responsible Department: Building and Fire Department '
Timeframe: Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy
4. All tract landscaping shall be consistent with water conservation practices including
' the use of drip irrigation, mulch, gravel, bark, and native plantings. To the greatest
extent possible, lawn areas and areas requiring spray irrigation shall be minimized.
Monitoring: Review of landscaping plans
Responsible Department: Parks and Recreation Department
Timeframe: Prior to construction of tract improvements
RESOLUTION NO. �
PAG E 21
5. The applicant shall complete measures to neutralize the estimated increase in
water demand created by the project by either:
Implement an individual water program that utilizes fixtures
and designs that minimize water usage. The calculations
shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for review
and approval. The proposed individual water program shall
be submitted to the City for approval prior to implementation;
or,
Pay an in lieu fee.
Monitoring: Review of individual water program or payment
of the in lieu fee
Responsible Department:Public Works Department
Timeframe: Prior to issuance of building permit
6. During construction, water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used to keep all
areas of vehicle movement damp enough to prevent dust from leaving the site. At
a minimum, this would include wetting down such areas in the later morning and
after work is completed for the day and whenever wind exceeds 15 miles per hour.
7. Soil stockpiled for more than finro days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with
soil binders to prevent dust generation.
8. All vehicles hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or
should maintain at least finro feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between
top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with CVC Section 23114.
i
9. Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads on #o streets,
or wash off trucks and equiprnent leaving the site. �
�
�
10. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried on to ;
adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water should be used
where feasible.
Fer measures 6-10:
Monitoring: Review of grading and building plans and site '
inspections
, Responsible Department: The Public Works and Building and Fire
Departments shall inspect plans, and the
Community Development Department shall
spot check in the field
Timeframe: Prior to issuance of grading permit
RESOLUTION NO.
PAG E 22
11. The applicant shall pay the City's Traffic Signalization and Transportation
Facilities Impact fees prior to issuance of building permit.
Monitoring: The applicant shall pay the fees
Responsible Department: Building & Fire Department
Timeframe: prior to issuance of building permit
12. All construction equipment shall be provided with well-maintained, functional
mufflers to limit noise.
13. All construction activities shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM
Monday through Saturday. No construction shall occur on Sunday.
14. To the greatest extent possible, grading and/or excavation operations at portions
of the site bordering developed areas should occur during the middle of the day to
minimize the potential for disturbance of neighboring noise sensitive uses.
For meac�re� 12-14;
Monitoring: Notes shall be placed on the construction plans
referencing the above measures.
Responsible Department: Public Works Department
Timeframe: During construction
15. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant/developer shall:
a. Mitigate the impacts on the trunk sewer line by contributing to the
installation of a new replacement trunk line or providing a relief line.
b. Submit public improvement plans that are prepared by a licensed
Civil Engineer in accordance with San Luis Obispo County
Improvement Standards and Specifications. '
c. Deposit or post a bond (or other means satisfactory to the District), ;
for the sewer facilities serving the property. �
d. Enter into an agreement with the District for plan checking and �
inspection services.
i
Monitoring: The applicant submit improvement plans and
post bonds to the agreement of the Sanitation
District. �
Responsible Department: Public Works/So. SLO County Sanitation Dist.
Timeframe: Prior to issuance of Building Permit
16. Prior to issuance of building permits for each residence, the applicant/developer
` shall pay the mandated school impact fee.
Monitoring: The applicant shall pay applicable school fees.
Responsible Department: Building Department
Timeframe: Prior to issuance of Building Permits for eac�
� residence
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 23 .
17. The following note shall be placed on the grading and improvement plans for the
Tract:
"In the event that during grading, construction or development of the
project, and archeological resources are uncovered, all work shall be
halted until the City has reviewed the resources for their significance.
If human remains (burials) are encountered, the County Coroner
(781-4513) shall be contacted immediately. The applicant may be
required to provide archaeological studies and/or mitigation
measures.°
Monitoring: Construction plans shall be reviewed prior to
issuance of a grading permit to ensure the note
is in place.
Responsible Department: Public Works Department
Timeframe: Prior to issuance of grading permit
18. Prior to issuance of building permit, the applicant shall pay all applicable park
development fees to the City.
Monitoring: The applicant shall pay the park development
fees to the City.
Responsible Department: Parks and Recreation Department
Timeframe: Prior to issuance of building permit
�
�
�
;
�
,
;
S:\COMMUNtTY DEVELOPMENT�PROJECTS\TTM�Farroll Estates\CC TTM reso.doc
,, _
.., ,_,: .,e . , . . .. . _ ..._ r ..
. ,:; �, . . . � . .
� _ � �1� e - O--- wv�rr�rs
.
., . . ' � '�sta?,
.. ' �` �.x Fk"3�"
m. .. ., i 4'�,
�. � � �
6 :.�� fY��ib �
, L....
a
�
__ e
r � .
I � _
J {
�?- �- � £
j
f� •Z �
� .._, '�' -'. .,.�' , _ , �,�. . .. ,..,�.� � 1
� .:. � z E. t, , ,., w� �� �.. y � �
. � ,. � � �r• �.,.� � / WM��lCR�IC!OM 1 . ��rrae�r �w°�irir�iwi�i�Nraa ��
' .. ' . . ..� ���w�Ofl�9.M�ACII�/rT 7�mi�aan�o�o sn�oe�na�en s�n
a. �
`I ��
�.. - < ., : � ..:. .:. �
� ... . � � ' ���
._ 1
... wwa�.
I � ;o }'
,. _ , , -
,. , .- ...� , ,
�
• � y
M[falV��
/ ;' . �.�. .F:� r ,. � . .
. �� i
x.�x.. �e ,,...w.. / � � �► ' ' �� �� e��w
C A..+n..
,�,�,� � s � ' ' � e `
�– unm oa.v�s
� � �
� I � i o«r
� �„�,
��/ii� .1� 1 � � `� � � .�.. � ,,,� ��
i! . r� iCs. n�n,s �n.�. � � �i.v
�..
/ , ; � I y i --� ��1± ,••�i s d`..i"..
✓/' � � ���� � r � .� �= 1 . �F____ _" wrer�� .
.,5,", '.� .� j , �� "r' � � � i�w$ifr��s�wr ��a� ai+�q�waw.
. . . �— ( �'`�°��"tes �wr�r�ww
"� i � ., li �.- �� T/R` �CN��Cld ���w r wr
� •���� � ��
. � I � . � �� 0 � ' R N _ , ��
� �: . ' .. :.� . � �.... .. � }
� r�`" 1 � � �• �� w � � � ��� �� ��,� � PRQECf OATA
�i� 4=r������ �� C � � � _ a�""' a��+�e�sw.�
e
/ fi : :.x . o, ,.�. �a
�/� L�. `— � � �A� � ww�wr+wr�wrw+rr�r
, �, .
�� 1 a1 � ��� ,. _... .. .
�' ` : � � �' .... _. „-... .. .,. ��." ROOD�bL+
.., _ .:. � . . . • , �� M� ��r.�
' _ _. . .. , _.
-_... , ..:t� ' ,,� w�s°
r � ��� f: � E� ��' wi�.��rI �
/�s I � �i � .. . �rr. �.��.�� ��i� r�y� rrw =_. _'__ � ,�� �/rr�ir.� II
,. ' DF.. �,,��� �!. ..,. j�..`�'� • L .. A � �' �T'ir�riw�iit`wa "4T�"irriwiair
l �� ^'nr� �L��� O ��� �as' � �sar AWf£M11a8 li
;I �--� �` � � ��� :��.#�..,..� , k`_:..�... I
, � ,�. � �r,� � 8U� „�.��.��8.,0, �=°..
� � H�IIf D ��J .
�� � � �,- _.�� .E �_ � � �- mtOAO7W11IeMSr ,.
,, � M�M�IIRIOIM[wC
s � � b
! _ . :,. ,.. , ' , . .
�-.°� . , �� , .
� ` '.' - � w.w. � � �� o��� .
�_rf,'w ..,..� �� .:,,: .1: � `1 �8 .
_�_ . � s��� "°�=.._� �„_
���
� � ,.e�.�.,.«..�..,...���,.�..
�% , ' ! ,�I. �s��� _::,.�.:...iiw.r�.���.: rn
� �� V � �i��9��a�°�ie���i� �
�_�T�'� ,` IXX IR�IYw#l�)�IY�IIIAM��I�f11�A�1O� �
I M r�R ll�l�lf AA I��IRI�
' I- � i a=��wr�rMwve���wa�r +
I \. W
.I � � '� ■A�rllf/Ip1�AMI�'�.��AiA1���M
. � �•,� . M1r ^� ';6 .� -, ,I ''WIH a w.wiw wrw����rm��ww�+e�,w�r �
1 1 � �� J��� �1 � �U. � 1 x�r- r-�°' �
-; ,: , . , � .e.,. I � u w .o ,m �a
. : � . ��- � . .
� .� � �.. �� wv�m
:, .___1_��. .�.�. .._
_ ,�,F �-e�•:< <:�,��.a, ,.,,-ncc VESTNG TENTATIVE M^P
� � . . .. .. . . .�ARRO{.ROJ1G. �rmc�ra -� : �� ° �`�� � � �c�...�rrrar���rraw:l�1�+� FOR
` �� s a, s r�s TRACT 2310
oF T,.E FARROL ESTATES
� ,..:y.. , . .. ' :." - �. , . . . .:: . . S�NLRI#.�Cr�q!!T.MG.. �iwr�°�iw°o ii.�irr�en°o��°°wwu��e°�o�°w¢���u�m�a awrr
1p!lIM�[AV!�
a .,.�- . ° . . . � Iw10�W N�v�E rt ano�w,MO wMr�rwc nar�wR woo�rMC�ca wvw w
� s nnr.cme s w aar s.
. . . . .�� . � eoe O��wsw OCfOB9t a000
•
V�170061AD\Ap\PRTIIOWS-bou+tlAp 10/16/W 01�ISM PM PDT
F - �
�
� `,�a �� r� V
, _ �
i�
� " i ����`' .
;� r. 'h
• �.tr: ,.r
i� t-�Y
� � M`��Sw
� � I (�`I� �r
• r Jr%t ~4
� i��\r — •
F =� �
���`'i� .li�'}
� �
1
� 1
� ���. ./ ,�� , . ��- ` � i' �
� � I
�► � �� �1 �
. .
, .
!,±s1�-.rr�^�3lm'���r�-����3S�s!"'�r=—�—=�i -
��-� —- � � ,� �1�� ��� �'
_ � ` � ��,� � � .
.. — _ __ _,._.,� , .
_ .-._„ ..._.
_
� �►1 �- iii� :�� � � ��.��� � �,. � � ��,�� .:�, ,������,�►;�� ��.
� � � : 3 � , . . �� � � �: 6�.��.._: _�:,,,�r���
�F � , � .�� �-
�, ,� ���.�r��...a�����.��� _�,��._ ;�,- -1
� �r�, .� =� --= -===�= - =-- '=----=`°�==. ��� '
, �. ..� .� .��.�
� _ _ . �
t1- !";•L'��'/�B'-Tix�r _ •-"�'i� ��"•„ �
�-., � ��--;��',`i
� I�!Eq� ,��.- : .�_,. � a�-�:�*�a( �.-���� i ��
' 'I liy;..�f� ',s��iil���i�i�;t�a"��'�'='� �'� �'�� ' �
�� ii �� ���� � 'S � ��� ������E _,
,�ir ,� � �� ,� .�;
,
. �',�
�t � i��. �� � - _ r
��,�r :� �:, � 'L7 � o �
� ,��. �j�a� � �, �r f�� �
�� �Idl� ;�� - - �������� ; , ;
„ i;�,� i��� �� ,� �, ,T, ,■ :��� ;
� j - it< � � :� f�;` �';� i
�r : --� I,���+ -��� ;� � 1 _� 3i �� ,� � � � : � ;�r��� � �
__�� —J •A) �s��w��ii•�iiii� �(�'1� �.�i�i - �+' �1" .=� I
- �.�....�_._..�.______�_ �`�� �1 . �
-�:�,- ,� � �� _ - _ __ _ - _ .���;�.��, r.����: � ; �
- - �� a 1, i.'`�i��r---�r I!_°-�r_--Ir �` , '1' i� �AA���� I .
� �''p� �� :��1`:.e'I ���• �^�� 1`a"�`�����, �,� �� �\
� t° _�% (�i ■�; t��r� ■� ���'a,�p s�,�...._., �. n�i,,J�,
� . �� � ' ' i�� � ��` °�;`:,,`,,!�'iii '
� 1J� #� � � L � _„
a .�� � C�, �' � '� 1+-�' ,'4' - • h ` � �
- -, G. . ' �� . r' ,, '� I .�
�f �, �
. �� � ��
+ � ; I
• � I
. �`• ��� � .��I'� '�
��'� _ '_ �����r������
a.,a 1�.�-��1/i—��
� . - _ ___— .__�.. --..::alll Pi � .� � I ��:
* ,� ■ � � �
�.
� . . � . . ... .. ... .. . ... .�..:.. ...�.... . �.. .. ., .. ... ... - . .�t.. ,t . . . .. ,.
0
�
�
A
�
O
0
�
�
�
�
W
�
m
�o
�
�
�
� ���� ����
a � �
� ��f.�Z
�eR 'R;♦♦
�
�
A
�
>
���� ����
�
s�� •.•
StR���
� eR;�
I
I
I
1
I
t
I
I
I
�
�
���� ����
. � �
����R Z �
� �
�
m
� � � � � s° �� - � � ' �
� � .
N � � A� �
�
�
>
� �
� $ �
� �
�
� � ,
�
�
�� � �
�
�����E�;�;��;�� � i
a E �
�����t��i��}i` ' -
���x��i�tF�:��� � ^
������`(i}��`� � �l L
r l . ,
EXHIBIT 64
u � ��; ����',� � u,
��•����.��� i� : M
� - . � -�f��E;����� ; � �o �. � �
' �'it�•>>� i ��� • � ■ � �
� � � ���������#������ p � t �� �s � � � � Q
� i
�
� � � �
' ��lh ��"� � ;',-.;'.,:
o � ��� �� � :�:�; ` �,
. . .� � :;:;,.. .,;.., �
. . f.
. ..;.w.f.•......t
Z � ;-'•~ r7•��E
� ,y, �
� �� �� � oc�
a ���� �� �. � �
• f •�i:,��{ �t�� �
4 � i i ^',t� n'�7. t.' �
` � y.7C t')lW �
� � � � � �.. � � � � w t +1.
� . � � Jj, .t.v ;�i�j.
� � � �
I i }:•I
� �f�l�.{]���°.��1...0
..Mi>`;;L.�•��`11'.
1 :�'}:~;:i;.±e~i�� �
f i�'C.t.r K;���,n�r�
I � °..itt':�Lfi} e{.f � O Q
i}rt.1�;o�"•t:l
� i r�;i• :i�, J
� t..Y n
' � �� : � � +'i{�,��;{?�;��;I
� � ,�
�t;,., ,'r �.F
t,,,fi �;t°' Y,
, 4 .:1;��y•: �k:'�'::;
�p �� A����l���•'t��•��l
T .�.��3•� 'r,arf%l!
( • O
� �� 8 "Y1 T> �
� � �
Ii�� � ' S � ,;i'^ ''P '��
-� - - - T �- - - - - �
n � � :.r� a a
n :.is�� ��;:,: � �
�. �. _ � �
� ... �. . �
��� �� T:;:.. ��r1� ; � .
� -.3;•• _ � � �
�� � � ��T.tr��l,s .
� � �'��t�}Y S.. Rt .�, �+.
k'S��. i t�..!'y_l^ �rS{' Y• /�
ktr l f`^ V
' Io , .,�.
v � � j Y. .
:�f,-y'��j
.:i:;.
/ '; "F
�+
' .�-:.. ..,. �...i. ..._ ...',..._. 4 �:�_ -..,.« :..: i�...._....:. - ' +<s. '—'. _
CITY COUNCIUREDEVE�JPMENT AGENCY MINUTES ATTACHMENT 1
MAY 28, 2002
PAGE 9
RDA
AYES: Lubin, Runels, Dickens, Ferrara, Lady
NOES: None .
ABSENT: � None
There being 5 AYES and 0 NOES, the motion is hereby declared to be passed.
Mayor Lady called for a break at 9:25 p.m. Mayor Lady reconvened the meeting at
9:35 p.m.
11.b. Consideration of Pre-application Review Case No. 02-002; Proposed
Subdivision of a 10-Acre Site into 25 Residential Lots and Dedication of a
1.23-Acre Portion for a Park; Farroll Road; Don McHaney.
Community Development Director Strong presented the staff report and responded to
questions from Council regarding the site relating to access to the Soto Sports
Complex, a suggested landscape easement, disclosure to potential homebuyers
regarding activities/lights at the Sports Complex, potential collection of park in-lieu fees,
the potential for second residential units and their relation to qualifying as affordable
housing units, and a proposed street name change for the�extension of Dixson Street.
Mayor Lady invited comments from those in the audience who wished to be heard on
the matter. •
Jeffrey Emerick, EDA, spoke on behalf of tF�e applicant in support of the project.
Hearing no further comments, Mayor Lady brought the item back to Council for
consideration.
Mayor Lady expressed concerns that second residential units would not meet the
affordable housing needs.
Council Member Ferrara stated he did not support any type of pass-through or access
connection to the Soto Sports Complex; stated he liked the flow and general layout of
the proposed project; favored the circulation system throughout the project; commented
that there were maintenance issues to work through; favored utilizing open space areas
and suggested some sort of pedestrian enhancement at the entrance to the project;
favored the proposed intersection alignment; and requested more information with
regard to the affordability issue.
Council Member Lubin favored the suggestion of a landscape strip on the east side of
the project; did not support the connection or access of the project to the Sports
Complex; requested more information with regard to how the second residential units
could qualify as affordable housing units; stated that parking and traffic issues need to
be taken into consideration with the addition of second residential units; stated that it
CITY COUNCIL/REDEVE�OPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
MAY 28, 2002
PAGE 10
was important to align the street; and suggested that it would make more sense to
extend the name of Bakeman Lane into the project.
Council Member Dickens stated he felt the lots were too big; the City needed more
affordable workforce housing, and encouraged different planning to provide tangible
affordable housing at this location. He did not support providing second residential units
as affordable housing units; stated that a pocket park should be included within the
project; suggested that a Homeowners Association be created to maintain a pocket
park; addressed the street name and drainage issues; supported buffer efforts on the
northem edge of the project, and supported the inclusion of language to alert potential
homebuyers of impacts related to Soto Sports Complex.
There was further discussion regarding proposed lot sizes. Mr. McHaney, applicant,
stated that 6,000-8,000 square foot lots were originally preferred; however, due to the
General Plan designation, he was limited to 12,000 square foot lots.
Mayor Pro Tem Runels commented that he did not favor flag lots; agreed that the lots
are a littleiarge; and suggested that second residential units and homes on flag lots be
sprinkled. .
Mayor Lady stated he would favor a reduction in the size of the lots.
Director Strong reviewed several alternatives that included requests for a density bonus,
which would provide a commitment for affordable housing, or the applicant requesting a
General Plan Amendment.
Mayor Lady ensured that the applicant had received sufficient feedback and direction
with regard to the proposed project.
There was no action taken on this item.
11.c. Consideration of Pre-application Review Case No. 02-003; Proposed
Subdivision of a 29.5 Acre Site into 15 Residential Lots and an Open Space
Parcel; Lot 182 of Tract 1390, Located on Rodeo Drive.
Community Development Director Strong presented the staff report and responded to
questions from Council regarding the site relating to slopes, soil conditions, and
landscaping.
Mayor Lady invited comments from those in the audience who wished to be heard on
the matter.
Carlo Alfono, representing James Land Partnership, stated the applicant would be
amenable to raised foundations on steep lots; however, most of the other lots were flat.
He also stated that the soil was suitable for compaction.
MINUTES ATTACHMENT 2 PAGE 7
PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 5, 2002
Commissioner Keen asked if the project could be conditioned to reflect that all buildings
meet the new Guidelines as approved by the Planning Commission and as yet not
approved by Council: Ms. Heffernon said it could be conditioned this way, but it may
hold up the project. Mr. Strong stated that this project better complies with the
proposed Guidelines than the adopted Guideline�.
Commissioner Arnold made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Fowler to approve
the project with the following changes:
1. Mitigation Measure No. 19 revised;
2. Condition of Approval No. 12 revised;
3. Eliminate Condition of Approval No. 60 (Duplicates No. 59);
and adopt:
RESOLUTION NO. 03-1860
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WITH
MITIGATION MEASURES, INSTRUCTING THE SECRETARY TO FILE
A NOTICE OF DETERMlNATION, AND APPROVlNG PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT NO. 02-001 WITH ASSOCATED ARCHITECTURAL
REVIEW (EAST VILLAGE PLAZA), LOCATED AT 520, 522 AND 528
EAST BRANCH STREET, APPLIED FOR BY DB&M PROPERTIES �
�
The motion was approved with the following roll call vote: ��
AYES: Commissioners Arnold, Fowler, and Vice Chair Keen
NOES: Commissioners Brown and Guthrie
ABSENT: None
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 5th day February 2003.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM — GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT CASE NO. 02-001;
DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT CASE NO. 02-002; PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT CASE NO. 02-002 AND VESTING TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP 02-002; APPLICANT — DON MCHANEY; LOCATION — NORTH SIDE
OF FARROLL AVENUE BETWEEN OAK PARK 6LVD AND GOLDEN WEST PLACE.
Staff report prepared and presented by Kelly Heffernon, Associate Planner.
Ms. Heffernon stated described the site stating that it is 10 acres surrounded by
residential development to the south, east and west, and by the Soto Sports Complex to
the north. She stated that the applicant has revised the project since City Council
reviewed it as a pre-application. The applicant is now proposing a higher residential
density than the current land use and zoning designations allow, hence a General Plan
Amendment is proposed. Council also recommended not having a neighborhood or
pocket park in this location given the proximity to Soto Elm Street Park.
MINUTES PAGE 8
PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 5, 2002
Ms. Heffernon described some highlights of the proposed project explaining that the main
access is proposed off Farroll Avenue as an extension of Bakeman Lane and a second
access is proposed off of Dixson Street. The Farroll Avenue frontage will have the
same landscape, fencing and sidewalk treatment as the adjacent subdivision.
Ms. Heffernon then addressed affordable housing and traffic as discussed in the initial
study. Ms. Heffernon explained the City's policy for affordable housing and concluded
by stating that because the General Plan is the foundation for all policy decisions
regarding development in the City, the project has been conditioned to reserve 5 units
(25% of the 20 unit increase) for affordable housing. Ms. Heffernon then addressed
traffic impacts and concluded by saying that because of the cumulative impacts of
existing projects, plus proposed projects, the Level of Service for the intersection of
Farroll Avenue and Halcyon Road, would degrade to an LOS "D" during the AM peak
hour. As mitigation, the applicant is required to conduct signal warrants study for this
intersection and pay the City's proportional share of Traffic Signalization and
Transportation Facilities Impact fees.
Vice Chair Keen opened the Public Hearing.
John Scholes, representative for EDA, the project engineer, stated that they were in
agreement with the findings and conditions; this was a good infill project; the
requirement for affordable housing would be helpful. In response to a question from
Commissioner Guthrie he replied that the increased units could be counted towards the
State mandate.
Commissioner Guthrie asked about the east side portion of land (where there were no
homes) and whether the City would end up with this.
Don Mchaney, applicant, replied that the intent was to create a linear park at this area to
act as a buffer between the proposed project and Golden West Place. They were
proposing to set up a maintenance district to take care of this rather than an HOA. The
City has a 20-foot storm drain easement across this area.
Commissioner Fowler referred to a letter from a neighbor asking about access across ;
the site to the back of their properties. Mr. Mchaney said he did not have any idea how i
this could be accommodated, but the City could allow it. �
i
Dan Miller, 442 Golden West Place, had concerns with the tra�c impact this project �
would have on Oak Park and Halcyon Road. He had a gate in his rear yard and stated ;
he accessed it frequently and believed it had been used like this since 1973 for motor �
home access, as had his neighbors. �
Paul Savage, 1374 Dixson, had concerns with traffic and accidents on Oak Park. He
said he had not received notification of this project.
MINUTES PAGE 9
PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 5, 2002
Resident of 442 Golden West Place, had concerns with the traffic impact with so many
homes being proposed, and had safety concerns with the increased traffic impact on
Harloe School. She also would like to keep the access to the back of her property.
Pete Gallagher, 1375 Dixson, said he did not received notice of the project. He had the
following concerns:
• The traffic circulation. He believed the majority of tra�c from the project would exit
onto Dixson then Oak Park and not Farroll Avenue.
• Traffic making a left turn into Dixson and that traffic would be backed up at Oak
Park.
• With Dixson Street being overparked as on some days the street is heavily parked .
due to activities at Soto Park, and considered it a safely concern for children in this
area.
• That there would not be a pocket park and children would be crossing streets to get
to the Soto Park from the proposed project.
Charles Ochoa, one of the site property owners and previous strawberry grower, stated
that they never gave anyone easement rights on the Golden West tract to access their
property and he had never seen anyone using this access, had never been asked by
anyone to use it and that two years ago there was a gate and he had never seen
anyone access out.
Commissioner Keen asked Mr. Ochoa how many acre-feet of water he had pulled out of
the well when he was growing strawberries? Mr. Ochoa replied that the well pumped
about 500 gallons a minute and they would irrigate 10-12 hours a day and the next day
because of the sandy soil you could not tell it had been watered.
Mr. Mchaney commented that if the development takes place the agriculture well would
be capped off and groundwater available to City wells.
Vice Chair Keen c%sed the Public Hearing.
The Planning Commission had the following comments and concerns:
• The traffic study had not addressed the Oak Park/Dixson Street intersection;
the trip distribution did not seem valid.
• Tra�c circulation —safety concerns.
• Lack of a pocket park for young children (due to proximity to existing park).
• They preferred not to have "in lieu" fees for affordable housing, but to require
on-site construction.
• They would like to see 4' sidewalks with a 2-4' landscaped parkway (same as
Berry Gardens). �
• Existing single story homes should have single story homes next to them. i
• Landscape design should include water conservation measures. E
• They would like to see access to Soto Park established. �
• A possible bus stop or turnout on Oak Park or Farroll. ;
. .__
MINUTES PAGE 10
PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 5, 2002
• The legality for egress to allow access for the neighboring subdivision should
be considered.
Commissioner Brown made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Guthrie, to continue
discussion to the March 4, 2003 meeting due to the late hour and many undecided
factors. The motion was unanimously approved on a 5/0 voice vote.
NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS - None
DISCUSSION ITEMS - None
PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS AND COMMENTS — Commissioner Fowler said
CNN news had a story on the chickens that had taken up home around City Hall.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR COMMENTS AND FOLLOW-UP — None.
ADJOURNMENT - There being no further business before the Commission, the
meeting was adjourned at 11:15 p.m. on a motion by Commissioner Brown, seconded
by Commissioner Guthrie, and unanimously carried.
ATTEST:
LYN REARDON-SMITH, JOHN KEEN, VICE CHAIR
COMMISSION CLERK
AS TO CONTENT:
ROB STRONG,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
�
;
'
�
�
�
t
MINUTES ATTACHMENT 3 PAGE 2
PLANNING COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 2, 2003
Chair Guthrie closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Brown stated he could approve the project as if the Conditions of Approval
recommended by staff were included.
Commissioner Keen stated he could not approve because the second story would block the
view from other homes.
Commissioner Arnold said approving this could create a domino effect.
Commissioner Fowler stated that this would improve the look of the area, not decrease the
value of any other properties in the area and there are other two story homes in the
neighborhood.
Commissioner Guthrie stated that he believed there are other ways to achieve additional
space and not have such a massive effect on neighborhood and that this was too large of a
building.
Commissioner Arnold made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Keen, to approve the
Resolution denying approval of the Viewshed Review case no. 03-004, and adopt:
RESOLUTION 03-1900
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE DENYING APPROVAL OF VIEWSHED REVIEW CASE
NO. 03-004, LOCATED AT 195 NORTH ELM, APPLIED FOR BY STEVE
ACCORNERO
The motion was approved on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Arnold, Keen and Chair Guthrie
NOES: Commissioners Brown and Fowler
ABSENT: None
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM II.C. — VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP CASE NO. 02-002;
DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT CASE NO. 02-002, GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT CASE NO. 02-001; SPECIFIC�PLAN AMENDMENT CASE NO. 02-001;
APPUCANT — DON McHANEY; LOCATION — NORTH SIDE OF FARROLL AVE
BETWEEN OAK PARK BLVD AND GOLDENT WEST PLACE. Staff report prepared and j
presented by Associate Planner, Heffernon and Assistant Planner—Jim Bergman. �
Mr. Bergman gave the presentation, describing the highlights of the proposal and explaining �
that circulation in the proposed development would be through a newly created "N. ;
Bakeman Circle", a private 20 foot wide access drive and access to the 13 single family t
homes would be through the completion of the cul-de-sac on Dixson Street. He further �
stated that SAC and ARC had reviewed the project and explained their recommendations.
There are still many technical details outstanding that relate to sewer, water, drainage, and
traffic. '
MINUTES PAGE 3
PLANNING COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 2, 2003
In repiy to a question from Commissioner Arnold Ms. Heffernon stated that ARC had
reviewed plans of the single-family homes and these had inadvertently not been included in
the Commission's packets.
Commissioner Brown asked why a General Plan Amendment is being required when the
General Plan Update has just been completed. Mr. Strong said at the time of the General
Plan, the applicant had not submitted a request for change. In reply to further questions
from Commissioner Brown, Mr. Strong then explained how the density was calculated, why
the proposal was part of a Planned Development and the requirement in the Development
Code that 25% of the project be affordable housing versus the text of the General Plan
Housing Element proposing °25% of the increase". �
Mr. Bergman then clarified how the density was calculated for the project.
In reply to a question from Chair Guthrie, Mr. Strong said Public Works has numerous
technical concerns that have been inadequately addressed at this time: including storm
drainage, sewer lines, water lines, deficiency of fire flow for the entire area and the
connection of the water line across Soto Park, and the street width. He further stated that
staff believes this project has merit and is appropriate to the neighborhood, but we are
interested in the neighborhood opinion. In reply to Commissioner Arnold's question, Mr.
Strong stated the traffic study that was previously submitted has been amended to discuss
the current project, but there are problems with the assumptions made.
Chair Guthrie opened the Public Hearing.
John Mack, Architect, for S & S Homes, gave his presentation and described the changes
made since the proposal was last submitted to the Planning Commission: traffic redirected
from the Dixson exit with a cul-de-sac; the needs of the community have been addressed
with affordable homes; there are three plan types each with different prices; all multi-family
units will be fitted with fire sprinklers in lieu of the 40-foot street width.
The Commission questioned the applicant at length regarding the numbers/ratios being
used f.or the distribution of traffic and expressed concern that there were no numbers for the
intersection at Farroll Avenue and Oak Park. Mr. Mack stated they had studied the most
impacted intersections that could change the LOS and the ones that staff had asked them
to study. Chair Guthrie disagreed with the distribution figures and said the figures were
understated on Oak Park Blvd. Commissioner Keen explained that logically he had a
problem with the SANDAG tra�c study guidelines because the price of the proposed
houses would require both parties in a home to work so there would be double the traffic
stated (majority will go north on Oak Park). Commissioner Brown recommended that it
would be better if the traffic engineer were present to defend the issues raised in the
SANDAG report. Mr. Mack asked that the criteria be made clear to them. Chair Guthrie
stated the issue was not with SANDAG, but the last time significant questions were raised
re the distribution; the numbers are not realistic. Commissioner Brown asked that in terms
of the traffic, could configu�ation of project be different to generate less trips. Mr. Mack
replied that the master plan considered what was best for Dixson Street and providing ;
affordable housing for the community. ;
i
i
MINUTES PAGE 4
PLANNING COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 2, 2003
Commissioner Brown stated the street width should be the normal 40-foot, curb-to-curb.
Chair Guthrie said if there was no parkway there could be a 40-foot road and no sprinklers
would be required.
Chair Guthrie opened the Public Hearing.
Paul Usavage. 1374 Dixson Street:
• Concern with turn onto Oak Park Blvd; it has been somewhat addressed, but still
some concern- most traffic goes north on Oak Park to Hwy 101.
• Traffic has changed since Oak Park opened up.
• Lot sizes as proposed in Phase I not in character with rest of neighborhood and
amending General Plan Update is a concern.
Pete GallaQher had concerns with:
• Size of 13 lots some on flag lots which could create a problem.
• Lots sharing common drives may pose significant amount of problems.
• Does not agree that these are medium priced homes.
• 32 foot street: No provision for children in neighborhood.
• Design does not provide pedestrian access to Soto Park on Ash — need easement to
back of Soto Sports Complex, need to provide for children's recreation.
• Density of 60 units and zero lot lines is problematic.
Jackie Kirk-Martinez. 1379 Dixson Street:
• Re the Oak Park and Farroll Avenue intersection peak time traffic: does not agree
with distribution numbers.
• Concern with place for children to play to avoid accidents.
• Horse shoe (cul-de-sac) concern with fire and density with no outlet.
• Concern with flag lots in keeping with the Dixson St.
Mr. Mack in response:
• The average lot size on Dixson Street is in keeping with the neighborhood and has
extra buffer as it is in between two streets; the single fronting lots are smaller.
• There are no flag lot configurations; all homes will have street frontage, but the
common driveway access can be removed if preferred.
• Recreational facilities: we showed some park area, but Parks & Recreation does not
want another pocket park to maintain. Every unit has open space.
• Benefits of zero lot lines: we moved units to provide more room on one side.
• Site circulation: the Fire Chief said they preferred a 20-foot paved road width or fire
sprinklers.
• Traffic issue: like to have some guidance on what reference to use.
Chair Guthrie closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Arnold:
• This is a better design than before -will not dump traffic onto Dixson.
• Only 4 or 5 lots that are 6,000 most lots 8000- may need to make lots bigger on '
Phase L i
• Pedestrian access between Phase I & 2 would benefit the neighborhood. ;
MINUTES PAGE 5
PLANNING COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 2, 2003
• Why no twin homes? — would look better, give driveways adjacent to one another
and provide larger yards.
• Like to see a bus route on Farroll Avenue (maybe where lots 12 & 13 are) trying to
cut down on traffic.
• Retention basin plan: suggest take lot 13 and make retention basin and pocket park
for younger families to use.
• Like to see more homes with adjacent driveways to provide more parking.
• Opposed to carports because Plan C only has 10 feet in front - no room to park. Will
look untidy.
• Think this type of affordable project is needed, but lots are very small. Like idea of
twin homes. Many unresolved issues: traffic study, drainage issue.
Commissioner Fowler:
• Very happy to see the loop—addresses the issue of Dixson Street.
• In favor of more affordable housing, but find these lots very small.
• Like the idea of twin homes.
• Many unresolved issues- traffic, drainage.
Commissioner Brown:
• Went from one extreme to another with the density.
• Neighborhood concern with lot size and hope the mix and configuration in the
number of single family residences— like to see more lots in the 6200 sq ft range.
• Agree with Commissioner Arnold on shared driveways, carports and parking issues.
• Families with small children need a place to congregate and with affordable housing
there will probably be a lot of small children.
• Pedestrian access to Soto Park needs to be addressed.
• Should have landscape treatment even with 40-foot roadway.
• Like to hear from Traffic Engineer.
Commissioner Keen:
• Dixson Street: size of lots should be more compatible with the existing.
• Problem with no parking in front of garages for most of the lots.
• The Development Code (quoted code) specifies that open space be provided for
Multi-Family and that a minimum of 500 sq ft of common recreation area and open
space shall be provided for each residential lot in the subdivision. This project does
not provide recreation place for young children and does not meet the required
standards.
• Traffic concerns.
• The City needs to address the drainage.
Chair Guthrie:
• Liked the changes re the cul-de-sac. I�
• Streetscape looks the same —�t is important to establish what the streetscape would ;
be. 1
• Shared driveways are a good solution for small and odd shaped lots. �
• Staff should review street widths ;
_ _
MINUTES PAGE 6
� PLANNING COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 2, 2003
• Zero lot lines can work, but would get a bigger yard with twin home concept — this
could become a retirement area.
• Traffic issue coutd be solved with re-distribution — studies understated, but not sure
yet who will occupy this project.
• Like to see bus stop.
• Need recreational element included —suggest lot 13.
• Pedestrian connection between Phases I and 2 should be worked out.
• Carport can provide extra parking, but need parking in front of carport also.
• 40 ft wide street-give more room to lots instead of parkway with detached sidewalk?
Commissioner Keen made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Fowler to continue the
project to the meeting of October 7, 2003. The motion was unanimously approved on a 5/0
voice vote.
The Commission took a 10-minute break.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM II.B — PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CASE NO. 03-001 8
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP CASE NO. 03-003; APPLICANT— PHIL ZEIDMAN; LOCATION
— 125 NELSON STREET.
Mr. Foster explained that this project was continued from July 15, 2003 to allow sufficient time
for revision of plans. Revised plans were submitted to the Community Development
Department, but there are several unresolved building code issues with the plans. Therefore,
staff is requesting that this project be continued. The applicant is submitting revised plans
tonight, but because staff has not had time to review these plans staff is recommending
continuance.
Chair Guthrie opened the Public Hearing.
Phil Zeidman, applicant, said they revised the plans after fast Commission meeting as
requested, but had been informed a few days ago that the plans were not in conformance with
building codes. He further stated that he would like the Commission to accept the concept and
planning issues of the project as submitted and allow the applicant to resolve the Building
Department issues with Building.
Chair Guthrie said it would be difficult to approve a project with changes not seen.
Mr. Strong stated that staff needs to fully evaluate plans before public comment and that the
;
plans previously submitted were inadequate and inaccurate. He further stated that this is the ��
first mixed-use project to be submitted during the Development Code changes and staff would ;
like to make sure it is correct, and a desirable design, not just code compliant. ;
�
Fred Bauer, 212 Short Street, stated this was never a good project and Mr. Zeidman's problem �
was not with the City, but unprofessional work in addition to not being an attractive project. He
further stated he would like to see a model of the project.
Chair Guthrie closed the Public Hearing.
_
PLANNING COMMISSION ATTACHMENT 4 PAGE 5
MINUTES
OCTOBER 7, 2003
AYES: Commissioners Keen, Arnold, Brown, Fowler and Chair Guthrie
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
the foregoing resolution was adopted this 7th day of October, 2003
Commissioner Keen made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Arnold, to recommend
that consideration of the revision of the Guidelines and Standards for Design Overlay D-
2.11 for the vicinity of Traffic Way and Station Way be continued to the meeting of
December 2, 2003.
AYES: Commissioners Keen, Arnold, Brown, Fowler and Chair Guthrie
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
CONT/NUED/TEM: PUBLIC HEARING ITEM II. D —VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
CASE NO. 02-002, DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT CASE NO. 02-002, GENERAL
PLAN AMENDMENT CASE NO. 02-001 & SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT CASE NO. 02-
001; APPLICANT — DON McHANEY; LOCATION — NORTH SIDE OF FARROLL AVE
BETWEEN OAK PARK BLVD AND GOLDEN WEST PLACE. Staff report prepared and
presented by Kelly Heffernon.
Ms. Heffernon gave an update on the proposal for a subdivision of a 10.3-acre site. She �
described the changes that the applicant had made since the last submittal to the Planning �
Commission (September 2, 2003): reduced the project from 73 to 66 residential lots and �
included a 0.9-acre park/ponding basin adjoining Soto Sports Complex; another plan type
has been introduced, Plan "D", a larger finro-story design; Plan "C" has been altered to show
the carports enclosed as two-car garages. Other changes included enlarging two lots and
widening all "C" lots to provide more open space and added guest parking spaces along the
private drive; an updated traffic study has also been submitted.
Finally Ms. Heffernon explained that because the subject property is one of the few
remaining large undeveloped parcels in Drainage Zone A, staff requested that the retention
basin be oversized to accommodate additional runoff; the retention basin shown on the
plans can accommodate approximately triple the amount of storage capacity than the
project requires, but would result in the loss of seven lots. The applicant is willing to
dedicate the property to the City to own and maintain, but requests that as a concession for
this added public benefit the City allow ten affordable units rather than the full 25% of the
project. An alternative is to downsize the basin to the project requirement only and provide
the required number of affordable units on-site. Staff favors the larger basin and
preservation of all seventeen affordable units.
In answer to Commission questions Mr. Strong gave a detailed explanation of the history
and the capacity of the existing drainage basin and future expectations with the installation
of a larger retention basin.
Chair Guthrie opened the Public Hearing.
PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 6
MINUTES
OCTOBER 7, 2003
John Mack, Architect, gave a power point presentation and an extensive overview of the
project now entitled "Parkside Village" and described the revisions to the proposal since the
last submittal. He also described the options for the retention basin. He requested:
• They be reimbursed for the new wate� line that the City was requiring them to install.
• They would like to have the 32-foot wide streets.
• They would like the City maintain the park and retention basin.
In conclusion, he stated that if they exercised Option B for the pedestrian path to Soto
Complex they would be able to increase the capacity of the retention basin by 20%.
In answer to a question from Commissioner Arnotd, Mr. Mack said they were intending to
build out the park, but were requesting the City to maintain the public park and the retention
basin.
In answer to a question from Commissioner Brown, Mr. Mack stated if they were not
required to install the retention basin they could increase the project by six units (more
affordable units).
Chair Guthrie opened the Public Hearing.
'
Wayne Peterson, 1382 Dixson Street, stated that he did not think the lots were compatible
with the existing lots on Dixson Street (they were smaller).
Pete Gallagher, 1375 Dixson Street, had concern that:
• The lot sizes were not compatible with the existing lots on Dixson Street.
• Homes that share a common drive are flag lots and neighbors would have to be very
cooperative for this to be successful.
• Putting homes against the backside of Soto Sports Complex ball field could be a
problem with lights and noise and the solution of a retention basin would be a win for
the City.
• He liked Option B for water retention.
• 32-foot road widths are small, but this may be offset by deeper lots and wider frontage.
• Water retention basins could present health concerns with West Nile virus (he referred
to pigeons and mosquito larvae.
• He would like to see a smaller number of homes fronting Dixson due to traffic.
Paul Usavage, 1374 Dixson Street, also had concerns with the size of the lots fronting
Dixson and the consistency for the neighborhood.
Mr. Mack commented that the lots off Dixson Street are 6000 square feet and everyone on
Dixson Street can now enter from their own driveway (there are no longer shared
driveways).
Chair Guthrie closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Brown;
� Concern that 6000 square foot lots are now considered the norm, and even considered
large, and he would like to see transition areas with lots more consistent to existing.
PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 7
MINUTES
OCTOBER 7, 2003
• He thought it unfair the developer is required to make up for lack of retention in the past
and unreasonable for them to have them provide retention for future development, but
there is a clear need for the retention.
• There has been a huge density aliowed on this project and he couid only agree to
compromise from 15 to 17 affordable units.
• He could iive with either option A or B for pedestrian access and retention basin
location.
• He could not agree to street width less than 4Q feet and not change any treatments
such as sidewalk.
• The park is an important addition for this very dense project as a place for small
children to play.
Cammissioner Fowler:
• Concern with loss of affordable housing; could the retention basin (Option B), provide a
park and allow more affordabie housing ar provide more afford�ble housing elsewhere?
• Has no problem with size of Dixson Street lots; this is a cul-de-sac and no one is going
to drive through.
Commissioner Arnold:
� The number of fots on the Dixson Street side does make a true transition.
• Prefer Option B for the park, more affordable, more workable.
• Like to see access from Dixson Street over to the park.
• The City should take care of the park, especially as it backs up to the Soto Park.
• Agree that the open space calcs. sound nice, but cannot agree to this without the park
being included.
• Could not agree to less than 17 affordable units.
• The City should not pay anything for the retention basin. ,
Commissioner Keen stated he preferred Option B and thought this plan a iot better than the
previous. He then addressed Ms. Heffernon with the following comments on the staff report
and conditions of approval:
• Page 5, #10, asked for clarification on the development code as it pertains to multi
family and PUD requirements. Ms. Heffernon clarif+ed that this was a general condition
of approval and that the PUD requirement related only to the density.
• Hours of construction conflict on different pages of the report. Ms. Heffernon replied
that it would be changed to be consistent.
• #11, referring to the Development Code he did not think this was an infill project and
therefore flag lots were not appropriate. Mr. Strong clarified that this was a Planned
Development district and therefore deviations are allowed.
• #15, referring to the CC&R's for common areas, stated that his understanding of the
Development Code (5.j.) says that the project has to maintain the park. Mr. Strong
replied that the developers are saying that the ponding basin and the park will be used
by others in addition to the residents and are asking the City to accept it, but the City is
saying that as an alternative minimum we want the maintenance district that exists to the
west on Dixson Street expanded so some contribution for maintenance could come f�om
those areas and this project.
PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 8
MINUTES
OCTOBER 7, 2003
Dan Hernandez, Parks and Recreation, with reference to maintenance district, stated that
current staff had about 95 developed park acres with only six maintenance persons and the
City is not in a position to adequately maintain an additional park at this time.
Commissioner Keen continued:
• Quoted additional sections where the Development Code states either the developer or
the homeowners should take care of the park.
• #18, 25% affordable, agree that it should be 17.
• #28, agree that all the family PUD units should be fitted with fire sprinklers, and like to
add to the condition that all flag lots should be sprinkled also.
• #39, needs to be clarified - relates to Public Works and the landscaping and who should
take care of it.
• #45b., in-lieu fees on low-income housing should be waived - counterproductive.
• #49 should be left in (loop for the water main).
• Page 20:
Commission Brown stated he would like to have a condition added that the design and
layout of the pocket park would be subject to approval by Parks and Recreation.
Mr. Hernandez stated reasons why City staff recommended Option A for the trail easement:
• It is wider.
• The purpose of the easement is for access to the Elm Street neighborhood park.
• Option A is shorter and is more visible.
• Option B would require the removal of a few of the healthy trees on the hillside and
maybe a retention walL
�
Commissioner Keen continued:
• Plan 'C' - it appears that there is not enough room to park in front of the garage without
hanging over the sidewalk.
• Plan 'D', sidewalk setbacks, referring to the Development Code, less than 5-foot set
backs not allowed - does not like to see buildings this close.
Mr. Mack explained that he was going to do one with zero lot line on one side and 5 foot on
the other. Building recommended 3 feet on either side.
Commissioner Guthrie referring to the connection to Elm Street Park:
• Alternative B is every bit as valuable as alternative A, in that it is also a pedestrian
connection from the neighborhood to the commercial area.
• If the easement that connects Dixson Street to Bakeman Lane north were included who
would maintain that?
Mr. Hernandez replied that it could probably be incorporated into the lighting and
landscaping district currently in effect for that area.
Chair Guthrie:
• How could a HOA be responsible for the retention basin when the general public would
be using this? Mr. Hernandez gave an example of another open space in the City which
was maintained by HOA.
__ _ _.
PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 9
MINUTES
OCTOBER 7, 2003
Chair Guthrie: .
• According to the traffic report stacking on Dixson Street would not be a problem.
• Size of the lots on Dixson Street although they are smaller should transition.
• This is a valuable place for a ponding basin, especially given Option B and this could be
fine tuned to allow a couple of other units to be developed.
• Did not think the affordable housing units should be reduced in order to build the
retention basin -unless the affordable units loss could be made up in some way.
Commissioner Keen, referring to Option B, stated if the basin is reduced and there are more
lots he would prefer to see them the houses on the other side and not between the park and
open space.
There was further discussion on the basin with Commissioner Keen stating that he would
like to see something that could be used as open space or as a park.
Commissioner Guthrie addressed the main issues agreed upon.
• 17 affordable units should be required.
• The City should require a maintenance district for the park.
• Option B would be the recommendation of the Commission.
• The road width should be 40 feet (could give up the parkway).
� Commissioner Keen would like to see his comments on the conditions of approval
addressed in writing.
Commissioner Keen made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Arnold, to continue review
of the project to the meeting of October 21, 2003.
;
The motion was approved on the following roll call vote: i
AYES: Commissioners Keen, Arnold, Brown and Fowler
�
,
NOES: Chair Guthrie �
ABSENT: None `
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM II.E — DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT CASE NO. 02-001
8 VESTING TENTATIVE TRACE MAP CASE NO. 02-005; APPLICANT — DON
McHANEY; LOCATION — GRACE LANE; ROYAL OAKS PLANNED
DEVELOPMENTMENT; LOT 182 AND PORTION OF LOT B, TRACT 1390. Staff report
prepared and presented by Kelly Heffernon.
Ms. Heffernon using a power point presentation described the proposal to subdivide a
29.46-acre property into fifteen (15) residential lots; designate a 15.95-acre area as
perpetual open space and development of four (4) moderate-income family residences on a
1.28-acre site adjacent to the open space parcel. In conclusion Ms. Heffernon stated that
staff is recommending that the Commission adopt the resolution recommending to the City
Council that they approve the Development Code Amendment and Tentative Tract Map.
After staff answered Commission questions Victor Devens, Public Works addressed the
issue of drainage stating they will be requiring that the applicant's engineer submit a very
comprehensive plan for their review that will show exactly how they plan on dealing with all
the storm water issues.
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA ATTACHMENT 5 pAGE 2
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 21, 2003
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM III.A - CONT/NUED /TEM: VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP CASE
NO. 02-002, DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT CASE NO. 02-002, GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT CASE NO. 02-001 8� SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT CASE NO, 02-001;
APPLICANT — DON McHANEY; LOCATION — NORTH SIDE OF FARROLL AVE. BETWEEN
OAK PARK BLVD. AND GOLDEN WEST PL. Staff report prepared and presented by Associate
Pianner, Keliy Heffernon.
Ms. Heffernon described the revisions made since the applicant's last presentation to the
Commission on October 7, 2003, stating that this was a Planned Development Amendment and
Tract Map consisting of 13 Singte-fami�y units and 52 multi-family units (16 of which would be for
affordable to moderate income households) on a 10.3-acre site. In conclusion she stated that staff
believes this is improved project and is recommending approval.
Victor Devens, Public Works answering Commissioner Brown:
• After review of 36-foot width streets — they seem to work well even with parking on both
sides.
Commissioner Keen:
• He had been out to Berry Gardens at different times and agreed that the 36-foot width street �
is working fine, and since the project street is looped it should be even safer.
Chair Guthrie opened the Public Hearing. '
John Mack, architect, described the revisions that had been made at the Commission's request in r
detail and answered the Commissioner's questions:
• Narrower streets encourage a neighborhood, promote slower traffic, more pedestrians and
they were hoping to promote tree canopy growth.
• They were going to meet with Parks and Recreation to discuss details of the proposed park. 4
• The pedestrian pathway is proposed to be separate from the sidewalk. '
• The basin is designed with two sliding gates on either side of the basket ball court to remain
open during the summer and closed during the winter months and fencing all round for
security; it has a slight slope on one end going to about 6 feet deep on the other end and
the goal is to use this area as a passive park during the dry season.
Commissioner Brown asked if there was concern about liability. Ms. Heffernon said there will be
the gate and the fence surrounding this area.
Commissioner Arnold:
• He would like to see lots 29 & 30 with more space for parking in front of the homes. Mr.
Mack said they had provided offsite parking for these units.
• He would like to see stairs instatled between the fields to make access more direct to the
baseball diamonds.
• He would like to see the trees spaced closer together. Mr. Mack said they could infill with
15-gallon trees.
Pete Gallagher, 1375 Dixson, asked Mr. Mack for some clarification on how some of the lots would
access onto Dixson; expressed concern about pedestrian access being close to the other retention
basin that is full of water; stated pedestrian access between the two ball fields would be more
appropriate and safer.
. _ . .� .___.u.��.�..
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA PAGE 3
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 21, 2003
Paul Savage, 1374 Dixson Street, stated he really liked the revisions that had been done,
especially the park and path and appreciated the effort.
John Wising, Grover Beach resident, stated his concern with the growing traffic in the area; people
from Grover Beach were being locked out from access to this area; he would like to see the City's
working together more to solve these problems; a stop light is needed at Brighton Street and Oak
Park Boulevard.
Katrina Ostby, 1371 Dixson Street, asked for clarification on how the funds from the special
assessment district for the Dixson Street area would work.
John Mack addressed this issue and answered the other public concerns in some detail.
Chair Guthrie closed the Public Hearing.
Commission Comments:
• They very much appreciated the applicant returning and the revisions made to the project.
• They would like to add a condition to have stairs if the parking alignment is on the right
(eastside) of the project site.
• They noted the rounding down on the number of affordable units, but this was acceptable
as there was now an expanded retention basin.
• They would like to have more trees and asked that the conditions reflect this - 15 gallon
would be acceptable.
• They hoped the increase in traffic would not be a problem. !
• Believed the density got out of hand for this project; it should have gone to 7,200 square �
foot lots and to 6,000 square foot lots with the density bonus. 1
• Ponding basin — in favor of it being gently sloped for public use. �
�
• The 36-foot road width is acceptable. �
• The financing of a maintenance district is the best way to go. �
• Traffic issues: Concerns with Oak Park/Grover Beach - the issues of getting across Oak
Park- Grover Beach controls these issues.
• Affordable housing: It's not moderate income, but is less than the average for the area;
there are 16 deed-restricted units and there were none in Berry Gardens.
• The path is essential for a walkable neighborhood.
• Preferred Plan B alternative, with the pathway to go between the baseball diamonds.
Commissioner Brown expressed concern for the future and that they were adding traffic density
that may cause problems in the future and that the affordable housing would not be as affordable
as they would like them to be.
Chair Guthrie stated that most of the issues had been addressed based on the higher density.
The Commission stated they were overall in approval of the revised project.
Commissioner Arnold made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Brown, to recommend that the
City Council amend the General Plan and Zoning Map of the City of Arroyo Grande, amend
Planned Development 1.5 and approve Vesting Tentative Tract Map 02-002 in General Plan
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA PAGE 4
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 21, 2003
Amendment 02-001, Development Code Amendment 02-002, and Planned Development
Amendment 02-001 with the following additions and amendments to the conditions:
1. The park alignment to go between baseball diamonds, and
2. If this is rejected a staircase is to be installed between the baseball diamonds (on the
southwest corner of the soccer fields);
3. The amendments to condition nos. 113 and 125 as submitted by staff.
and adopt:
RESOLUTION 03-1906
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO
GRANDE RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AMEND THE GENERAL
PLAN AND ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE, AMEND
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 1.5, AND APPROVE VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 02-002 IN GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 02-001, DEVELOPMENT CODE
AMENDMENT 02-002, AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT 02-001
FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTH SIDE OF FARROLL AVENUE
BETWEEN OAK PARK BOULEVARD AND GOLDEN WEST PLACE APPLIED
FOR BY DON McHANEY
The motion was approved on the following roll call vote:
�
AYES Commissioners Arnold, Brown, Keen and Chair Guthrie ¢
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Fowler
the foregoing resolution was adopted this 21 St day of October 20Q3.
The Commission took a 10-minute break.
Ms. Heffernon requested that Item IV.A be heard next.
NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEM IV.A — PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO. 03-012;
APPLICANT— LORENE NEFF; LOCATION— 509 BENNETT STREET. Staff report prepared and
presented by Assistant Planner—Jim Bergman.
Mr. Bergman gave an overview of the proposed lot line adjustment, which would better utilize
underlying antiquated parcels. Using a power point presentation he described how the flag lot
would be created and also create a buildable lot in the back.
Mr. Bergman stated there are currently 213 parcels in the City that can be developed as lots as
narrow as 25 feet wide and less than 5000 square feet; they are located in the tract where the
applicants lives and in three other tracts in the City. Staff would like to see some sort of controls
on the development in these lots to avoid problems with impacts on infrastructure such as traffic,
water and sewer in the future. Mr. Bergman then described some options for development of
these narrow lots and asked the Commission for their direction.
Chair Guthrie opened the Hearing to the public and hearing no comment closed it.
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA PAGE 5
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 21, 2003
Commission Comments:
• Concern that there be some yard area on these lots.
• Not in favor of flag lots, but could not see how this would work any other way.
• Liked the logic for only allowing the merging of lots on the outside edge that face the Mixed-
Use area.
The Commission said they woutd be in favor of this project.
PUBLIC HEARING III.B. - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT CASE NO. 03-005; APPLICANT —
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE HOUSING ELEMENT. Staff report prepared and presented by
Associate Planner, Kelly Heffernon.
Ms. Heffernon stated that the City had hetd six workshops to study the Housing Element Update.
The last one was on September 2, 2003 and the following Planning Commission recommended
changes had been made:
• The 30-year rollover when the property changes hands; creating more perpetual affordable
units.
• Reductions in impact fees.
�
Ms. Heffernon stated that the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) �
�
had just faxed their comments on the Housing Element to the City; she distributed copies to the
Commission.
Chair Guthrie recommended that the State's recommendations not be considered this evening as
they had no had time to study it.
Commissioner Brown:
• He would like to see specific language relating to which agency would be monitoring the
affordable housing.
• He had concern with the language in the Housing Element regarding density bonuses
containing "shalls" that may allow greater densities than he would be comfortable with.
Commissioner Arnold:
• Commercial requirement for housing? Ms. Heffernon replied that Commercial inclusionary
will be researched further because it is more complex; the City Attorney will be reviewing
this in detail before it goes to City Council.
• B.3-2, page 10: Does not think any of the fees on above moderate or "work force housing"
should be waived.
Commissioner Keen:
• 6.3, Page 8: Language should be changed to state — ...or defer collection of impact fees
for"very low, low and moderate income housing units':
Chair Guthrie agreed with Commissioner Brown and stated he also had a concern that there would
not be an agency in place to monitor the affordable housing, and also agreed with Commissioner
Arnold that he is not in favor of waiving impact fees for moderate income housing, and is only in
favor of reducing impact fees for the low and very low; density bonuses should be sufficient
incentive.
�
i
o� PaROyo c ATTACHMENT 6
� INCORPOAATED Z
" " MEMORANDUM
i� .xxr �o, �o�y ,f
�4��FORN�P
TO: CITY COUNCIL �
VIA: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER
FROM: DANIEL C. HERNANDEZ, DIRECTOR OF PARKS, RECREATION AND �
FACILITIES
SUBJECT: RECOMMENDATION OF PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
ON TRAIL EASEMENT THROUGH THE SOTO SPORTS COMPLEX
DATE: NOVEMBER 25, 2003
At the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting of November 12th, the
Commissioners discussed the recommendation being made by the Planning
Commission regarding the trail easement from the Farroll Road housing project. The
Planning Commission recommended the easement between the basin fields
(Volunteer/fkeda) and Porter Field. There are however numerous issues that make this
pathways highly problematic and undesirable. At the Parks and Recreation
Commission meeting, many of the concerns regarding this alternative as well as the
alternate option between Pilg/Campbell and Volunteer/Ikeda were discussed. The
Commission unanimously adopted the option for the pathway between the four fields as
the safest, most accessible and least problematic. A copy of the staff report is attached
for your review. In addition, the Commission recommends maintaining existing access
to the basin fields.
Finally, in my professional assessment, I fully concur with the recommendation
forwarded by the Parks and Recreation Commission and strongly recommend the City
Council adopt their recommendation. The Soto Sports Complex is a tremendous asset
to our community, generating over $600,000 annually to the local economy and careful
consideration of impact of improvements needs to be carefully reviewed. A very
conservative estimate on how this figure is calculated is that over 10,000 out of town
users annually attending the various tournaments hosted spending $30 per day each
locally for lodging, food and miscellaneous purchases.
Attachments
c:\DCH\Memosototrai111.03
,
' {.
� pRROr�
o ��,
� MICOHPONATEO 9Z
V T
. �t JUl.lf 10. t911 * .
MEMORANDUM
c�4��FOR�'�P
�
TO: PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
FROM: DANIEL C. HERNANDEZ, DIRECTOR OF PARKS, RECREATION AND �r�
FACILITIES
SUBJECT: TRAIL EASEMENT — SOTO SPORTS COMPLEX
DATE: NOVEMBER 12, 2003
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend the Parks and Recreation Commission urge the City Council to adopt
Option A for a traii easement from S and S Homes located on Farroll Road through the
Soto Sports Complex. In addition, the Commission also recommends k�eping current ,
access only for the Volunteer and Ikeda Fields.
FUNDING: '
No City funding is required. The developer will pay for all improvements to make the i
pathway fully accessible per the Americans with Disabilities Act regulations.
DISCUSSION: �
At the Planning Commission meeting held on October 7th, two options for trail
easer�ents through the Soto Sports Complex were presented. Both would provide ;
needed access to Elm Street Park as well as pedestrian access through to East Grand ;
Avenue via Courtland Street. On October 22"d, the Planning Commission j
recommended adopting Option B, which is a pathway between Porter Field and the i
Volunteer/Ikeda Field basin. '
The Director had the opportunity to walk the site with both Police Department and Public ';
Works personnel. Based on our observations regarding safety and visibility;
preservation of green space, trees and aesthetics; and on-going maintenance, it was ;
determined Option A was favorable for the following reasons: '
,,
1. Option A allows for a path with a clear visual line of site and fewer blind areas for '
observation of activities. Option B would have a path that would come out
between fields with unsecured access to dugout areas of Porter field and blind
spots adjacent to the score booth as well as concession area. Option B has
greater potential for vandalism and illicit activities due to limited direct visibility '
from the parking lot.
2. Option B would require significant change to the hiflside above Volunteer and
Ikeda fields and would require the removal of six of the eight mature trees on the
slope. Initially, the developer proposed moving the fence adjacent to Porter field
�
;
to limit tree impact. Unfortunately, doing so would prevent access to
maintenance panels on new lighting standards recently installed. This will
require the path to be extended on the basin side to accommodate a six-foot
connector trail. The City Arborist has stated the amount of work required so
close to the trees would eventually lead to their demise. Also, this option would
replace a green slope with a concrete retaining wall. No removal of trees or
vegetation would be required for Option A.
3. Option B would pose significant challenges regarding the Americans with
Disabilities Act requirements for access due to high sloping near dugout areas of
Porter field.
4. Option A would allow for a view shed of the retention basin, which is classified as
wetlands and is home to numerous birds and other wildlife.
5. Access for maintenance under Option A is superior to Option B. Option B would
not allow for use of larger equipment for maintenance and repairs due to the trail
being narrower and not accessible to larger equipment. In addition, in order to
accommodate a trail above Volunteer and Ikeda �elds, the existing fence would
need to be moved, which is not currently possible due to installation of new
� lighting standards that has all access panels accessible from Porter field.
6. Option A is closer to Elm Street Park by over 250 feet, which is the primary
reason for access through the park. The parking lot adjacent to Pilg and
Campbell fields is also the pick up and drop off point for the Lucia Mar school
bus. A large majority of early morning and afternoon foot traffic on this trail
would be these students, making Option A also more conv.enient for children that
reside in the areas off Farroll Road.
7. Option A also provides better access to scheduled activities to the four most :�
heavily used fields (Pilg, Campbell, Volunteer and Ikeda). The connector trail '
comes out at the main entrance to the basin fields (Volunteer/Ikeda) and '
adjacent to Pilg/Campbell.
The developer has stated he will work with staff in the design of the pocket park to be
located within the development that will also serve as the trailhead. Maintenance of this
area will be managed with contracted assistance paid for by a Lighting and Landscape
District or HOA. '
Finally, the Planning Commission discussed adding staircase access to the basin fields
from the development. This idea is not acceptable for the following reasons:
1. The Soto Sports Complex is not a drop-in facility. This facility has scheduled
activities taking place over 250 days per year and is closed for 90. Controlled
and limited access is important to maintain the security and condition of the
fields.
2. The basin fields were installed prior to the access requirements of the
� Americans with Disabitities Act. Any improvements to access would have to
be compliant with new regulations. As such, a full access ramp system would
have to be installed. This would be very costly and eliminate the hillside
. adjacent to Ikeda field.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for the Commission's consideration:
- Adopt Director's recommendation and forward to the City Council for
consideration;
- Modify proposal and forward to Director;
- Do not approve Director's recommendation or modify proposal; or
- Provide direction to staff.
,
�*° �`�.. �il�
� ���
�,a�
. � : �� � �
...�.� ��, ._.y _ .� � �
�.�d a �� �
(' .t _ , � ' � j
. . , . _"_. " �'"." - : 4 .
� � . r , �._ . .
_ � � �
..� 1_ - �� q I
; ,,.. � � ..
��> ' � �
�h , ��!� ,
'+�t, ��.e , , .. . }• 3�
<��� ,,� ,
� � �'- `~ � i �
� ��li , ,zt .. , ;� , � �
► " ,�.,_ ( � �
�����.; u �,� .,,;, '�[ �
�`� ��:, � - _ . _
, -�-.'' �
� y ,�'��,5 .
� �.�"��7� .
� .. fi�� � ... .. .. �
, 4 `a.. '� —
. ?j� ,�}k3 .. , 4 J��yr� . �N . � t
� +i�� �� �-Vr . .
• , a . ., �' �..�` .� �t1��`�G'.. .
•..��r: '� ^ :�` ..P���� - . � ... �� C�
_. �t -�
:.^ .. � h
.' �.' x,�y , ` � �` ,
i `
�s :a��-' ,ti� ,
,�.�_ >-
i S � , �
,�_ . ., ..� > . ,. �"
�, � ,
wF '"�`,.,'- � • �
� i •
� .,� �•� �_ .L<Yy- ' i
� ��� r � ., . ���.����� � � �
3�� . ' � � .���' 1
� > .�r. . . �
, �' �,�..�i�—. , �
��,�.,
��� " .:a
��
4 a
t
t,. �
�y��r ��
r e :.� � ��•.�
4�"ri�f�x. ;� ' , �
��%t�,.: . � �
4�5a=r<. ..
..R���¢�... . . '
i e�`.
r
k`� '-� y,..
��w •
5�� �7S ..
k �.•
��♦� � �.. �.�!�
� k ^,y^aal,-
k ���:
x;o M1 y t
�i�� _ ft'.-"��'.
, M �
,�� �.M�M f
��. ,� "'�
,�,i�,;���.y�""' �
«�� , _
`° ".�: w
, �
� :.
. ,a ti,..�.,•'
./. - ^_" .
; Y�^��
w.,.�..._.,
-';*�_...� . .
• .r°.
4:, ,y , ,
..��' ���...ro�.rorl,�,_., +s
I r.y}
w.. �4?"'° . -..-,_:�.�.-.. �
Jw`I W�w�YY�r�✓�� �I
. ,���.sli�"� �o�B
� 1
.. J.� F.r �r . f ��� �
� r� � d•
� % I',
� LL �t� ��
$w- ;�'�i•;� ,�'4 . w`y'
r ,{r' ,* '�
� � •,H,
4',
... r
9'`w '
. .
w' �± , {"i
;.� • , ?' - ..f�.,.,
� Y
! `.(
' I <3
i' �
. . `✓ ��3�, ' � _�� ,
� ; ��. .
� � . • " „ .
, �
-.r Z
` z �f,. �.• _ • . ,'� .t�
m
a,�'` � �' �+ i
�• ^ �� � ♦ a
� ,.-. �. ¢ M� �i+ M .�
' . �iai.R�� . - � . _ . . ` ' ��� � �
.. rM:�¢r — . .... .
• p � � .
• !� r • �
.; � . , r
'�� Yj
.••�it. . . � y��.�+ '
a�
. +
.' •'s' ' , ' �?�
.4 ��;.:
� ^ t _
.� � � �M
il. , �.0 ��:�� � . . �1�
� ��� �� "Srt� . . �� ' � .
�
t .
t r« � �
't � �l I
_._-_� ' y,� ,,�' , �
_. , _� � , •ti
- � � < . i °
,_ _. . _._. . __ �€ , �� . �
��-. �
— -- - . .�_� ,
- ! '` �; � —: �� ��'. �. _�.,._�_1 --_._. __..
��.� "„«" �y� �_ _ ���._'! . i „s,,....� . ��s. _ � '
, t, , �-3 _ . . . - t
� - � �,. �.'tY`°"' ��.y�� ?
i.,i �s - . h
f� "
�
.,�
:ht�
•:. �
� ' �
'4°�'t�i�' �� �
� � �;' _
�
�
+. �� � q`� ���
� �:. �j ' '� -
i �
� . \. �i
{ ' t4 - 's'
� !� :
t � , '.
� { j '
�
� � C1 1� � ie"
� � -. . i;.;v � .S
� i
m
s'
i ° �
, ..' �
�
�
_ �
�
.
�
,_�
�� _ -
-.'"�:��.„�� . '- . �
.,-
, ..��:,�_
�,;�- ' .
. � ;� -;`::} t�
.- ��
� ,
; * i�
;
�
�
�� �
• I
.E
� � �, i� !
� . I ,�„ 2li ` N4.� ...
_... . .!f�Y.. . _ � i�Ft^~ .
- "�1:,
__''_' � ' '_ ' '_ ' z ' .�.��.�-�e,�is+.sw.���..w...�.,�I��.. - ..
� �..� , � � � _
` �`�� � ��
_ "�_� _ _,:--�,,�-� . 'r' , '.'
� • ' ���` � w
� .;'t.�,•
,�
„
�
�� I
. (
;: i '
'� � 1
'i � ��
3� �,.: ��
l�`� _ � ���- w ���'
•� r
. , �� '� ��'��
� y-����:�..
_ .�--_ .
�
� �� .� �=�'
�s
'� �.
-�___. : �.�� ,�.�_.
� - ��
�,- ,�
� . ��:�: �"�
_ ��►
� �
E�r�a'!
,
. �+�`` �, � ' .
. 4, . � �
�ti►. � (
.t'S•_ _
:•�:; ;�� �. . . . � .
.,
. , �
�
t-
1 ��"
���� � � ��
I ,•a �f t �..
_'i���..'a ° ` �
t �
��f� t i � „', i
�, � �4�,� .� {i
�� -._......,.i �'i; �� {�
� � -:
; , ;
* � .
,
,.; ....:. , .• _.�_ �._. _. __�
��� �',
�� � � .,.. '
.� �
•V �,. .,�.
• ��
'�"
�K �, �� �
� �'
,... . �
, '��
�..i � � �;�; . .
; }i . r�,.
�
� f# � �� ' , ` .
f
�.� na
�`.`��� �,.
;y. , -
,
` . ,
c, ,
��
f� ' ��
`�' -
�
,,..-�+ '
/f,��� ,
,�'��_
d"�
i
( � CHAPTER 4 ATTACHMENT 7
STORM WATER DRAINAGE ZONES
( The watershed area tributary to the City of Arroyo Grande�drainage system consists of five
major areas, as illustrated in Figure 1.
IAn evaluation of the area hydrology within the City of Arroyo Grande has resulted in the
I identification of three storm water drainage zones within which separate policies for storm
water basins are recommended. These storm water drainage zones are shown on Figure
3, and are described below:
( DRAINAGE ZONE A:
This drainage zone is approximately 670 acres and is tributary to the following existing
� basins: South Elm Street infiltration; Golden West Place/Farroll Avenue infiltration; Oak
Park Boulevard (West) retarding; Dixon Street retarding; Ash Street Basins; Poplar Street
Iinfiltration, Grand Avenue/Courtland Street infiltration.
This area has several infiltration basins which have functioned with some success. The
� area soils are primarily sand and soils test typically show high infiltration rates. AGtual
performance has shown infiltration rates are somewhat limited, particularly for the deeper
basins in the Farroll Road to Grand Avenue area. The actual infiltration rate of the Ash
� street basins is 6 inches per day. It is recommended that large and/or deep (over 5 feet)
basins in this area be sized for a 6 inch per day infiltration rate.
� These infiltration basins are desirable since they reduce drainage impacts as well as
provide groundwater recharge. In this zone the sandy soil types are typically suitable for
infiltration basins.
f
Therefore, within Zone A the primary drainage strategy recommended is summarized as
� follows:
1. Use infiltration basins.
I 2. Use storm drains and other facilities to convey excess runoff directly to
neighboring creeks.
3. Avoid the use of retarding basins, unless these are needed to prevent impacts
� downstream properties.
DRAINAGE ZONE B:
' This draina e zone is a roximatel 2,066 acres and is tributa to ihe followin creeks:
9 pP Y rY 9
Arroyo Grande Creek, Tally Ho Creek, Newsom Springs Creek, and Los Berros Creek.
' The soil types in this Zone are typically clayey and are not suitable for infiltration basins.
� City of Arroyo Grande Chapter 4
DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN - 17 StoRn Water Drainage Zones
!
� —
� �iii��llllq\�`'�
,�.
�� .,�,�'A�_ ,,2!►i �'�a�� 1 . ' .
� � ..�� •%
�:�� �aA,,' .�'�;���%�i;�;Q�� � �
c.+.�M Ql,i1'i'� !- '1.��,l�S��� J � ..
�il: :�MI:1,�,��/��1F7`�:t IY�� �• '��i �
�r�� 1
�7= -•;r r►- �, ��-:t � i►.�"r
;��C�;?��, �►;s��p.� .�e!���' S��
��' ���1����r�[����s�� 1 � ♦♦
. o��-i�. �� ,� .. ���.
,; �,�1��= ►=i/ ♦����d�j� � �. r ,�����11�°-
�����t� !/ /� /��'t—�: ♦�����r,����J?�-1.>��r •
�,� ���iUi ♦ \� ♦�♦ ♦ 1� �I�
�.A�. ♦�. �!���J� ��.��, y �1�i*/.��� � ! � •
� � s�e►���: r .!
�C .,.. �i♦. o ��/^��`' 1 ��h�\�� � ��� •i �� z
�� ,-
�` � -./� � •-_R.�► � ��.�. ♦ •�i���i � l ��� \
�.t+ �11.0��i�^�): ♦ OIi ♦i.'.�'Hi�.� ��/ :, --��1 ��
� -,l���c�i�s;�!�.`�!`��\���7' � �_..i����`i �i\`J�o,'l '�I i i� '
����. \ `1 U���i► �U/��' r dr i'! /C//� � %\ /�
~ '�a�t �=�'y��*��k U 1 ��� �� \ � � / r i�7'{� � ' • ' • •�• ��
7 •���' ■�?i►i�`\�. �:1m.a��i��r"•1�i���� l I l � �i�a• ; ?�`
.ti� i� :��:O��i. .:'/.0��e�\��`�1�►�.,/�� ,. �'�. �i,.�\�� � '-�-���
� •A� ��.� �u���' �'��\\`• ►h i/� y�I,�+ �� �•--�-�- • '�'1..
1��-��ii .��� �oi��� �Cii����%. �i���Ji � i�`.�l► ��" ���� ���� � �. •� �
� °��i��..��� � e#1�.:�J�i ��`��/t %� �j'.��'�� � I
• ■�� �� w
....:/ �i.,� ': > •. .,�A� �, ��`.�._i ��� '. /��i� � i�i � r,.�:�
�N1u���II�Ii�. �i��I� ��,�1 .i��:� ���O�% �1���,�,"�� .��� J.
11�� .,�fur:.:,7 ��!jy�`r' ���1��/i ���� !`.�`XJ� �,� .� �, ♦_I M ����i\\!.
nu..��'�'=�'t�=t �l 7/��•� �,� !�r v., ►� -�i;�►� �/� � t�e�;:a s���',�::
��--_:�r,rr '-��••. . � � �f—�1��,�.� �� ,,� � ��
���� � �y ` � \�`��l�o� I���`��\__�--'-��'��' � V `� • ��A
/� �`S:t' ��y�4�;�� �-- ��� /•.��t� ,,,'� \''�i•. ��
,�.�� �atS�l.,.r�v n, �\�,r ;,,�y.�t�.<� � •
1 � Y: ��I `���� �� �..� "�\\�
I�1`ITr'� ..,�, r�,,,,,�� .,.r���'� >� ,�,% y... , �.: �'«����
,�, 'yl-��j�� .,\,��oi� i�;�.� �Z.�;��;�
■ ,ur , �� �
■ •iii���6'�I�ZI'�i � i � /
�, � � n�
�:�'-i � ���m� i r �i- � ��� y�^�_.�
������L. ��-.►IL� ��d1.�( .I..-`. �� -\`�
/�L�-�:����ii� �-��) _� ��si=1 „��:�\ �►�•,�►���►�i•�►-
� yj�rii�l��/ �i����-�..�_�i��� � ����
/._ ilI`-� . n.� +�� li�a�i � `_.
� •,���uu (�" i � `/- �
;�--.'��'r����y���-a � �. ,1�~ ,�� ��.
��.� r t-� -(_ �
� I�. I-��ii�e:^1= '��
� ��� � � I ti�1`L'-?J:°,;�:1�� �� 1t
...,.,�.,,._
ladCgii��x���:.��_� � ����\
t=:_�'`-'• _.iS� '-7"r�� _
--� .c 1 w F ":�- ��/,,�1�'Jt
:Y::(.� :-t-� � , -! .�sa��.f.t\\ �s`.
�r�= .���.s r� - ������
�� �•L'-.,LL�J k irZ::
- `.�%
- == �..
.. •� M • � �.0 �
• � � ' � � . . .�� � �I1�1
� t� ��� ��� °�
•� i � � .•
•� � �• � � � �
.�� ` :� ,
_ __. _ . _
t'
SITE N0. 10: SOTO SPORTS COMPLEX INFILTRATION BASIN SYSTEM
Probiem 10: Undersized basins
Solution 10: Decrease the tributary area
The existing infiftration basins at Soto Sports Comp(ex have a history of filling and spilling
into the overflow ballfield basins. The bleeder line outlet pipe installed in 1997 has helped
relieve the basins considerably. However, in very heavy winters the basins can still be �
expected to overtlow.
The policy proposed to improve this area is to require new development in the tributary
area to provide additional infi(tration storage on-site for the deveioped area. There is ;
approximately 10 percent of undeveloped spaced within this tributary area. Over time, this
will reduce the runoff into the Soto Sports Complex basins and relieve the flooding.
li
�
�
�
� '
�
�
�
�
�
�
C'rty.of Arroyo Grande Chapter 5 �
DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN 44 Evaluation of Specific Sites
�
�
�
� CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE - Draina e Master Plan
9
� Site No. 10: Soto Sports Complex Infiitration Basin System
Probiems:
, 1. Basin system is too smafi
for its tributary area. \
� 2. The infiltration rate
within the basins is too
s(ow due to a high water
1 table. �
a�
... . ���.
� �� , ,��� �'�,: ,
, �.:
^[5,�. .p"'y g ,>':
�� :., ^ � 7�;
n� 't a-
:5 v`-y i_"w r ...;.:..12 �.�.r.�..'`�'�,�
'�`.
1
I ' � ' �-� ;� ;;; I; ;;;. So(utions:
aam�� ����R � im iz �asa ir.��iz,s� � �vae '°° I
_� :�s wa I us�
► Z'° �� 1. Future devefopments
�°aa��n a�'omO1f � au a:s �n zu A fs„ ao• e xm �»
� ��°°� e2, zm � -� _� e° shall retain runoff
� 'a� "�� �,� � � `�' increases on-site.
� I E2B � I q
�+� �i.�C L�7
�
� 2�0 i t�i 2.T. , t58 YJS 321 ' u
w�rs i-iz �:' . �. �
� -}� �+57 • ' u•
i 2N E{B '*.'4� 262� �u��.hiFiN:�`�hn Y
Eei
I � _„ �, e�t �� z��� $ Estimated Cost:
j �iQ p? �:t?8 t2'6 1220 N
rs• '7GAalu 31� �
� u���m��18901EKI����'2ry „� �� + Q9gQ ��0 � aD Not determined
YI-N•�e1c � Ip
asH sr. � f
' POND �ND �
� �z�s �
a ~w w� �
ssav� �� ��—
__ �-,��, ;-��\ �
' POND �.\4 �
iszi �� 2 Y
1 /�ea t � _
� x•w��wtr I a a� � I ,o: I z . .�o I ^ .
11� s15 I I I
I �u Iil 1
� I I aM ,��71 ' i •� �� . .
' � �]S
0 � ac I i sv' y-
'I ��o �us 1 I ''°�
+�:� •w
I ;, .v�. � is;u .,o
.si ( I ::o
� �: �c: �
i ne ot ( ir.a
I . - ,e; �:ze -
� .at •e� ��2a. �zo I I 8
.PMW
�Yi �93! I � ��� � .
IMW ��
City of Arroyo Grande Chapter 5
DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN 45 Evaluation of Specific Sites
�
� pRROy�
° �� ATTACHMENT 8
� INCORPORATED �Z
� ° CITY OF ARROYO GRAI�DE
* JULY 10, ,s„ ,� � INITIAL STUDY ---
c4��FORN�P
1. Project Title: General Plan Amendment 02-001;
Development Code Amendment 02-002;
Planned Development Amendment 02-001; and
Vesting Tentative Tract Map 02-002
2. Lead Agency Name & Address: City of Arroyo Grande
P.O. Box 550/214 E. Branch Street
Arroyo Grande, CA 93421
3. Contact Person & Phone #: Kelly Heffernon
(805) 473-5420�
4. Project Location: North side of Farroll Avenue between Oak Park Boulevard
and Golden West Place.
Arroyo Grande, CA 93420
-----------......._..-------- -......--��----,--..._._.........__.......,
� ,—vaaecr srrE
'� �
a� ! �...__.._
� � i
Q .� :............... . :
^. ..:�\.. . , ._ �
.\
� ��,.�. �:_
_
� �� �. ..
�
' _ � _��T�
_ �
- .... .... � ' ....W
, .... -'�� � ��..... ..... i�...i..... ..... ' 11.1.1.lJ.lA.I _"
� i. i!
..........`.........�._ � ..
Y..... ........._. ...... � .
....... ._........ ...... ' '� .
5. Project Sponsor's Name & Address: Don McHaney
1566 Grand Avenue
Grover Beach, CA 93433
6. General Plan Designation: Low Medium Density (LM) with a Planned Development (PD)
overlay; 2.5 dwelling units per acre
7. Zoning: Residential Suburban (RS) with a PD overlay; 2.5 du/ac�e
1
8. Description of Project: (Desciibe the who%action invo/ved, inc/uding but not/imited to/ater phases of
the pioject, and any secondary, support, oi off-site features necessary for its imp/ementation. Attach
additiona/sheets if necessary.J
The project includes a General Plan Amendment to change the land use category of a 10.3-acre
property from Low Medium density residential (LM) to Medium High Density (MHD) residential
allowing up to 9.0 dwelling units per acre, a Planned Development Amendment to include the
property within PD 1.5 (Okui Planned Development), a Development Code Amendment to change the
zoning designation from Residential Suburban (RS) to Condominium/Townhouse (MF) with PD 1.5
overlay, and a Vesting Tentative Tract Map to subdivide the property into 73 residential lots ranging
in size from 3,000 square feet to 7,774 square feet.
9. Other agencies whose approval is required (and permits needed):
None
i
I
4
�
�
k
1
I
�
DETERMINATION.
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have
been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. X
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposal MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has
been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the
effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated". An
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be
addressed.
��/ � /G3
Signatu Date
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTEN7IALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a
"POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACT" or "POTENTIALLY IS SIGNIFICANT UNLESS MITIGATED", as indicated by the checklist on '
the following pages.
■ Land Use and Planning ❑ Biological Resources ■ Public Services !
❑ Population and Housing ❑ Energy and Mineral Resources � Utilities and Service Systems
❑ Geophysical ❑ Hazards ❑Aesthetics �
■ Water ■ Noise ■ Cultural Resources ;
■ Air Quality ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance ■Recreation '
■Transportation/Circulation '
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: ;
1. A brief exp/anation is required for al/answers except "No /mpacf"answers ihai are adequate/y supported by the information �
sou�ces a/ead agency cites in the parentheses fol%wing each quesiion. A "No Impact" question is adequately supported if the
referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project `
falls outside a fault rupture zone►. A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project specific factors as
well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific
screening analysis).
2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-
level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operations impacts.
3. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if an effect is significant or potentially significant, or is the lead agency lacks
information to make a finding of insignificance. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the
determination is made, an EIR is required.
4. "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from
"Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures
and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier
Analyses", may be cross referenced.)
5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 150631c1�311D►. Earlier analyses are discussed in Section
XVII at the end of the checklist.
6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g.,
general plans, zoning ordinances►. A Source List should be attached and other sources used or individuals should be cited in the
discussion.
3
lRotentr'a,l�•
Potentfa�y' .S/9',�1'lt�nt tBtRS 7'h�rJt
Jssues (and Supporting Information Sourcesl: " �9��'�+�t ` tlnless ' �gr,�ara�t` Na
Impsct MiHgated /mp�t /mpact
I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Wou/d the proposa/.•
a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? X
(source#Is): 1,2,3,4)
b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies
adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project?
(source #Is►: 1,6,7) X
c) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g., impacts
to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land
usesl? Isource#Is1: 9, 11) X
d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community (including a fow-income or
minority community)? (source#Is): 2,4,11) X
II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Wou/d the proposa/.•
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population
projections? (source #Is): 1,5,91 X
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or
indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area
or extension of major infrastructurel? X
(source #Isl: 9,10)
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing?
(source#Is1: 9,10,11) X
III. GEOPHYSICAL. Wou/d the proposa/�esu/t in oi expose peop/e to potentia/impacts invo/ving:
a) Seismicity: fault rupture? (source#Is1: 5,6) X
b► Seismicity: ground shaking or liquefaction?
(source#Is1: 5,6) X
c) Seismicity: seiche or tsunami? (source #Isl: 5,6) X
d) Landslides or mudslides? (source#Is): 5,6) X
e) Erosion, changes in topography or unstabls soils
conditions from excavation, grading or fill?
(source#Is): 10) X
f) Subsidence of landl (source#Isl: 5,6) X
g) Expansive soils? (source#Isl: 5,6) X
h) Unique geologic or physical features? (source#Is):
5,6,10,11) X
4
����i�
F�ater��ia�r 3igr�i�an# L�s Ttt�rr
{ssues (and Supporting Informa#ion Sources}:` �'���+�' t!� ` �►qr�nt �to '
' trn�ac�t Ml�ga�d lmp�act lm�ct
IV.WATER: Wou/d the p�oposa/iesu/t in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff? Isource#Is1: 10) X
b) Exposure to people or property to water related hazards
such as flooding? (source#Is): 8) X
c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of
surface water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity? (source#Isl: 9) X
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water
body? (source#Is): 9, 10) X
e► Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water
movements? (source#Is1: 9, 10) X
f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through
direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception
of an aquifer by cuts or excavations?
(source #Isl: 9, 10) X
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater?
(source#(sl: 9, 10) X
h) Impacts to groundwater quality? (source #Is1: 9,10) X
i) Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise
available for public water supplies? (source #Is►: 6)
X
V. AIR aUALITY: Wou/d the proposa/.•
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quafity viofation? X
(source#Is►: 7, 13)
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? (source #(sl:
10, 11) X
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause
any change in climate? (source #�s1: 9) X
d) Create objectionable odors? (source #�s►: 9,101 X
VI.TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal resu/t in:
a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? (source
#Is1: 13) X
b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment►? (source #Is►: 9, 10) X
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby sites?
(source#Is): 9, 10) X
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? (source
#Is): 3, 9, 10) X
5
P�crte��y
" Pv#e,��y ,S�pttu'tP�en't les�T%ta�
lssues (and Supporting Informat�an Sources}; ' ���� �� •��� Nv, '
` lmpact Mf1Yga;�ed '' i�pact' ,tr��t'
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? (source
#Is►: 9, 10) X
f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting altemative
transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racksl?
(source#(s): 9, 10) X
VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Wou/d the proposa/result in impacts to:
a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats
(including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, X
animals, and birds? (source #Is1: 6)
b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage treesl?
(source #Is►: 10, 11) X
c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., oak forest,
coastal habitat)? (source#Is►: 10, 11) X
d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian and vernal pool►?
(source#Is1: 9, 11)
X
e1 Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? X
(source#Is1: 11)
VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the p�oposal.•
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans?
(source#Is1: 1, 6) X
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient manner? (source#Is1: 9, 10► X
IX. HAZARDS. Would the p�oposal involve: ,
i
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous
substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation? Isource #(s►: 9) X
b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan
or emergency evacuation plan? (source #Isl: 9, 10)
X
c► The creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazard? (source#Is►: 9, 10) X
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential
health hazards? (source#Isl: 9,10,11) X
e1 Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, X
grass, or trees? (source#Is1: 10, 11)
X. NOISE. Wou/d the pioposal result in:
a1 Increases in existing noise levels? Isource#ls►: 1, 91 X
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X
Isource#Is): 9, 101
6
_ _ _ _
�ttetatt�i
Poten�r ; �fir�rnf" Eess 771an`
Issues (and Supporting Information Sc�urces): ��`��+� V� �'9+►�a►nt No
/mpa+c� 7Mfti�st�►r! fmp�rct iln�psct,
XI.PUBLIC SERVICES. Wou/d the proposal have an effect upon, or resu/t in a need for new or alte�ed
government services in any of ihe fo/%wing a�eas:
a) Fire Protection? (source #1s1: 6) X
b1 Police Protection? Isource #Is1: 6► X
c1 Schools? Isource#Is1: 6) X
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads, sewer
system? X
(source#(s): 6)
e) Other governmental services? (source#Is1: 6) X
XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposa/resu/t in a need for new systems, or
substantial a/te�ations to the fol%wing utilities:
a) Power or natural gas? (source#Is►: 9, 10) X
b) Communications systems? (source #(s►: 9, 10) X
c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution
facilities? (source#Is►: 6) X
d) Storm water drainage? (source#Is1: 6) X
e) Solid waste disposal? (source#�sl: 6) X
XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposaL• ;
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? '
i
(source #Isl: 1, 10, 11) X !
�
b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect?
(source #(sl: 9, 10, 11) X
c) Create light or glare7 (source#(s): 9,10) X
XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the p�oposaL•
a) Disturb paleontological resources? (source#�s1: 6, 11) X
b) Disturb archaeological resources (source#Is►: 6, 11) X
c) Affect historical resources? (source#Is1: 6, 11) X
d) Potentially cause a physical change that would affect
unique ethnic cultural values? (source#�s►: 11) X
e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area? (source#�sl: 10, 11) X
XV. RECREATION. Would the proposa/.•
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks
or other recreational facilities? (source#Is): 1, 3) X
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities?
7
Pate�tis//y
Pu#en�y 5ig�fff�ant t�s T�
Issues (and Supportin� Information Sources); ���'+�+� t1n/sss �e�r�t �va
lmFact MPdg�afed lmp�s�t /mpact
(source #Is1: 1, 5) X
XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the potential to 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 levefs,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history or X
prehistory?
b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-
term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental
goals? X
c) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable7 ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the effects of probable future :
projects.) X '
d) Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, '
either directly or indirectly? X
i
XVII. EARLIER ANALYSES.
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have i
been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 150631c113►ID►. In this case, a discussion should `
identify the following on attached sheets: $
a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and
adequately analyzed by earlier documents. `
c) Mitlgation Measures. For effects that are "potentially significant" or "potentially significant unless mitigated",
describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to
which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
SOURCE LIST:
1. City of Arroyo Grande General Plan (October 2001)
2. City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Land Use Map (October 2001)
3. City of Arroyo Grande Development Code
4. City of Arroyo Grande Zoning Map
5. City of Arroyo Grande Existing Setting and Community Issues Report
6. City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Program EIR (October 2001)
7. Air Pollution Control District Clean Air Plan �
8. FEMA - Flood Insurance Rate Map
9. Project Description
10. Project Plans
11. Site Inspection
12. Ordinance 521 C. S.
13. San Diego Council of Governments —Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates
8
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The project site is 10.3 acres in size and is located on the north side of Farroll Avenue east of Dixson Street. The site
is fairly level sloping slightly from the northeast to the southwest and has historically been used for row crop
agriculture. The property is bordered on the north by Soto Sports Complex, on the west by single-family residences,
on the south by Farroll Avenue and on the east by multi-family development.
The project evaluated by this initial study consists of a General Plan Amendment, Development Code Amendment,
Planned Development Amendment, and Vesting Tentative Tract Map to divide the 10.3-acre site into 73 single-family
residential fots. The project would be constructed in two phases. Phase I includes construction of 13 custom homes
on the western portion of the property with access provided via Dixson Street. Phase II includes construction of 60
residential units, with access provided by a loop road having two access points on Farroll Road. The onsite sewage
collection and water distribution system will be connected to existing City facilities in Farroll Avenue and Dixson
Street. Storm water flows will be conveyed by concrete curb and gutters to a storm drainage system that will tie into
an existing 42-inch storm drain that traverses the site.
EXPLANATIONS TO INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST:
I. LAND USE AND PLANNING
The applicant is proposing to increase the allowable density on this site from 2.5 dwelling units per acre to
9.0 dwelling units per acre (the overall density is about 7 dwetling units per acre). The proposed increase is
consistent with existing residential densities of adjacent properties located east and west of the project site.
The density increase equates to roughly forty-eight (48) additional units above what the City' s General Plan
has allocated for that property. Per the Program Environmental Impact Report for the 2001 General Plan
Update, City supplied resources and services can accommodate the increase in population. However, to help
offset the need for affordable housing as mandated by the State Department of Housing and Urban
Development through the Housing Element Update process, the applicant shall either set aside a percentage
of the units for moderate to low income families, donate land for construction of affordable housing units, or �
pay an in-lieu fee.
Analysis of Significance: Potentially significant unless mitigated
Mitigation Measure:
1. The appticant shall allocate a minimum of 25% of the increase, or twelve (12) units, for moderate-
income households through a thirty-year deed restriction.
Monitoring: The applicant shall build the affordable units and record the
deed restrictions.
Responsible Department: Building and Community Development Departments
Timeframe: Prior to issuing a certificate of occupancy
II. POPULATION & HOUSING
Occupancy of the project upon completion would increase the population of the area above current levels.
However, the addition of 48 units above what the current land use allows does not impact regional population
projections or the City build out projection of 20,000 residents, nor require major displacement of existing
housing. Therefore, the impact is considered less than significant and no mitigation is required.
Analysis of Significance: Less than significant impact
III. GEOPHYSICAL
Based on the General Plan and review of the Alquist-Priolo Zone Fault maps, the proposed project is not
located on a known earthquake fault subject to rupture. The proposed project will be subject to the effects of
periodic seismic events in the region, including ground shaking. However, exposure of people to these events
9
can generally be mitigated to an acceptable level of risk by following Uniform Building Code development
standards.
Analysis of Significance: Less than significant impact
IV. WATER/DRAINAGE
Development of the currently vacant site will dramatically increase impervious surfaces, which in turn will
change absorption rates and increase the amount of run-off. The site would drain onto Farroll Avenue and
existing drainage facilities would accommodate the increased flows with upgrades to existing drainage
facilities. Detailed drainage calculatians would be reviewed as part of the plan check process.
Analysis of Significance: Potentially significant unless mitigated
Mitigation Measure:
2. As part of the tract improvements plan check, the applicant shall provide detailed drainage
calculations indicating that increased run-off can be accommodated by existing facilities
and/or provide on-site retention basins, to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works.
Monitoring: Review of tract improvement and grading plans
Responsible Department: Public Works Department
Timeframe: Prior to acceptance of tract improvements for construction
The proposed project will not significantly change the quantity of ground water through direct additions or
withdrawals, since the project description does not include improvements that would change ground water
through these methods. The rate of flow or quality of groundwater is also not anticipated to change as a
result of this project. Impacts to groundwater quality or rate of flow will not significantly change due to this
project.
Analysis of Significance: Less than significant impact
Development of this project will require water for both domestic use and landscape irrigation. Projected water
demand is approximately 36.5 acre-feet of water per year (73 units x 0.5 acre-feetl. The water consumption
by this project would further reduce the amount of available water. This impact could be mitigated through ;'
conservation and the development and implementation of an individual water neutralization program.
Analysis of Significance: Potentially significant unless mitigated.
Mitigation Measures:
3. All new construction shall utilize fixtures and designs which minimize water usage. Such
fixtures shall include, but are not limited to, low flow shower heads, water saving toilets,
instant water heaters or hot water recirculating systems, and drip irrigation with drought
tolerant landscaping. Water conserving designs and fixtures shall be installed prior to finat
occupancy for each residence.
Monitoring: Field inspection of each residence
Responsible Department: Building and Fire Department
Timeframe: Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy
4. All tract landscaping shall be consistent with water conservation practices including the use of
drip irrigation, mulch, gravel, bark, and native plantings. To the greatest extent possible, lawn
areas and areas requiring spray irrigation shall be minimized.
Monitoring: Review of landscaping plans
Responsible Department: Parks and Recreation Department
Timeframe: Prior to construction of tract improvements
10
5. The applicant shall complete measures to neutralize the estimated increase in water demand
created by the project by either:
Implement an individual water program that utilizes fixtures and
designs that minimize water usage. The calculations shall be
submitted to the Director of Public Works for review and approval.
The proposed individual water program shall be submitted to the City
for approval prior to implementation; or,
Pay an in lieu fee.
Monitoring: Review of individual water program or payment of the in lieu
fee
Responsible Department: Public Works Department
Timeframe: Prior to issuance of building permit
V. AIR QUAUTY
The proposed project would generate approximately 730 average daily automobile trips. Emissions from the
trips generated would produce approximately 23 Ibs. of emissions per day. Based on the San Luis Obispo
County Air Pollution Control District (SLO APCD) emissions thresholds, the proposed project would not have a
significant adverse impact on air quality, but does require mitigation.
In addition to the vehicle trips generated by the project, construction activities would generate dust, which
could cause potentially significant environmental impacts. In San Luis Obispo County, ozone and PM10 are
the pollutants of primary concern, since state health-based standards for those are exceeded in portions of the
county in most years. For this reason, San Luis Obispo County is considered to be in non-attainment of the state
standards for both ozone and PM10. The major sources of PM10 include mineral quarries, grading, demolition,
agricultural tilling, road dust and vehicle exhaust.
Grading and construction of the project would occur over a period of months. Short-term impacts related to dust
generation from site preparation and grading could result in dust generation that could affect adjacent properties.
Conditions placed on the project would reduce short-term dust generation during construction of the project to less
than significant levels.
Dust generated by the development activities shall be kept to a minimum with a goal of retaining dust on the site.
The dust control measures listed below shall be followed during construction of the project, and shall be shown on
grading and bui�ding plans.
i
Analysis of Significance: Potentially significant unless mitigated.
Mitigation Measures:
6. During construction, water trucks or sprinkler systems shalt be used to keep all areas of vehicle
movement damp enough to prevent dust from leaving the site. At a minimum, this would include
wetting down such areas in the later morning and after work is completed for the day and whenever
wind exceeds 15 miles per hour.
7. Soil stockpiled for more than iwo days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to
prevent dust generation.
8. All vehicles hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or should maintain at
least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance beiween top of load and top of trailer) in
accordance with CVC Section 23114.
9. Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads on to streets, or wash off trucks
and equipment leaving the site.
10. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried on to adjacent paved roads.
Water sweepers with reclaimed water should be used where feasible.
11
Monitoring: Review of grading and building plans and site inspections
Responsible Department: The Public Works and Building and Fire Departments shall inspect
plans, and the Community Development Department shali spot
check in the field
Timeframe: Prior to issuance of grading permit
VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION
The project plans show Dixson Street as providing access for Phase I of the project (13 residential lots) along
the western project boundary, and a circular internal roadway for the Phase II residential units. Access points
for this internal roadway would be located on Farrall Avenue directly north of Bakeman Lane and East
Bakemen Lane.
According to the Traffic and Circulation Study prepared by Associated Transportation Engineers dated July
23, 2003 (Attachment A) for this project, the development is estimated to generate 730 new daily trips, with
58 trips during the AM peak hour and 73 trips during the PM peak hour. The analysis concludes that Dixson
Street and Farroll Avenue can adequately accommodate the project-added traffic increase. All intersections
will operate with minimal detay and accommodate traffic entering and exiting the project site. The study also
concludes, however, that the cumulative intersection levels of service (LOS) would degrade the operation of
the stop-sign controlled intersection at Farroll Avenue and Halcyon Road to LOS D during the AM peak hour
period and recommends that the City monitor the intersection and conduct full Caltrans signal warrants in the
future to determine if and when a traffic signal is needed.
Analysis of Significance: Less than significant impact
Mitigation Measure:
The project traffic would contribute to the cumulative negative impact on the backbone circulation system.
These long-range traffic impacts can be mitigated by the City' s Standard Condition requiring payment of the
City' s Traffic Impact and Signalization Fees as adopted by the City Council.
Analysis of Significance: Potentially significant unless mitigated
Mitigation Measure: ,
11. The applicant shall pay the City' s Traffic Signalization and Transportation Facilities Impact fees
prior to issuance of building permit.
Monitoring: The applicant shall pay the fees
Responsible Dept./Agency: Building & Fire Department
Timeframe: Prior to issuance of building permit
X. NOISE
The proposed project will develop a site that is currently vacant and adjacent to residential development to
the east, west and south. Some noise will be generated from additional vehicles in the area. However, noise
from residential traffic (stops and starts) is generally within acceptable decibel ranges. Noise generated as a
result of residential uses will therefore be less than significant. Severe short-term noise impacts may be
created during the construction phase of this project. Noise resulting�from construction activities will be
short-term, and is subject to the City's Noise Ordinance.
Analysis of Significance: Potentially significant unless mitigated.
Mitigation Measures:
12. All construction equipment shall be provided with well-maintained, functional mufflers to limit
noise.
13. All construction activities shall be limited to the hours of 8:00 AM to 7:00 PM Monday
through Saturday. No construction shall occur on Sunday.
12
14. To the greatest extent possible, grading and/or excavation operations at portions of the site
bordering developed areas should occur during the middle of the day to minimize the potential
for disturbance of neighboring noise sensitive uses.
Monitoring: Notes shall be placed on the construction plans referencing the
above measures.
Responsible Department: Public Works Department
Timeframe: During construction
XI. PUBLIC SERVICES
Development of the site with seventy-three (73) residences would increase demand for fire and police
protection services, but not beyond levels anticipated by the General Plan for City buildout. Per the Master
Sewer Plan, approved November 13, 2001, the project will add demand to portions of the City' s sewer
system that are currently over capacity. According the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District, the
subdivision is expected to contribute approximately 18,250 gallons of raw sewage per day to the Sanitation
District' s treatment plant through an existing 18-inch trunk line located south of Farroll Avenue and parallel to
Bakeman Place. This line is reaching carrying capacity and therefore the project is required to mitigate the
impacts on the trunk sewer line.
Analysis of Significance: Potentially significant unless mitigated
Mitigation Measure:
15. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant/developer shall:
a. Mitigate the impacts on the trunk sewer line by contributing to the installation of a
new replacement trunk line or providing a relief line.
b. Submit public improvement plans that are prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer in
accordance with San Luis Obispo County Improvement Standards and Specifications.
c. Deposit or post a bond (or other means satisfactory to the District), for the sewer
facilities serving the property. '
d. Enter into an agreement with the District for plan checking and inspection services. �
Monitoring: The applicant submit improvement plans and post bonds to
the agreement of the Sanitation District.
Responsible Dept./Agency: Public Works Dept./So. San Luis Obispo County Sanitation
District '
Timeframe: Prior to issuance of Building Permit
The project is expected to add approximately fifty-one (51) school-aged children to the Lucia Mar Unified
School District based on a student yield factor of 0.7, which will impact the capacity of local schools. As
allowed by State Law, the Lucia Mar Unified School District has a development fee established by the school
district for new residential and commercial construction to finance any new classrooms. The designated fee
is 52.14 per square foot for residential development and must be paid to mitigate impacts on schools.
Analysis of Significance: Potentially significant unless mitigated
Mitigation Measure:
16. Prior to issuance of building permits for each residence, the applicant/developer shall pay the
mandated school impact fee.
Monitoring: The applicant shall pay applicable school fees.
Responsible Dept./Agency: Building Department/Lucia Mar School District
Timeframe: Prior to issuance of Building Permits for each residence
XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
The proposed project will not create a significant demand for new or altered power, gas, communication
systems, water treatment capacity or solid waste disposal. The project can tie into the existing infrastructure
13
for these systems to serve the site. The project is within.the expected demand for these systems based on
the growth rate established in the General Plan.
Analysis of Significance: Less than significant impact
XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES
The proposed project is not located in an area that has been identified as a known site for cultural resources.
The project site has historically been used for agriculture and therefore it is highly unlikely that any cultural
resources are present on the site. However, as a precaution, if cultural resources are encountered during the
construction process, development activities at the site should cease until a qualified archaeologist has been
employed to view and assess the discovery and prepare a mitigation plan.
Analysis of Significance: Less than significant impact
Mitigation Measure:
17. The following note shall be placed on the grading and improvement plans for the Tract:
"In the event that during grading, construction or development of the project, and
archeological resources are uncovered, all work shall be halted until the City has reviewed the
resources for their significance. If human remains (burials) are encountered, the County
Coroner (781-4513) shall be contacted immediately. The applicant may be required to provide
archaeological studies and/or mitigation measures."
Monitoring: Construction plans shall be reviewed prior to issuance of a
grading permit to ensure the note is in place.
Responsible Department: Public Works Department
Timeframe: Prior to issuance of grading permit
XV. RECREATION
The proposed project would increase demand for City park and recreational facilities. In this case, the Parks E
and Recreation Director has indicated that this impact would be mitigated by the City' s Standard Condition ;
requiring payment of the park development fee.
Analysis of Significance: Potentially significant unless mitigated
Mitigation Measure:
18. Prior to issuance of building permit, the applicant shall pay all applicable park development '
fees to the City.
Monitoring: The applicant shall pay the park development fees to the City.
Responsible Department: Parks and Recreation Departmen#
Timeframe: Prior to issuance of building permit
S:\COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT\PROJECTS\TTM\Farroll Estates\Initial Study 1.doc
14
. __
ATTACHMENT A
FARROLL ESTATES PROJECT
C1TY OF ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA
UPDATFD TR,4FFICAND CJRCULATION STUDY
_ �t1_ xi�:
�-:�,r ��_�� '_ '�'a`�r� ',�;i }�;.:.�
� � ___+ z`_-- ° ,�''��-- ',�_��—_��v
.a��-
� � =��L-••�� _ �'�-' ����-�L'__ _--_ .
-`-.,/ � ��.� �.a.! s �.. �i �! '
'�{�_o,^�i- _ - `' • -`
��t — _ + ! �� �..
�j ��� 13 �� � � �'
' �. �'. ��'� � "'�".•� � �: �
���_�— _�1- ; �-�w -�"M: -'�
� � . t�y,�� _�;,�, ` ` `_
�^ �i i�• � ��r � 6'��y 1 f� _ •� �
i`����� ="=`3T-' j ' �' _-�..'�
_- !� -° — � —�
� � �-°� i � ` :l �;� ;
. } ��'_ � - -� \ �� �� i
�'� _ :� � � i.;. "� f
f"� ;
�`s � _�+ ^.± �''�'� � � - !
- - �
��'►�`�`l �� _.,r�',�-.: -�� __�
�'
Jufy 23, 20�03 ATE Project�2130.0�
Pre�ared ror.
S &5 Homes
1350 E. Grand Avenue
- Arroyo Grande, CA 93-�20
.
= ASSOCIAT�D TRANSPORTATION ENGiNFfRS
_
= — �oo�.t�ope.���.s�;�e.s,Santa 3aroara.C��3t 10-7b85• ,aos,sa;-�.sis.F,,�►x,so�sa��so9
a ' ASSOCIATED TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS
.= 100 N. Hope Avenue,Suite 4,Santa Barbara, CA 93110 • (805� 687-4418 • FAX[805J 682-8509
Maynard Keith Franklin,P.E.
Richard L.Pool, P.E.
Scott A.Schell,AICP
July 23, 2003
)ohn Mack
S & S Homes
1350 E. Grand Avenue
Arroyo G rande, CA 93420
UPDATED TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION STUDY FOR THE
FARROLL ESTATES PROJECT, ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA
Associated Transportation Engineers(ATE) is pleased to submitthe following updated traffic and j
circulation study forthe Farroll Estates Project, located in the City of Arroyo Grande. The study
has been updated to address the change in the project description and to address City staff
comments on the project trip distribution.
We appreciate the opportunity to assist you with the project.
Associated Transportation Engineers
�" /�- �^.��
Scott A. Schell, AICP
Principal Transportation Planner
Engineering . Planning . Parking . 5ignal Systems . Impact Reports . Bikeways . Transit
TABLE O� CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
PROJECT DESCRIPTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
STUDY-AREA FACILITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
EXISTING CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Street Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Traffic Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE IMPACT THRESHOLDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
PROJECT-GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
PROJECT-SPECIFIC IMPACTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Intersection Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
SITEACCESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
CUM ULATIVE ANALYStS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Cumulative Intersection Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 '
Cumulative + Project Intersection Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
STUDY PARTICIPANTS AND REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
TECHNICAL APPENDIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
TAB LES
Table 1 Study-Area Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Table 2 Level of Service Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Table 3 Existing Intersection Levels of Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Table 4 Signalized Intersection Guidelines of Significance for Traffic Impact Studies 8
Table 5 Project Trip Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Table 6 Project Trip Distribution Percentages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Table 7 Existing + Project Intersection Levels of Service-A.M. Peak Hour . . . . . 16
Table 8 Existing + Project Intersection Levels of Service- P.M. Peak Hour . . . . . 16
Table 9 Approved & Pending Projects Trip Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Table 10 Cumulative Intersection Levels of Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Table 11 Cumulative + Project Intersection Levels of Service- A.M. Peak Hour . . 25
Table 12 Cumulative + Project Intersection Levels of Service- P.M. Peak Hour . . 25
FIGURES
Figure 1 Existing Street Network/Project Site Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Figure 2 Project Site Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Figure 3 Existing A.M. Peak Hour Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Figure 4 Existing Average Daily and P.M. Peak Hour Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Figure 5 Project Trip Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Figure 6 Project-Added A.M. Peak Hour Vo(umes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Figure 7 Project-Added Average Daily and P.M. Peak Hour Volumes . . . . . . . . . . 13 �
Figure 8 Existing + Project A.M. Peak Hour Votumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Figure 9 Existing + Project Average Daily and P.M. Peak Hour Volumes . . . . . . . 15
Figure 10 Cumulative Project Locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Figure 11 Cumulative A.M. Peak Hour Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Figure 12 Cumulative Average Daily and P.M. Peak Hour Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Figure 13 Cumulative + Project A.M. Peak Hour Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Figure 14 Cumulative + Project Average Daily and P.M. Peak Hour Volumes . . . . 24
INTRODUCTION
The following study contains an analysis of the potential traffic impacts associated with the
Farroll Estates Project,proposed in the City of Arroyo Grande. The study provides information
relativeto Existing,Existing + Project,Cumulative and Cumulative + Projecttraffic conditions
in the vicinity of the project site.
PROJfCT DESCRIPTION
The project site is located on Farroll Road east of Dixson Street, as shown in Figure 1. The
project is proposing to construct 73 residential units. The project will be built in two phases.
Phase 1 would include construction of 13 residential dwelling units along the project's west
boundary.. Access to the Phase I residential units would be provided via Dixson Street. Phase 2
would,inciude construction of 60 residentia) dwelfing units. Access to the Phase 2 dwelling
units would be provided via two access points on Farroll Road, located directly north of
Bakeman Lane and East Bakeman Lane.
STUDY-AREA FACILITIES
The study-area facilities included in this traffic impact analysis are listed in Table 1. The study
area was determined based on input provided by City staff.
Table 1
Study-Area Faciiities
� ;� �;: �� :� � ��� �
�.�����., �����
Farroil Road Grand Avenue/Oak Park Boulevard
Elm Street Farrol) Road/Elm Street
Farroll Road/Halcyon Road
Fair Oaks AvenueJHalcyon Road
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Street Network
The project site is served by Farroll Road, Oak Park Boulevard, Elm Street, Fair Oaks Avenue
Halcyon Road, Grand Avenue and Dixson Street as illustrated in Figure 1. The following text
provides a brief discussion of the major components of the study-area street network.
Farroll Estates Project Associated Transporkation Engineers
Updated Traffic and Circulation Study 1 )uly 23, 2003
-i T
N �'
�i O
n =
Q
�
' n�
�•N
C �
y–O
°_ � GRAND AVENUE
N
�
a
K
PROJECT S4TE
i __ FAIR OAKS AVENUE
I DIXSON 5T / 1�
I � � �
v I I
p�,`' �. I I -
�'`��� z I I I
�. I I
N
� { I
FARROLL AVENUE
O ao m
� Z � � �
7�C m Z rt' D r' �
Q Z tn -�G
� m �
C � � �
D O
� D
N 0 � �
N LEGEND
�
�• W E � Signalized
�- Q Unsignalized
�
N S _ _ Proposed �
$ Street
a NOT TO SCAIE
c`7 �
N m � ASSOCIATED FIGURE � �
N�• — TRANSPORTATION EX{STING STREET NETWORK/PRO)ECT SITE LOCATtON �
o`��, � E NGINEERS i
�
. ,
. �
� ' �
• �
's�� � � ` r ,` �
•� � �Si�w �ss i � . '�
_ �._ .r� ,
�' +��� �_� ��N " . .
��I/ �—�. �� ;;:,
, � �. ►►1 , �
.�/! /� ���; �1��� �' ,;,,��`
� � �����- !�/�
, ��_� 1 �.
;� ..�rr� . �►� 1��-:,
.� �n�� -� '� �����
, _ � �� 1i
: _ _ ;� ��..�-. ..
�d�! ��:�:�i . - -?'• ��±����� .��..*�..
. ������ ilt!r..
;, � ��4
�:�tii �=� ► :.�ii 1����11 �►" '
, .,� � --,�--i� I■ ��1 i�—�—r_
��■ _ ���� ,��� ��
��� u�f:� - , �■ �
� ! .,- �l�� ( II�4--:
�,�- �II . Ii�:r-_ � -,. Ili '
'll��hll � ., ��`�I� ..-�`�'��
.� �,. ��(� �11� �'�- 1� ,
�-�n ii�.. .�i� ���,,.�_ ,;�
��� ., .s ��;
[■� �.■ ��r. -
� - . �� II �II ������ .,;
, ; ����ii ii��� ���ii ��—�--�,-- .. .
w. ����� III!r�� �'"'-?III ���„� =
.� ��� �.��� ����-r �� � �,,,;.
- ��� ll��� . �II Ili�'�.�1� �
�:�r,r �i �� ..� � . .�., ;::,:
, -�,, - , ��o! l:�� u�°�"' ' ��I� �, ;;
� i�1s :� :���ii �����-�-(' ;�� .�"'
� - r
r�r—-- �°n ��V��l� , .
� .fr� ��� i�ll -
�, � �� �' � ��
� . � � _ . I _ � , :�i
/ ,� � �
� ,� � � 'ii �C- ����; � � _ ,,?;
`�' �'`� +��°'����,,`� � ��, ;�i
�� +��,���r'�"I'�-�, t1�Im ' I �`'
� � � ��� ~ �. ��� � �;� �,
� ��; � r � i /
, „` ,
, L , , , �;�� ;!�J,� .
-�; �, �, � � � , :�, ,►• �-- J � . .
�----- J!� 1" `����� �
_�_
�- _ . . ���---^- -, — ��T�
=-r -�. � �`L
�' �
� .i` 1���" � --••w�� �
-f __�,\` ♦ i
� , /'�'/ �/�/��\ � /i %%�/ri� ', .. ,/ ��
j �� j ��� ����� i i/���� j i ,' .; i /�?;/ � . �_�
ff
� � /U ,/ r�,i" % /� ii„ i:l
N
. . �
: �_ . . �
� -
-
- -
, . , .
. . , ., .. .
Farroil Road, located along the project's south frontage, is a 2-lane east-west col lector street that
extends westward from Halcyon Road to 4th Street in the City of Grover Beach. The project is
proposi ng to provide access to the site on Farrol I Road via the northerfy extension of Bakeman
Lane. Farroll Road is designated as a Priority One bike route in the City's Circulation Element.'
Oak Park Bouievard, located westofthe projectsite, is a4-lane north-south minorarterial that
extends southward from James Way(located north of U.S. Highway 101)and through the city.
South of Arroyo G rande,Oak Park Bou(evard becomes 22"d Street through the City of Oceano.
Efm Street, located east of the project site, is a 4-lane north-south minor arterial that extends
northward from The Pike in Oceano to its terminus north of Brighton Avenue in Arroyo Grande.
The Elm Street intersection at Farroll Road is controlled by all-way stop signs. Elm Street is
designated as a Priority One bike route in the City's Circufation Element.
Halcyon Road, located east of the project site, is a 4-lane north-south minorarterial that extends
south from U.S. Highway 101 past Grand Avenue into the unincorporated areas south of
Arroyo Grande where it intersects with State Route 1. Four fanes are provided on Haicyon
Road between Grand Avenue and the southerly portion of Arroyo Grande. The Halcyon Road
intersection at FairOaks Avenue is controlled by traffic signals. The Halcyon Road intersection
at Farroll Road is controlled by a twaway stop sign.
Grand Avenue, located north of the project site, is a 4-lane major arterial roadway that extends
along the commercial core of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach. Grand Avenue extends from I
U.S. Highway 101 on the east in the City of Arroyo Grande to State Route 1 on the west in ''
Grover Beach. The Grand Avenue intersection at Oak Park Boulevard is controlled by traffic
signals.
Dixson Street is a 2-lane residential street located east of Oak Park Boulevard. Dixson Street
extends eastward from Noel Street and Oak Park Boulevard and eventually curves southward.
Traffic Operations
Existing average daily traffic(ADT)volumes and peak hour intersection volumes forthe study-
area street network were obtained from counts completed by ATE in November 2002 and
July 2003. The count data is contained in the Technical Appendix. Figures 3 and 4 show the
Existing ADT, A.M., and P.M. peak hour traffic volumes for the study-area roadways and
intersections.
,
Arroyo Grande Circulation Element, City of Arroyo Grande, July 1988.
Farroll Estates Project Associated Transportation Engineers
Updated Traffic and Circulation Study 4 )uly 23, 2003
M
� �W W
w Q 0. �
v
W j t� �
J
} LL
��� ��87 `^0
�`+�- l-538 �v o o •-583
..J j I-► �-18 �I j L. j-36
ios--t '-� t r' z-� � f r HALCYON ROAD
300-► �r o rn 335-� �o�o
45� �"N'r 104-i � `�
w W
� �
Z Z
> j
Q Q
�
Y �
� �
� �
Q �
� v>
. w
�
J
u, L�g �j
� M�N �--'�72 � �
� l �. �-3� o
20-� '1 t f ELM STREET =
ioi-- ��� �
95� °°^"�' Y i
W I
�
<
Q
Z
�
V�
X
w
W � � E. BAKEMAN
Z i LANE
W
Q BAKEMAN
p I LANE
Z
¢
OG w ��—„ DIXSON ST.
U r_ z
�, o
U a
w
�
� OAK PARK BOULEVARD
Z
.'(s o
�
'� o ~ ,�
o°O�,o, L57 < � „�w,
�"�v +-304 u � z
� j �. r3s ° � Z
Q f- W
az--� � t r W <
i Zs--- N°� " I
126-� .-N Z cn o
�
0
3 Z
Farroll Estates Project- Associated Transportation Engineers
Traffic and Circulation Study 5 July 23,1003
�d
d ,
�o
n c
°'�' woWOCO t144
�?m w rn o +-443
c � .� j �.► �178
�o.
_� 2�z-� � t r' GRAND AVENUE
v, 644� Noo�o
c �
� � N
O
O
PROJECT SITE
Nwv t-103
w^'�° �--199
.-I � L. j--191
^ � FAIR OAKS AVENUE 4s-� -� i r
pIXSQN 5T. � V 137--► rv w-.
� 25-� �"'��°o
o � O
X �
H
Z I
��y� n� �
28 -�� L
� ��� �121 oo�rv .._.j
� 5 600 -� � �- �22 4 000 -� � �- �-o
O � m �49� N t r FARROLL AVENUE ��-} '1 t f�'
0-. r,,t+o
� wvw 39� ti,�
� Z � � �
� r" Z ^' � r D
W Z 3 �'' n
O N -� -<
c m 0 O
D � O
A D
N � U LEGEND
� ADT
�� W E
a
�. �
P.M.
� �PEAK
,� S 'r
� �
S'i NOT TO SULE i
c`O '.
'�' Assoanre� FIGURE 4 j
W°� � TRANSPORTATION EXIS7ING AVERAGE DAILY AND P.M. PEAK HOUR VOLUMES �
Nt=p
�� E NGINEERS #
�
�
In evaluating roadway and intersection operating conditions, "Level of Service" (LOS)
A through F are applied, with LOS A indicating very good operating conditions and LOS F
indicating poor conditions. More complete definitions are presented in Table 2. The City of
Arroyo Grande has set LOS C as the minimum perfarmance standard.
Table 2
Level of Service Definitions
� �� � ,.�.., .
� '��z`N' a`.. �'�� r ..,-.. �. z .��;. .•: .,. .- , �.�.�..�.. .�.�_ .k tia +�""•s �wa�, ,-•s �,�c
� ��
.,
,
��. .__„�::;�. : _.:«,�,.. , .� �#��.. � . . .,. � ,c, .�. .:_�. �...: ,: ..a.. ,.. .,�,�,.. k"§�.e;��a r��
����
A < 10.0 < 10.0 Conditions of free unobstructed ffow.
B 10.1-15.0 10.1-20.0 Conditions of stable flow and very little delay.
C 15.1-25.0 20.1-35.0 Conditions of stable flow with delays that are low to
moderate.
p 25.1-35.0 35.1-55.0 Conditions approaching unstable fiow and delays are
moderate to heavy.
35.0-50.0 55.1-80.0 Conditions of unstable flow with significant delays.
E Congestion exists for extended duration throughout
the peak period.
� > 50.0 > 80.0 Conditions of farced flow, travel speeds are iow and
volumes are well above capacity.
Source: 2000 Highway Capacity ManuaL
Since traffic flows on roadway systems are most constrained at the intersections, traffic flow
analyses focus on the operating conditions of critical intersections during peak travel periods.
Existing levels of service for the study-area intersections are shown in Table 3. The {evels of
service were calculated using the operations methodofogy outfined in the Highway Capacity
Manual (HCM)Z. LOS worksheets are contained in the Technical Appendix.
2 Hi�hway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Special Report 209, National
Research Council, Forth Edition, Updated 2000.
Farrol{ Estates Project Associated Transportation Engineers
Updated Traffic and Circulation Study 7 July 23, 2003
Tabie 3
Existing Intersection Levels of Service
. �E '�e: 4 e%i: t ��,, ,�„ y� .�} `"e,�y �':.�.a4 € c §a�'W.k3 � .� 9w! �ta?' .m"" .,�h s �. a � ', S
� "��, ��"�� '�„"a`�^����'g �Y�.,. r�c���„�.Y. ��?����' ..• � ��� S� w�`�� t�� �'��`�i �.t„�'`s '�:. ,'"=tE
y����� �' �r� �e.�„s '�,�s�. -�. s � °_ r , �
� �� . � �- M 3 � �� �.
�..nr��w.������,,�,�.:.�'`�`�"^;�...�"s:'�,.���.��,�a. ..w „+ �`s� �>:+e � ss�.� ���
;
��
. .-,. ,.. . . ...._ ' � . " �.... _ . .� .: �. .k.. ,...... ... ....�W .»,,..�, _��
Grand Avenue/Oak Park Boulevard Signal 16.4 sec./LOS B 27.4 sec./LOS C
Fair 0aks Avenue/Halcyon Road Signal 7.1 Sec./LOS A 6.7 Sec./LOS A
Farroll Road/Elm Street All-Way Stop 11.9 Sec./LOS B 12.5 Sec./LOS B
Farroil RoadiHafc on Road 2-Wa Sto 18.5 Sec./LOS C 16.5 Sec.ILOS C
Table 3 indicates that all of the study-area intersections currently operate at LOS C or better
during the A.M. and P.M. peak hour periods. '
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE IMPACT THRESHOLDS
The following text reviews the City of Arroyo Grande's traffic impact thresholds3,which were
used to determine the significance of the traffic generated by the project.
A project has a significant traffic impact when:
1. Theadditionofprojecttraffictoasignalizedintersectionexceedsthethresholdsshown
in Table 4:
Table 4
Signalized Intersection Guidelines of Significance for Traffic Impact Studies
��.ri���� �� � ���� �� � ��;�:: y�,. ����
�
�.�
�
�:
�
>
. . ,�
�
. , ,
� �. ,
� � F
� �
� F ;
y r
�„„...� 4.. . ..�.�.�+-.a r,.,.�w* .., _ �. � .
. , r . ... �u..�:.� . , •.' ._. nt_ ,t _... .,.:.. _ . �,,.. . .��... . �� ..,:.. � . .��� ;�..
LOS C > 45 150-540 90-180
LOS D > 15 50-180 30-60
LOS E > 10 30-120 20-40
LOS F > 5 15-60 10-20
3 Traffic 1m�act Study Pol icx,City of Arroyo G rande Publ ic Works Department,Adopted
February 2000, Revised March 2002.
Farroll Estates Project Associated Transportation Engineers
Updated Traffic and Circulation Study 8 July 23, 2003
2. The project's access to a rnajor street requires an access that would create an unsafe
situation or new traffic signal, and/or major revisions to an existing signal.
3. The project adds traffic to a street with design features (e.g., narrow width, roadside
ditches,sharp curves,poor sight distance,and inadequate pavement structure)that may
cause potential safety problems with the addition of project traffic.
4. Theaddition of project-plus-cumulativetraffictoasignalized intersection increases the
delay by 2 or more levels of service if the intersection is currently operating at
LOS A or B, or contributes traffic to an intersection operating below LOS C and meets
thresholds defined in the above table.
The addition of project,or project plus cumulativetrafficto an unsignalized intersection
increases the level of service to an unacceptable level(less than LOS C). Level of Service
shall be determined by the Highway Capacity Manual.
If the above thresholds are exceeded, the developer will be required to construct
improvements or implement other methods to reduce the level of impact to
insignificance except where mitigation measures have already been identified in the
City's ClPand funded as partofthe City's Traffic Mitigation Fee Program. Thethresholds
of significance identified above assume full contribution to the Traffic Mitigation
Fee Fund.
PROJECT-GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Table 5 shows the trip generation estimates developed forthe proposed project. Trip generation
calculations are based on the Single-Family Detached Housing rates presented in the San Diego
Association of Governments (SANDAG)Traffic Generators Manual4, as required in the City's
traffic assessment guidelines.
Table 5
Project Trip Generation
# �
�
�,�?�����R �� m,e�3���,�� .� � , �_' �=� � �c
; � >_..� _,.�,.
�� � ,� ':F �
,� � , . .
,� �
�
,
���a. ��
Single-Family Detached Housing 73 D.U. 10.0 730 0.80 58 1.0 73
Trip generation based on SANDAG rates.
4 San Die�o Association of Governments Traffic Generators, SANDAG, Updated 2002.
Farroll Estates Project Associated Transportation Engineers
Updated Traffic and Circulation Study 9 )uly 23,2003
Table 5 shows that the project is forecast to generate 730 average dai ly trips,58 A.M.peak hour
trips and 73 P.M. peak hour trips.
Trip Distribution
The project generated trips were d istributed onto the study-area street network accord i ng to the
percentages shown in Table 6 and Figure 5. The trip distribution/assignment pattern was
developed based on peak hour intersection counts conducted atthe Farroll Road intersections
with Bakeman Lane and East Bakeman Lane. The traffic volumes and distribution calculations
are included in the Technical Appendix. Figures 6 and 7 show the project-added ADT,A.M.
and P.M. peak hour volumes.
Table 6
Project Trip Distribution Percentages
;_ ��a, . � . ,
����°� � ��,:� �, � ,` _ � ���,�°�
,
...�,�� �...e.. . � .�. ;�y �� .. , . . , � �.� �:�_. ,. �.� >����
Halcyon Road North 10%
South 5%
Elm Street North 10%
South 5%
Fair Oaks Avenue East 15%
Oak Park Boulevard North 20°/a
South 10%
Farroll Road West 10%
Grand Avenue West 10%
East 5%
PRO)ECT-SPECIFIC IMPACTS
Intersection Operations
The operational characteristics of the study-area intersections were analyzed based on the
Existing + Project traffic volumes shown in Figures 8 and 9. Tables 7 and 8 present the results
of the LOS calculations and compare the Existing and Existing + Project levels of service forthe
study-area intersections.
Farroll Estates Project Associated Transportation Engineers
Updated Traffic and Circulation Study 10 )uly 23,2003
—{T
�i O
A =
a d 2�% 5%
cl m
q•vi
n -a
c o
d�.
_ � GRAND AVENUE
.`�� ' 10% 10%
10%
PROJECT SITE
FAIR OAKS AVENUE
DIXSON 57. / ��
I I i 15%
g I I
N. I i '
�� � � � i
�`' � I I
� I I
FARROLL AVENUE
10% � r, � W
� Dm D7�C
� m D rn m m =
W 10% Z � � 5% � 5%
z
�
� � O
�..� m
D � O
� Y
N � � LEGEND
�
^� W E °�
�
� � Trip Distribution%
�
j S • Study
N
� �n�M��l�
�
Fi'i NO7 TO SG1LE
C O
N m ��, ASSOCIATED FIGURE 5
N�• _ — TRANSPORTATION PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION
�� E NGINEERS
�-{T
w °'
�o
� _
� �a
nN w
� -o � j-t
�o.
��� 2� '� t r` GRAND AVENUE
N ' �P OD N
C
�
PROJECT SITE
N
j �2
FAIR OAKS AVENUE t r-
SS DIXSONST. " /—_\� ��
�� � � v_ I I .
�� x � � I
a o� �
�o,�. z I I
� � I I I �
.� �5 .J
N 12� '-! FARROLL AVENUE 10� '-i
Go !'T'� � 3-j �
O �r � W
� D m r" D �
� r" D m m ^' D
7� Z y � �
�0 Z
�
O V �� � N
OC .1 �. t 10 .-� L. .-4 � �
m q� 4� rT7 �
Dg� 11� '""� Q
�
N � p LEGEND
D
o �A.M.
a� W E �PEAK
�
�
w PROPOSED
� C - -STREET
J
O
6'i NOT TO SCALE
�r'n ASSOCIATED FIGURE (j
W° ° � TRANSPORTATION PROJECT-ADDED A.M. PEAK HOUR VOLUMES
N�•
O.� _ � E NGINEERS
�w
�o
n -
� �Q
n� o
� � 1 �-3
���
_ � 5� � t r' GRAND AVENUE
N W A�
G
a V
W .
� PRO)ECT SITE
6`
�,
130 � j-a
FAIR OAKS AVENUE t r
� �3pXSONST. ������� ww
i �� t � I 1
; � � � o i i I
�'� �- I i -
��,�. � I I I
-�. I I N w
w
329 -� --�5 219 -�
�� 'W FARROLL AVENUE 6� N
O vo rn \ �-� �
-v Z � y � \
� mD r^ � m D
7� Z y � �
°0 Z
O tnA L AA t�� N W �
C ..1 L.. �g .-� L.. .-13 � V �
� ��-� i�� m ,'v
i 3~ 6-' � LEGE
ND
N � 0 ADT
N
� �P.M.
� W E �PEAK
-�
�,
N S _ _PROPOSED
� STREET
O
a NOT TO SCALE
c`o
�' ASSOC�ATED FIGURE 7
N ' � TRANSPORTATION PROJECT-ADDED AVERAGE DAILY AND P.M. PEAK HOUR VOLUMES
W�,
N�
�� _ �� E NGINEERS
I
�d
�o'
!7 =
ad NWOC ��OO
n;� rn�N .-340
� � �J j �. �50
�,o.
_� 129� '� t r' GRANDAVENUE
v� 290-- N��
c 35� iv
a
�
PROJECT SITE
�oo t-t97
u'^�c° �--230
.J j �. ��38
FAIR OAKS AVENUE sa-� � t r
DIXSON 5T. �� /-'_\� 260--► -�v+-•
i � I 19� �'r.'"iw
� � � � I
N: � � �
'�. Z� � � I w
��' � I I rn°o t150 °wcw„^� t0
� � ..1 j �. �—22 .J j �. �-o
�
90� '� f r' FARROLL AVENUE 136, '� t r'
163� w�� p-► wv�o
Q 00 !T� 34-� °"r�.,`O 30--� �w
-�o Z m � �
A r" D mm r^ D
� Z D 3 n
W Z
O � �
rC- m Z
D � �
�
N p p LEGEND
�
"o A.M.
� W E �PEAK
-�
� STREET�SED
0
S
� NOT TO SCALE �
c O
'N m ASSOCIATED FIGURE $
N�� ° � TRANSPORTATION EXISTING + PROJECT A.M. PEAK HOUR VOLUMES
��
N — E NGINEERS
-{T
�t O
n c
°'� w�� L144
n m w rn o .-443
� 'D ..1 � I... �181
�o.
_ � 242� `� t r' GRAND AVENUE
� 654~ �A� �
,°- � N
V
W
PROJECT SITE
j t" t-103
i w�� .--199
.-� ! L. �199
FAIR OAKS AVENUE as-� '-� t r
DIXSON 5T. ���—_�� V 137-► n�w-�
I I ...a IS� WNN
v_ I I I W
X I I
�' � � � I L
� I I �A� �
�., ��„
�! tn WNW 28 �V
I I �136 �or.+ ��
�, 5 929 -� 1 �- �22 4 219 -� ! �► r�
75� `� t r' FARROLL AVENUE 83-� '� f ►'
� 1 S4� N�N O'--� N A O
� W !T� 50-� °'w t" 40-� �'.A
'� Z m y �
D m 3 Z m m =
W Z m D � �" n
p Z cn -� -<
� W O
r m V Z
� LEGEND
m
N
� � � ADT
�
� �P.M.
� W E �PEAK
�
'w
,�„ S _ _PROPOSED
�p STREET
O
S'i NOT TO SCALE
G O
N� � � ASSOCIATED FIGURE g
N; � TRANSPORTATION EXISTING + PROJECT AVERAGE DAILY AND P.M. PEAK HOUR VOLUMES
o�
o N � E NGiNEEftS
�
Table 7
Existing + Project Intersection Levels of Service -A.M. Peak Hour
� €.�z a`���.-f `e � ��'�a���� � �r �., s ri �>.' c� �� �,�,+���7 �. � ,��.a � °
� `� � u +. rt� �z� �.�' ; � � . , �
� �� �
� � � �� � �����i � ���zz ��' �+..�r� af P '�„�'�`r F y �"*'e
'�''� �& c�p� '� g`.�.�c,�� ���rsre"4 Sy,'�+ � ��:.�
�
.
= az a, i , � • , h
�
�- .,.. . �, ��„�a..a.. . ..� � �, 5 � F.
Grand Avenue/Oak Park Boulevard 16.4 sec./LOS 6 16.5 sec./LOS B 8 PHT NO
Fair Oaks Avenue/Halcyon Road 7.1 Sec./LOS A 7.1 Sec./LOS A 6 PHT NO
Farroll Road/Elm Street 11.9 Sec./LOS B 12.3 Sec./LOS B 26 PHT NO
Farroll Road/Hal on Road 18.5 Sec./LOS C 19.5 Sec./LOS C 13 PHT NO
Table 8
Existing + Project Intersection Levels of Service- P.M. Peak Hour
¢� K� � � �. � .� ��.
�+kx �`�.. ��,��� x.,.,„� .# �� ��x� � F ��� ' .•.
��- k
4yY�'' x� ?.\�L+`�4 ,.��y,y, g ,
�. r .
.��,.M� �*M1``�, p .
.
� �
..
�
�
, '. � ,
.. ...,, �.�� . �e ., n .._.. a.<R
�
Grand Avenue/Oak Park Boulevard 27.4 sec./LOS C 27.8 sec./LOS C 7 PHT NO
Fair Oaks AvenuelHalcyon Road 6.7 Sec./LOS A 6.7 Sec./LOS A 13 PHT NO
Farroll Road/Elm Street 12.5 Sec./LOS B 13.0 SecJLOS B 33 PHT NO
Farroll Road/Halc on Road 16.5 Sec./LOS C 16.9 Sec./LOS C 9 PHT NO
The data presented in Tables 7 and 8 show that the study-area intersections would continue to
operate at LOS C or better during both the A.M. and P.M. peak hour periods with
Existing + Projecttraffic. Project-generatedtrafficwouldnotexceedCitythresholdsatthestudy-
area intersections.
SITE ACCESS
Dixson Street would provide access to the Phase I residential units located along the projecYs
western boundary. Dixson Street extends eastward from Oak Park Boulevard and then
southward as a cul-de-sac road. The Phase I residential units would be constructed on the east
side of the Dixson Street cul-de-sac road. The project would add 130 average daily trips to
Dixson Street east of Oak Park Boulevard. Given the existing low-level of residential
development on Dixson Street and the forecast project-added traffic volumes, Dixson Street
could adequately accommodate the project-added traffic increase. The applicant would be
required to construct the east side of Dixson Street according to the City's residential street
standards.
Farroll Estates Projed Associated Transportation Engineers
Updated Traffic and Circulation Study 16 )uly 23, 2003
City staff requested thatthe traffic study address the project's effect on the southbound left-turn
queues atthe Oak Park Boulevard/Dixson Street-Noel Street intersection. Atthis intersection,
the southbound left-turn pocket is 50 feet long and can accommodate two veh icles. A queui ng
survey was completed during the P.M. peak hour at this location. The survey found that the
southbound left-turn queue neverexceeded onevehicleand vehicles makingthesouthbound
left-turn waited less than five seconds in the left-turn pocket. The project would add
4 southbound left-turns to this intersection during the P.M. peak hour, which equates to one
vehicle every 15 minutes. This level of traffic addition would not increase queues beyond
current levels and would not create queues which would exceed the pocket storage length.
Therefore,the southbound left-turn lane could accommodate the Existing + Project volumes
at this intersection.
Theprojectsiteplanshowsacircularinternal roadwayforthePhase2 residential units. Access
points for the internal roadway would be located on Farroll Road directly north of Bakeman
Lane and East Bakeman Lane. G iven the existing and forecast traffic vol umes,the Farroll Road
intersections at Bakeman Lane and East Bakeman Lane will operate with minimal delay and
accommodate traffic entering and exiting the project site. The applicant would be required to
construct the internal roadway according to the City's residential street standards.
CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS
Traffic Volumes
Cumulative traffic volume forecasts were developed for the study-area roadways and
intersections usingthe mostcurrent list of approved and pending developments within the City,
which was provided by City staff. Figure 10 shows the locations ofthe approved and pending
projects within the City. Thetrip generation estimates were calculated usingthe rates presented
in the SANDAG Traffic Generators report (cited previously) as well as the Institute of
Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation, 6th Edition.5
S Trip Generation Manual, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Sixth Edition, '
November 1997. ';
Farroll Estates Project Associated Transportation Engineers
Updated Traffic and Circulation Study 1 7 July 23, 2003
� .
�
B
}} O ayW.°
j `.� C N
[ C N
4.1
,. . . . . .. ... ... ..... .. .... .. . ... . _.... .. . ..... .. -' � O 7
, , q .. .. ..._..... ._ . i.
� �r--•'��°1 �� � � �,��}!'t� � w ...AVF'�, . � �� . .. ..� .r .., . . � . . �o r� ,v� ... . e;u� � �
pipi `♦
/ _ 3 y,� �Q• I,Q��� Ey PVE Ys,�` `� ��a �. Y •�(}� aq `�S .�� `, �4, V c
t� �,
�. � e � � , ,'' ?' � �y�� ��4. ��j`r ° LL �
� ' �
` Q( s �` '�s�� � d� s ,�' �
� �, j� ��,k�J �i '� ��. u�y �cj �t� � ✓,r-.. �/.�'�,�� w a �
y 'r
��� �'� � �'�.,��� ,��.�. ,�'�. ��1°�, ,,'� � /1'�;���04� � <
r 1� ,_..�--�.�,,,� � �ri� �'-�� �%". � ; J;c� °� " .
< t �o - 4y., \�;� .� /!'� � _
�, - Q��S ��)y �� r,� i� s �''7�.� •�--� -' p��i .�li'';�� r o� ' � , ',�l!� 7 � �
�
t 1]� q.� ♦� '•�%cF�7-' Kr 3'q r?.�o` � r^fi` � , �� 3r o
o�`�.� � ��.� �, eP�t�'� � 'r R�
� �'a�� ��,�.Y � � S ��pp� �'�4E,� �° � `'J���u'� . ��
,f � ,� ` ��'` .� � � � � �
> � 1 .,� �,, t °� f�'�� 4�
r-( �.
�'�� � %'.��1 Y�+�����s►.�. 3 Y �� ° � � �"���' � �-, ��
,�!.� r $'. `� h�,�' ��� y Rtl � Cr
'�, . � �� � y ,. � r
�' (��
.
� t �-- ; � � �. ��� p aa aanvn g Z
^ ! � / � •
',�• '�� �EU� �` ' �bi,-:\� �-��,r� . � _ � O
�,qy,. SXbp � � �� I—
����. `/ ,. .ts � -� L Q
� � �
(°�\ _ \, �� �mrov F
. .,.1 , { 3 N � «l�� LL � u
` � �l �(� � � 1 �:�Ill a '��� 4 �: .
, .. .,' .. � ._. � �
: �-r 1 v � 6�,,� �_ � y� G �� �s�
/ r�- I''�wM6`• �l b' � fi''°�h : �'•. �j � , � �� � � �. s�s r � .� .. �
d.._� � Yia � \ ,�:` ^ o 1' _
805EU�Si�.. ''l. �' `\ � ��. � . '�/, � ���� �O�Plbl ``. ` 1�� �� �
.b) ' �`: op
`y ,���0�` �a��°� �•� � .�,& ��. �. 15� �Id7b Q �QODM� `• �. 'a`b L � ^
��.� /
e �
' �, N \ �• �. � q d �
.. `� � -. � , �� yu . I �, �s'vri�a� � � � `J
'�., 3>. t` � �,• �� � �� 7�n 1 me� � ,:� � n W
`.. a�� �q,� .,S �d•�� s. � 1u i' � • . � - � �NOA]IYH� Qi �
���� r
, ! s.. �s. 073S�.a, `�� rN � . �,��wp � 1 �y ,. �. i 1] ��� p� Ii-'vuNVtrf� � �
t •s._ � J Y Q�\.�1 splVd ' \�a._.__._--_. 7—,; � r � � Q
� � � `� . " ,. 1'�s r.� moc $ '-w-u�iei �. �
�_ .
����� 17� � `�� �;: . � ��� �� . i1301H 15. �W - �1 A � ° �� �
-�rt731Itlo� �iv t�MOo
'L) "J .��_ .r. 1 � ` . ' .� �•� �" � lstd� - . ,� <
/`� \. c� C� �. . 411YA L� H31311 <
� .� g � �i � ��� ca+� .' '�., ' �Q,�� � 2° � w evs �i� +,.._ � � --��- C rn vaarur vaa�� �
� ``� m ' 3a`�t-� ��� .'� � c� � o
� c�" $ soa�a� � � / r _s�c _ .U, U
�� � ` �; / j• is rwivM I �, �
� � Oi�"d4�1 ,�•�/ .+ , q 6-'J -�i f !', r r _ —uJ � n G � Z e
�� / "�i fjd . � '�;,.� ,� ,�,� � ls��� �d G � . ��,z - -
C,r.. � � �.i,:.._ ,+-1�J•�` � _ ;oo�� � 3 ; d. � �saoe� ���
`$ , Y ' .� � - s s � 15 SM115V7
. �,,� t � .��, _ f�� � y � � �15 W73'��p�.N-�'�.�—._: G '-�ry.---�y� ` 2
` • 9JU'� �� ro � $ .• �' �_ g '. .v __'I �. w vi �— � ��� �
� s�) � j / � � 1fIL � r .� an F�� � _'75 � . _
'�J� � 'y. � mo 7- i' _15 . ._��naes imo�f �.N'_� � � G � �� � _ m� a� �
�B�ka~ pp `. � ,Sr �s,� aa � ' th.w � � � - o
�� x�v . a , � ni : �� G ��� - �°°°—� s �� <
�' � r.� L is b._. i r�u S t�' � � o � �
/�� • �" �.• g�t ` � ,� ---� �p�4 u. ��,4� �a _ � �� .�' � g Z �-.
��T,�Y ° ��. � �/ � ` t 9. � .�.T w • o �Sr 3oe an - , '., i 1s.+._.._. �x . �. Q Z U =
f�`���fI� �,p �^�-� / �: � � �° ( .p vsows�i � �����jk _"�� 1 v � � aS z �
1��� �'x 7�U �B r> >RIVd A 0 _nP�� A&�di -! oar�oaaa �,__i•L.�,,,� 4 1 a �I
_� /...c..'�m�'/?�'� I �::� r'_ -�u - :r-��-= d I— w � c
. . •o�
a �
au
S3 v
W p
— u
��
a
LL~
Table 9
Approved & Pending Projects Trip Generation
� , � �,� � x � � �� t � .�_ .� � � E�; �> � � � ��:
g :r � ��;�" � x�`"� g,.�...k�`a.� �*�- iw�t'�����"`�'�.� "�''a "s� ;�� 'a,.�-a ..a�x ��� �.:.�a � �' �' �t'" g a..
�'�� ��'+ �.��a4�k ' e'�'�.�`.�3,�'c�'� �, ''��`�'�z ���„E.'� ��"�� �3�, '. �� a ��.
� r �y x�
r
<
� . _s', r b.�.�> � . _ ,1'�.,� � �'�"� .. �.. ,���. �,. ;'x'�2' 7,
1 Tract 2260 S.F. Residential 149 units 756 59 78
M.F. Residential 31 units 172 13 16
2 Trad 2240 S.f. Residential 9 units 86 7 9
3 Tract 2207 S.F. Residential 38 units 191 15 20
4 Rancho Grande Park S.F. Residential 3 units 29 3 3
5 Rancho Grande Park Park 8.6 acres 430 17 34
6 Five Cities Center Retail 224,000 s.f. 3348 81 292
7 CUP 98-573 Health Club 19,000 s.f. NA 6 82
8 CUP 98-572 Office 11,335 s.f. 125 18 17
9 Tract 2328 S.F. Residential 26 units 249 20 26
10 CUP 99-012 Office 19,910 s.f. 219 31 30
11 Amended CUP 99-001 Office 2,300 s.f. 28 4 4
12 Parcel Ma 2306 S.F. Residential 4 units 38 3 4
13 CUP 99-009 Office 7,690 s.f. 85 12 12
14 CUP 00-019 Retail Commercial 24,932 s.f. 1075 38 91
15 CUP 01-010 Senior Housin 60 units 209 4 6
16 CUP 01-005 Office 25,000 s.f. 903 61 92
17 CUP 01-014 Commercial 18,879 s.f. 768 23 68
Senior Housin 108 units 376 7 10
18 CUP 99-013 Office 24,300 s.f. 448 60 66
19 East Branch Villa e Office/Residential 25,000 s.f. 595 67 71
20 TTM 01-001 $.F. Residential 36 units 360 29 36
(La Canada&James Wa )
21 Creekside Office/Residential 30,000 s.f. 517 43 55
22 Rancho Grande(Hi hlands) S.F. Residential 87 units 870 70 87
23 Grover Homes S.F. Residential 92 units 920 74 92
The traffic generated by the approved and pend ing projects was distributed and assigned to the
study-area roadway network according to existing traffic patterns,consideration ofthe location
and type of each project, and methodologies contained in existing environmental review
documents and traffic studies. Once distributed, the approved and pending developments
traffic volumes were added to the existing traffic volumes to arrive at the Cumulative traffic
forecasts. The cumulative traffic volumes are presented in Figures 11 and 12.
Farroll Estates Project Associated Transportation Engineers
Updated Traffic and Circulation Study 19 )uly 23, 2003
r-
r-
� �W W
W �a �
V
W j � �
J
t192 LO LL
���' �-589 N o o �585
..-I j L. �18 ..1 j L. r-39
109-� -� t r 2� -� t r HALCYON ROAD
327-� m o rn 337-► o o rn
47� N N^ ��J2� ^D M
W W
� �
Z Z
Q �
� ¢
Y J
� �
� �
Q � Cn
LL W
�
J
�
in L 20 �
M^�'`� ���3 ` �
.J j L. j-s� �
102� � t r ELM STREET Q
103 °i o�n w
� �
�
Q
w
�
F-
Q
J
�
�..__.._.. �
E. BAKEMAN v
Z i LAN E I
W !
� BAKEMAN
Q
p ( LANE f
Z
¢ . .
� �y ,�"„ DIXSON ST.
V I_ Z
� �
H K
U p
w
�
� OAK PARK BOULEVARD
�s o
�
�ti o � �
� �
N��n �`} < � W
M�n �--322 � Z z
�il �. ra� ° � z
a � W
W
95 ~� t r � ���� ��
133� �M� ,�
137-i �K,`�' Z cn o -
�
� Z � � I
Farroli Estates Project Associated Transportation Enginee.rs
Traffic and Circulation Study 20 )uly 23,2003
w �
�o
n =
°'�' c�'„o� t'172
�?H �`�� �-479
� � ..1 ! L� j-198
d o.
_� z65 GRAND AVENUE
� '1 1 I"'
�n 669-► o N o
a 58-i -�°°° �p
•<
Cn
O
O
PROJECT SITE
�,�a, t 104
vo�o ��gg
.-� � L. �194
FAIR OAKS AVENUE so� `1 f r
DIXSON ST. V 137--► �W�
� 25-� �o�
I O
j °. O
N�
Z �
� ��
y '� I Q�TO +L-��GZ A� �t .
N N �--�
' � 7 100 -� 1 �- �23 5 2 00 -� l �- {-o
80� � t r FARROLL AVENUE 149� '� t r'
� Z O4� T.7�IJ Q-► N A O
0 DW ^� 4g-3 "�'r' 46-j °'v
W
y Z3 Z �
m =
� Z r" � rrn- Y
�° Z 3 �' n
�C � o O
r m � Z
> � O
�
N � � LEGEND
� ADT
�� W E
�- P.M.
� �PEAK
v S
0
n� NOT TO SCALE i
c G
n,,'„ Assoanreo FIGURE �2 ;
W�� TRANSPORTATION CUMULATIVE AVERAGE DAILY AND P.M. PEAK HOUR VOLUMES �
tip�tp �
o� E NGINEERS
� �
i
�
Cumulative Intersection Operations
A cumulative A.M. and P.M. peak hour level of service analysis was completed using the
cumulative traffic forecasts. Table 10 shows the results of the Cumulative A.M. and P.M. peak
hour level of service analysis.
Table 10
Cumulative Intersection Levels of Service
i �`� ����� � . �. � ., s ,y�
.
,k .
�, : �°�,��; ����,��
Grand Avenue/Oak Park Boulevard 17.9 sec./LOS B 29.1 sec./LOS C
' Fair Oaks Avenue/Halcyon Road 7.6 sec./LOS A 6.9 sec./LOS A
Elm Street/Farrol) Road 14.0 sec./LOS B 15.3 sec/LOS C
Farroll Road/Halc on Road 25.3 sec./LOS D 23.2 sec.lLOS C
The cumulative traffic additions would degrade the operation of the stop-sign controlled
intersection at Farroll Road and Halcyon Road to LOS D during the A.M. peak hour period.
The City's Capital Improvement Program shows no improvements planned forthis location.6
Peak hour signal warrants were conducted to determine the need for traffic signals at this
intersection. The cumulative P.M. peak hour volumes exceed the Caltrans peak hour signal
warrant criteria. However, this represents only one of eleven Caltrans signal warrants. It is
recommended that the intersection be monitored and the City conduct full Caltrans signal
warrants in the future to determine if and when a traffic signal is needed. '
Cumulative + Project Intersection Operations
The operational characteristics of the study-area intersections were analyzed based on the
Cumulative + Project traffic volumes shown in Figures 13 and 14. Tables 11 and 12 present
the results of the LOS calculations, comp�re the Cumulative and Cumulative + Project levels
of service for the study-area intersections and identify the project's impacts based on City
thresholds.
6
Capital Improvement Program, City of Arroyo Grande, 2001.
Farroll Estates Project Associated Transportation Engineers
Updated Traffic and Circulation Study 22 July 23, 2003
.-�T
'a �
�o
� c
a�' ww�c t124
�1�o v rn v, .-365
' ^ � .-1 ! L. j-56
c
w�
;�� ias-� '� t �-' GRAND AVENUE
v, 313-► �W�
� 39� o
a
K
PROJECT SITE
�.r"ao L198
i ��� �-230
.-I l �.► j-141
FAIR OAKS AVENUE 5s-� -� j �--
DIXSON ST. �� /-''—��
( ' 219-� °°w°o
g I I I
x I I
� �
��`' � I I ' �oN t"39 WW L
z
N� ��BO O+VN �--0
� � � � � �22 � � � �0
N
w
9�-� -� t r ,90, -� t r
O 00 m 234~ `��,�' FARROLL AVENUE
0-► �v,o
w�o 35� a�
�
� D m D �
� m D iZ � rn 2
T� Z r' � ,
D �
°° Z cn �-�G
�
� rn �Z
rn
�
� � �
N � � LEGEND
D
�
�� W E
� �A.M.
� �.PEAK
a
�
'a
'y0
S � STREEOSED �
O i
d NOT TO SCALE '
c o
N� � Assoan�o FIGURE �3
W�• — TRANSPORTATION CUMULATIVE + PROJECT A.M. PEAK HOUR VOLUMES �
N�
S� — E NGINEERS �
1
�
�--�T
-�+O
n =
�-� �A� L»z
�?;� m�v �479
� o ..1 � L. j--201
d�.
a� 265� '� t r' GRAND AVENUE
cn 669--► u+�
a63-i �r�".,° lD
K
C17
V
W
PROJECT SITE
�,�� L104
.iwo +-1gg
.-1-1 L.. j-202
FAIR OAKS AVENUE so-� � t r
DIXSON 5T. V 137� N��
/ \
� � � 25-� ;'n�.�
v I I I v
w
y� i I -
� .�. � I I
`' -�" I I I °�$ tii� �NN Li
i
� � � 7 429 .� j �. �23 5 419 .� j �. j-o
82� � ? r FARROLL AVENUE 155� `1 1 r'
Z��� N"'N Q---► N?O
� D r*i 5p-i °'v�.�' q�� °'v
� Dm � 7�c
� rt' D Z r^ 2
7� Z r" 3 rrn— D
00 Z � `" n
� -"'i w p
m r^ V Z
� � Q LEGEND
N � � ADT
�
d� W E �P.M.
Q �.PEAK
-�
a
7 S
� _ _PROFOSED
p STREET
5'i NOT TO SCALE
c O '
�m ASSOCIATED FIGURE 14
o�� � TRANSPORTATION CUMULATIVE + PRO)ECT AVERAGE DAILY AND P.M. PEAK HOUR VOLUMES
�N � E NGINEERS �
E
�
3
__ �
Table 11
Cumulative + Project Intersection Levels of Service -A.M. Peak Hour
� a � +� ..� �" � ,�, *t��� .�;� �#: �°��:°'"�N. ��'���" '� �,'����;s c� .. �
� �,��,�'�t '" � `�;ss���'s ` 3���` a x � �� m �A �� � � �
� :"°�,n;�� �,`�"'`� " °�n ,��h. �, � � ���"��`�':�
s
c �- ��� ���a.
.,
�������°.� �, �� �
� ��;
���r��r, � h, �'°£� �` �^. �.. �s. �� �-� ,� ��s���
Grand Avenuel0ak Park Boulevard 17.9 sec./LOS B 18.0 sec./LOS B 8 PHT NO
Fair Oaks AvenuelHalcyon Road 7.6 sec./LOS A 7.6 sec./LOS A 6 PHT NO
Farroll Road/Elm Street 14.0 sec./LOS B 14.8 sec./LOS B 26 PHT NO
Farroll Road/Halcyon Road 25.3 sec./LOS D 27.3 sec./LOS D 13 PHT NO (a)
(a) City impact threshold is 15 critica!trips for intersections forecast to operate at LOS D.
Table 12
Cumulative + Project Intersection Levels of Service - P.M. Peak Hour
� �
:� ��
_. t _ ,. �a� �. _.�,
�:.
� ���_ � �� � .s, � ��.
,. _ �, ��... �
Grand Avenue/Oak Park Boulevard 29.1 sec./LOS C 29.6 sec./LOS C 7 PHT NO
Fair Oaks Avenue/Halc on Road 6.9 sec./LOS A 6.9 sec./LOS A 13 PHT NO
Farroll Road/Elm Street 15.3 sec./LOS C 16.3 sec./LOS C 33 PHT NO
Farroll Road/Hal on Road 23.2 sec./LOS C 24.3 secJLOS C 9 PHT NO
Tables 11 and 12 showthattheprojectwould notcontributetocumulative impactsatthestudy-
area intersections. The project would add 13 critical trips to the Farroll Road/Halcyon Road '
intersection duringtheA.M. peak hour. Thiswould notexceed theCity's 15-critical trip LOS D
threshold (see Table 4). '
■ ■ ■
Farroll Estates Project Associated Transportation Engineers
Updated Traffic and Circulation Study 25 )uly 23, 2003
STUDY PARTICIPANTS AND REFERENCES
Associated Transportation Engineers
Scott A. Schell, Principal Planner
Dan Dawson, Supervising Transportation Planner
Andrew Orfila, Senior Transportation Planner
Brian T. Hiefield, Traffic Technician
Persons Contacted
Rodger Olds, City of Arroyo Grande
References
Arroyo Grande Circulation Element, City of Arroyo Grande, July, 1988.
Hi�hwaY Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Special Report 209, National Research
Council, Fourth Edition, 2000.
Traffic Impact Study Policy,, City of Arroyo Grande Public Works Department, Adopted
February 2000, Revised March 2002.
San Die�o Association of Governments Traffic Generators, SANDAG, Updated 2002. ;
i
�
Trip Generation Manual, Institute ofTransportation Engineers,Sixth Edition, November 1997.
Capital Improvement Program, City of Arroyo Grande.
Farroll Estates Project Associated Transportation Engineers
Updated Traffic and Circulation Study 26 July 23, 2003
TECHNICAL APPENDIX
CONTENTS:
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE CALCULATION WORKSHEETS
Reference 1 - Grand Avenue/Oak Park Boulevard
Reference 2 - Fair Oaks Avenue/Halcyon Road
Reference 3 - Farroll Road/Elm Street
Reference 4 - Farroil Road/Halcyon Road
TRAFFIC COUNT DATA
Farroll Estates Project Associated Transportation Engineers
Updated Traffic and Circulation Study 27 July 23, 2003
__. �. __.._.�.,..�.�......
4
i
,
;
�
, - ,
� ASSOCIATED TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS
100 N. Hope Avenue,Suite 4,Santa Barbara, CA 9311 O • [805)687-4418 • FAX[805)682-8509
Maynard Keith Franklin,P.E.
Richard L. Pool,P.E. ,
ScottA.Schell,AICP
September 16, 2003 02130.01 L02.WP
�ohn Mack
S & S Homes
1350 E. Grand Avenue
Arroyo G rande, CA 93420
ADDENDUM FOR THE FARROLL ESTATES PROJECT TRAffIC AND CIRCULAT/ON STUDY-
GTYOFARROYO GRANDE
The following addendum addresses the comments provided by the City of Arroyo Grande Planning
Commision on the traffic and circulation study prepared for the Farroll Estates Project. The
addendum summarizes the Existing + Projectand Cumulative + Project levels of service atthe Oak
Park Boulevard/Dixson Street and Oak Park Boulevard/Grand Avenue intersections using modified
projecttrip distribution percentages. These modified trip distribution percentages were discussed and
developed at the September 8 meeting with ATE, City staff (Rob Strong and Victor Devens) and
Planning Commissioner Jim Guthrie.
Project Trip Distribution
At the request of City staff, ATE conducted traffic counts at the Farroll Avenue intersections at
Bakeman and East Bakeman Lane to more precisely estimate the proposed project's traffic distribution
patterns. The Farroll Avenue intersections at Bakeman Lane and East Bakeman Lane provide access
to a residential neighborhood and are located adjacent to the project site. The counts were
completed and the results were used to determine the trip distribution estimates for the project.
At the request of City staff,a sensitivity analysis was completed using modified project trip distribution
percentages developed atthe September8 meeting with ATE,City staffand Planning Commissioner
Jim Guthrie. The modified trip distribution percentages assume highertrip distribution percentages
to/from Highway 101 via Oak Park Boulevard (commute trips to/from San Luis Obispo). These
_alternative percentages are shown i n Table 1. Figure 1 shows the alternative project trip distribution
percentages and Figures 2 and 3 show the project-added A.M. and P.M. peak hour volumes at the
study-area intersections.
Engineering . Planning . Parking . Signal Systems . Impact Reports . Bikeways . Transit
� � f
John Mack Page 2 September 16, 2003
Table 1
Alternative Project Trip Distribution Percentages
Halcyon Road North a 15°�
South 5%
Elm Street North a 10%
Fair Oaks Avenue East 10%
Oak Park Boulevard North 45%
South 5%
Farroll Avenue West 5%
Grand Avenue West 5%
TOTAL 100°�
a 50% of Dixson Street traffic via Grand Avenue; 50% of Dixson
Street traffic via Elm Street and Halcyon Road
Levels of Service
Existing + Project and Cumulative + Project peak hour levels of service were calculated forthe Oak
Park Boulevard/Grand Avenue and Oak Park Boulevard/Dixson Street intersections based on the
modified projecttrip distribution. Tables 2 and 3 showtheA.M.and P.M.peak hour levels of service
for these locations. The level of service calculation worksheets are attached for reference.
Table 2
Existing + Project & Cumulative + Project A.M. Peak Hour Levels of Service
Grand Avenue/ �6.4 sec./B 16.5 sec./B 17.9 sec./B 18.1 sec./B 9 PHT NO
Oak Park Boulevard
John Mack Page 3 September 16, 2003
Table 3
Existing + Project & Cumulative + Project P.M. Peak Hour Levels of Service
Grand Avenue/ 2�,4 sec./C 28.0 sec./C 29.1 sec./C 29.8 sec./C 15 PHT NO
Oak Park Boulevard
Dixson Streed g,6 Sec./A 8.9 Sec./A 9.2 sec./A 9.9 sec./A 10 PHT NO
Oak Park Boulevard
Tables 2 and 3 show that these locations wi I I conti nue to operate at LOS C or better with the addition
of project traffic within the Existing and Cumulative scenarios.
Left-turn queues at the Oak Park Boulevard/Dixson Street intersection:The traffic study addressed the
projecYs effect on the southbound left-turn queues at the Oak Park Boulevard/Dixson Street
intersection. At this intersection, the southbound left-turn pocket is 50 feet long and can
accommodate two vehicles. P.M. peak hour surveys at this intersection found that the southbound
left-turn queue neverexceeded one vehicle and vehicles makingthe southbound left-turn waited less
than five seconds in the (eft-turn pocket. The project would add 6 southbound left-turns to this
intersection during the P.M. peak hour,which equates to one vehicle every 10 minutes. The traffic
study concluded that this level of traffic addition would not increase queues beyond current levels
and would not create queues which would exceed the pocket storage length.
The Existing + Project and Cumulative + Project P.M. peak hour level of service calculation
worksheets indicate a 95% queue length of 0.03 vehicles for the southbound left-turn movement.
Therefore, the southbound left-turn lane could accommodate the Existing + Project and
Cumulative + Project left-turn volumes at this intersection.
Inbound/Outbound Split Percentages for the Project During the P.M. Peak Hour
The project trip generation estimates were developed based on the San Diego Association of
Governments(SANDAG)rates for Single-Family Homes,as required in the City's Traffic Impact Study
Policy(March 2002, page 4). The SANDAG report shows that 70°k of the trips generated by single-
family homes are inbound during the P.M. peak hour and 30°k of the trips are outbound during the
P.M. peak hour. The SANDAG information for singl�family homes is attached for reference. The
SANDAG P.M.peak hour in/out splits are also consistent with the P.M.peak hour in/out splits shown
in the Institute of Transportation Engineers(ITE)Trip Generation Manual forsingl�family homes. The
ITE rate is based on 294 studies of traffic patterns forsingle-family residential neighborhoods. The ITE
manual states that 64% of trips to single-family homes are inbound during the P.M. peak hour and
36% of the trips are outbound during the P.M. peak hour. The ITE trip generation information is
John Mack Page 4 September 16, 2003
attached for reference. Both sources of information are industry standards and are consistent with
observations that ATE has made at other residential developments. In addition to this data, ATE's
counts conducted at the adjacent residential neighborhood access points on Bakeman Lane show
that 60% of the P.M. peak hour trips are inbound and 40% of trips are outbound.
Associated Transportation Engineers
� �-- �--�.
cott A. Schell, AICP
Principa) Transportation Planner
SAS/AO
c: Rob Strong, City of Arroyo Grande Community Development Department
Victor Devens, City of Arroyo Grande Public Works Department
Jim Guthrie, City of Arroyo Grande Planning Commission
attachments
FARROLL ESTATES PRO)ECT
RESIDENTIAL INTERSECTION COUNTS � FARROLL ROAD INTERSECTIONS WITH BAKEMAN LANE AND E. BAKEMAN LANE
TO/FROM WEST TO/FROM EAST
TIME PERIOD IN OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL
4:00-4:30 P.M. 5 6 11 5 2 7
5:30-6:00 P.M. 12 8 20 11 6 17
DISTRIBUTION
� TO/FROM WEST = 569'0
TO/FROM EAST = 44qo
,
45%
i5°io*
GRAND AVENUE
10%*
5%
PROJECT SITE
i
FAIR OAKS AVENUE
� DIXSON 5T. �� /——��
( I i 10%
v I I
N 1 I
0
�y,�. z I I I
-� I I
I I
FARROLL AVENUE
5 o�a oo m
D
Zm 9 7DC
m D Z m S
O 5% Z rn D � '— 5%
-� Z N -nG
� � O
rn Z
� � �
C y
N � 0 LEGEND
D
W E � qo
�
Trip Distribu[ian X
S � sa'a,'
�nccsecn«i
NOT TOSULE * 50% OF DIXSON STREET TRAFFIC VIA GRAND AVENUE/50% OF DIXSON STREET TRAFFIC VIA ELM STREET AND HALCYON ROAD
Associnreo FIGURE 5
TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVE PROJE�.T TRIP DISTRIBUTION
E NGINEERS
�
j ��
' � � t r GRAND AVENUE
�
PRO)ECT SITE
I
N
. ! �Z
FAIR OAKS AVENUE }
�
�'Z DIX50N 5T /——� �n�
� �
u � � � �
� � v I ! I
�O " I I
� � -
o i`'S'�' L�� � I I
�OCO �) � N A
J j � j�'2 � �.4 �J
�� �
o / � rn ��� FARROLLAVENUE 2� o
D
�
� D m � � �
� m y Z ^' _
� Z m D r �
Do.i L3 Z o� L3 N -G
70 ..1 l► .—�p .-� L �; � �
G�o a� 4� rn �
� 5~ 8~ � Q
�1 m � LEGEND
<
➢
W E � A.M.
�PEAK
S _ _PROPOSED
STREEf
NOT TO SCALE
AssoanTeo FIGURE 6
TRANSPORTATION PROJECT-ADDED A.M. PEAK HOUR VOLUMES WITH MODIFIED TRIP DISTRIBUTION
E NGINEERS
__ _
N
W
� ��
3� `� t r GRAND AVENUE
�o�
o�
rn
� PROJECT SITE
��
130 j �-s
FAIR OAKS AVENUE
�-1 fl xso�sT ..��.—\--� t r
N W
f�� < < o I I I
�"' " I I
�.5'�. t�� z I 1
�O N ..-� -1. I I I 3+. W .
J l �- �'' 275 -� --�s 209 -�
Z� N f 6� FARROLL AVENUE 5� ti
W m � ��
D
� � m � � �
rn D Z m 2
� Z m D � �
Z � n
D °"' L8 �'a t9 cn � -�
� .� L. �� .J t. .._.�p rn �
� �
Q �3-' �4-' '-� � LEGEND
N m � ADT
D
W E � P.M.
�.PEAK
S - -STREETOSED i
NOT TO SULE
Assoc�nTeo FIGURE 7 �
TRANSPORTA710N PROJECT-ADDED AVERAGE DAILY AND P.M. PEAK HOUR VOLUMES WITH MODiFfED TRIP DISTRIBUTION �
� E NCINEERS 9
�
_- _
.I
Farroll Estates Project Existing+Project A.M. Peak Hour
1: Grand Ave & Oak Park Blvd s/�s/2oo3
.;� �. � ;,�"' "'� ''� � � �► �, � �
Lane Configurations F� ;',:'� ,: t ; �:s ,., ,�. .
Satd. Flow(prot) 1770 3483 0 1770 3539 1583 1770 3539 1583 3433 3284 0
Satd. Flow(perm) 1770 3483 0 1770 3539 1583 1770 3539 1583 3433 3284 0
Volume(vph) 129 290 34 50 340 100 41 322 58 82 136 126
Confl. Bikes (#/hr)
G�owth FaCto� 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 900% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mid-BIoCk TrafflC(%) 0% 0% 0% 0%
Tum Type Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Prot
Permitted Phases 8 2
Act Effct Green (s) 9.9 13.1 8.0 11.6 11.6 7.9 17.7 17.7 7.7 19.4
v/c Ratio 0.39 0.36 0.19 0.43 0.23 0.17 0.25 0.10 0.17 0.19
Delay 22.2 15.5 25.0 18.6 5.8 26.5 18.5 7.3 24.7 10.2
Approach Delay 17.4 16.6 17.8 13.7
Actuated Cycle Length:45.3
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.43
Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.3% ICU Level of Service A
Spiits and Phases: 1: Grand Ave&Oak Park Blvd
�'�1 �� m2 '. � e3 � ` �4>
1:9:s 29 s �1 s 37 s .-
� m5 : '� ;:06 � ;a7 . ,08
9 s ,,, s - s -
Synchro 5 Report
Page 1
ASSOCISANT-ST51
, , . •
Farroll Estates Project Existing+Project P.M. Peak Hour
1: Grand Ave & Oak Park Blvd 9/15/2003
� _.,. � �- "- � � ��', .�► �. j' �.
_ ,
Lane Configuratians ;� �
�. .. ,..
z.
Satd. Flow(prot) 1770 3497 0 1770 3539 1583 1770 3539 1583 3433 3348 0
Satd. Flow(perm) 1770 3497 0 1770 3539 1583 1770 3539 1583 3433 3348 �0
Volume(vph) 242 621 52 179 443 144 93 320 88 180 409 233
Confl. Bikes (#/hr)
G►'owth FaCto� 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Bus Blockages(#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mld-BIoCk T�affIC(%) 0% 0% 0% 0%
Tum Type Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Prot
Permitted Phases 8 2
Act Effct Green (s) 16.6 22.4 13.9 20.0 20.0 10.0 20.6 20.6 9.8 20.4
v/c Ratio 0.71 0.72 0.63 0.53 0.30 0.45 0.37 0.20 0.46 0.73
Delay 33.6 28.2 36.2 29.7 6.0 40.8 27.2 6.6 39.7 25.5
Approach Delay 29.6 26.8 26.1 28.6
Actuated Cycle Length: 77.5
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.73
intersection Capacity Utilization 70.6% ICU Level of Service C
Splits and Phases: 1:Grand Ave&Oak Park Bivd
� ¢y 02 . air a9 =�"'�a,�
15 s 33 s , �4 s,: < 34 s ,
e5 � �6: `'�` m'� :eB�:
7 s ,s s _
Synchro 5 Report
Page 1
ASSOCISAN7-ST51
Farroll Estates Project Cumulative+Project A.M. Peak Hour
1: Grand Ave & Oak Park Bivd 9/15/2003
_ _
,,�` .�, �: ,� �- ,� � t; � �� ,� ,,�
Lane Configurations - ;!. ;� � ' ` j,
k
Satd. Flow(prot) 1770 3483 0 1770 3539 1583 1770 3539 1583 3433 3277 0
Satd. Flow(perm) 1770 3483 0 1770 3539 1583 1770 3539 1583 3433 3277 0
Volume (vph) 145 313 38 56 365 124 50 340 75 95 141 137
Confl. Bikes (#/hr)
G�ovVth FaCto� 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mid-Block Traffic(%) 0°� 0% 0% 0°�
Tum Type � Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Prot
Pe�mittedPhases 8 2
�
Act Effct Green (s) 10.9 16.9, 8.5 12.2 12.2 8.3 19.0 19.0 8.1 21.0
v/c Ratio 0.44 0.35 0.23 0.50 0.29 0.21 0.29 0.13 0.20 0.21
Delay 23.9 16.2 27.2 21.2 5.4 27.4 21.3 6.7 26.7 11.6
Approach Delay 18.4 182 19.6 15.4
Actuated Cycle Length: 52.2
Maximum V/c Ratio:0.50
Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.6% ICU Level of Service A
Splits and Phases: 1: Grand Ave&Oak Park Blvd
01 � m2 '. .� m3 , 84._ '
19 s 28 s 21 a �.a : : .
+� : �.
l �5 � �6 ' ' .'�� �.� :'. �8>
Os 7.
Synchro 5 Report
Page 1 i
ASSOCISANT-ST51 f
, , .
Farroll Estates Project Cumulative+Project P.M. Peak Hour
1: Grand Ave & Oak Park Blvd s��s�2oos
•� =► '� � "� ''�•:; '�' '�` �► �+► �; �
Lane Configurations " '�!� ,�
F
Satd. Flow(prot) 1770 3497 0 1770 3539 1583 1770 3539 1583 3433 3341 0
Satd. Flow(perm) 1770 3497 0 1770 3539 1583 1770 3539 1583 3433 3341 0
Volume(vph) 265 669 61 199 479 172 102 338 101 217 430 258
Confl. Bikes(#/hr)
G�ovVth FaCtO� 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mid-BIoCk T�affIC(%) 0% 0% 0% 0%
Tum Type Prot Prot Perm Prot Pertn Prot
Permitted Phases 8 2
Act Effct Green (s) 18.1 23.6 14.6 20.0 20.0 9.4 20.4 20.4 10.4 24.7
v/c Ratio 0.78 0.82 0.72 0.63 0.37 0.59 0.44 0.24 0.57 0.72
Delay 35.1 31.1 39.1 32.5 5.5 44.4 29.3 6.3 40.5 25.9 �
Approach Delay 32.1 28.6 27.8 29.4
Actuated Cycle Length: 86.4
Maximum v/c Ratio:0.82
intersection Capacity Utilization 75.6% ICU Level of Service C
Splits and Phases: 1: Grand Ave& Oak Park Blvd
�' 01 � �2 ' . r�:03 ��"'''.ed" ° '
,
1.6 s 33 s:. . 23;s, ; ;; 3±l<s:
e5' # �6 ' � `::07 �8
�5 S �S .. : :. <. s , ;;:
�
�
i
Synchro 5 Report �I
Page 1 �
ASSOCISANT-ST51
, �
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst AO Intersection OAK PARK/DIXSON
Agency/Co. ATE Jurisdiction CITY OF A.G.
Date Pertormed 5/17/2003 Analysis Year 2003
Anal sis Time Period P.M. PEAK HOUR
Pro'ect Descri tion EXISTING P.M. PEAK HOUR
East/West Street: DIXSON STREET North/South Stree� OAK PARK BOULEVARD
Intersection Orientation: North-South Stud Period hrs : 1.00
Ma or Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
Volume 5 398 3 5 500 4
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Hourl Flow Rate, HFR 5 345 3 5 543 4
Percent Hea Vehicles 0 — — 0 — —
Median T e Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 1 2 0 1 2 0
Confi uration L T TR L T TR
U stream Si nal 0 0 ,
Minor Street Westbound Eastbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
Volume 0 0 2 0 0 2
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Hourl Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 2 0 0 2
Percent Hea Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0
Percent Grade(%) 0 0
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0
Confi uration LTR LTR
Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound i
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration L L LTR LTR
v(vph) 5 5 2 2 i
C (m) (vph) 1033 1222 846 730 ��
v/c 0.00 D.00 0.00 0.00
95% queue length 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 E
�
Control Delay 8.5 8.0 9.3 9.9 !
LOS A A A A
Approach Delay — — 9.3 9.9
Approach LOS -- — A A
>
HCS2000� Copyright�2000 University of Florida,All Righu Reserved Version 4.1 c '
� Y . � � . ��� � - '� . G se.c . LD5 /�
� �
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst AO Intersection OAK PARK/DIXSON
Agency/Co. A TE Jurisdiction CITY OF A.G.
Date Pertormed 5/17/2003 Analysis Year 2003
Anal sis Time Period P.M. PEAK HOUR
Pro'ect Descri tion EXISTING +PROJECT P.M. PEAK HOUR
East/West Street: DIXSON STREET North/South Street: OAK PARK BOULEVARD
Intersection Orientation: North-South Stud Period hrs : 1.00
Ma or Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
Volume 5 327 6 11 521 4
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Hourl Flow Rate, HFR 5 355 6 11 566 4
Percent Hea Vehicles 0 — — 0 — —
Median T e Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 1 2 0 9 2 0
Confi uration L T TR L T TR
U stream Si nal 0 0
Minor Street Westbound Eastbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
Volume 1 0 5 0 0 2
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Hourl Flow Rate, HFR 1 0 5 0 0 2
Percent Hea Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0
Percent Grade(%) 0 0
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0
Confi uration LTR LTR
I
Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound i
Movement 1 4 7 8 �9 10 11 12 ;
Lane Configuration L L LTR LTR ;
v(vph) 5 11 6 2 �
C (m) (vph)
1013 1209 674 718 �
r
v/c 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 �
95%queue length 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.01 i
Control Delay 8.6 8.0 10.4 10.0+
LOS A A 8 8
Approach Delay -- -- 10.4 10.0+
Approach LOS -- -- B B
>
HCS2000� Copyright�2000 University of F'lorida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 c
/� v� . � � . D�`�.� _ '� . � s� � . Los /�
� I� � R
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst AO Intersection OAK PARK/DIXSON
Agency/Co. ATE Jurisdiction CITY OF A.G.
Date Performed 5/17/2003 Analysis Year 2003
Anal sis Time Period P.M. PEAKHOUR
Pro'ect Descri tion CUMULATIVE P.M. PEAK HOUR
East/West Street: DIXSON STREET North/South Street: OAK PARK BOULEVARD
Intersection Orientation: North-South Stud Period hrs : 1.00
Ma or Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
Volume 5 527 3 5 654 4
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 5 572 3 5 710 4
Percent Hea Vehicles 0 -- — 0 — —
Median T e Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 1 2 0 1 2 0
Confi uration L T TR L T TR
U stream Si nal 0 0
Minor Street Westbound Eastbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
Volume 0 0 2 0 0 2
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Hourl Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 2 0 D 2
Percent Hea Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0
Percent Grade(%) p 0
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0
Confi uration LTR LTR
Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound '�,
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 �
Lane Configuration L L LTR LTR ;
v(vph) 5 5 2 2
C (m) (vph) 895 1008 715 645 �
v/c 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 �
95% queue length 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 �
Control Delay 9.0 8.6 10.0+ 10.6
LOS A A B B
Approach Delay — — 10.0+ 10.6
Approach LOS -- — B B
>
HCS2000T�"t Copyright�2000 University of Floride,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 c
� v _ w -� - 0�\a : °� . �- s� c _ Los �
5 �
� .i , �
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst AO Intersection OAK PARK/DIXSON
Agency/Co. ATE Jurisdiction CITY OF A.G.
Date PerFormed 5/17/2003 Analysis Year 2003
Anal sis Time Perivd P.M. PEAK HOUR
Pro'ect Descri tion CUMULATIVE+PROJECT P.M. PEAK HOUR
East/West Street: DIXSON STREET North/South Street: OAK PARK BOULEVARD
Intersection Orientation: North-South Stud Period hrs : 1.00
Ma'or Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
Volume 5 536 6 11 675 4
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Houri Flow Rate, HFR 5 582 6 11 733 4
Percent Hea Vehicles 0 — — 0 — —
Median T e Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 1 2 D 9 2 0
Confi uration L T TR L T TR
U stream Si nal 0 0
Minor Street Westbound Eastbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
Volume 1 0 5 0 0 2
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 '
Hourl Flow Rate, HFR 1 0 5 0 0 2
Percent Hea Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0
Percent Grade(%) 0 0
Flared Approach N N ;
Storage 0 0 �I
RT Channelized 0 0 i
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 �
Confi uration LTR LTR �
Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound �
�
r
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
�
Lane Configuration L L LTR LTR
v (vph) 5 11 6 2
C (m)(vph) 878 997 500 635
v/c 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00
95%queue length 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.01
Control Delay 9.1 8.7 12.3 10.7 '
LOS A A B 8
Approach Delay -- — 12.3 10.7
Approach LOS -- -- 8 B
>
HCS1000TM Copyright m 2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c
� v�. 4� � • �L� c�� = 1 • � S e C_ �-- S l4
; � .. .. _ :.�
��I'�AG T�EN R�4T����� ,�' �•• [ ' • l 80 1000 s ft., 1 8 seat, 36o screen•
j' '� ...... 66.17•17 / � q. . / / '��'y�
...........................
,
�
�iESIDENTIAL.....:...................:..:.:::.:...::::...............:. .....[86:11:3J
................ .
Estate, Urban or Rural 12/dwelling unit'A 83b �(3:7] i��.
(everage 1-2 DU/acre) ...:;
Single Family Detached 10/dwelling unit'" S°�
(average 3-6 DU/acre) �3�7) 10°16
C�ndominium 8/dwelling unit`R 8°6 (2:8) y0�
Inr anv mi�lti-f�milv 6-ZO nlJ/acrei �
Apartment 6/dwelling unit'R 895 (2:t3) yqr,'
(or any multi-family units more than 20 DU/acre)
Military Housing (off=base, multi-family)
(less than 6 DU/acre} 8/dwelling unit 736 3:7 9�
(6-20 DU/acre) 6/dwelling unit 7g� �3:7� 90�
Mobile Home
Family 5/dwelling unit, 40/acre' 89'0 (3:7) 1 1%
Adults Only 3/dwelling unit, 20/acre' 93fo (3:7) �ngb
Retirement Community 4/dwelling unit" 6% (4:6) �,
Congregate Care Facility 2.5/dwelling unit" 4g� �g;q) �o�
I
RESTAURANTS..........................................................................[51:37:1 Z]' ' '
Quality q. . 196 (6;4) � 896
i . 100/1000 s ft., 3/seat, 500/acre' "
Sit-down, high turnover 160/1000 sq. ft., 6/seat, 1000/acre"' 835 (5:5) Sg{�
Fast Food (w/drive-tlirougli) 650/1000 sq. ft:, 20/seat, 3000/acre' " 796 (5:5) 7g�,
Fest Food (without drive-through) �700/1000-sq: ft." 596 (6:4) 796
Delicetessen (7am-Qpm) 150/1000 sq. ft., 11/seat' 9°� (6:4) 3%
TRANS P V RTATI O N --
Bus Depot 25/1000 sq. ft."
Truck Terminal 10/1000 sq. ft., 7/bay,.BQ/ac�e" 99b (4:6) � gg{�
Waterp�rt/Marine Terminal ' 170/berth, 1 Z/acre" �
Transit Station (Light Rail w/parking) 300/acre. 2'�2/parking space (4/occupied)" 14% (7:3) 15°6
Park Ft Ride Lots 400/ecre(600/paved acrej, 1436 . (7:3) . 1555
. �5/parking space f 8/occupied)' "
r
, � :
' Primary source: San Disgo Traffic 6enerafors.
" Other sources: !TE T'np Generah'on Report(6[h Edi[ronj,Trip Generation Ratas(ather egencies and publications�,varfous SANDAG 8 CALTRANS studies, reports and estimates.
� P Tri cate or
p g y percentape ratios are daily irom local household surveys, often cannot be applied to very specific land uses, and do not include non-resident drivers
(dra(t SANDAG Analysis ot Trip Diversion,revised November, 1990►:
PRIMARY-one trip directly between origin end primary destinetion.
DIVERTED-li�ked trip (liaving one or moFe stops along the way to a primary destination)wl►ose distance compared to direct distance� 1 mile.
PASS-BY-undiverted or diverted < 1 mile.
� Trip lengtl�s are average weiglited !or all trips to and lrom general land us9 site. �All trips system-wide average length a 6:9 miles)
� Fitted cuive equation: ln(T) - 0.602 Ln(x) + 6.946
° Fitted curve equation: Ln(T) � 0.756 Ln(x� + 3.960 } T— total trips, x = 1,000 sq. ft.
s
" fitted curve equation: t a -2.169 Ln(d) + 12.g5� t=trips/DU, d=density(DU/acre),DU=dwelling unit
5 Suggested PASS-BY[undiverted or diverted<1 mile]perceritages for trip rate reductions only ' Trip Reductions-In order to help promote regional"smart growth"policfes,
during P.M.peak period�based on coinbination of local data/review and Otlier sources"�: I and acknowledge San Diego's expanding mass transit system,consider
COMMERCIAL/RETAIL vehicle t�ip rate reductions(with proper documentation and necessary
_�:.._a_'_a_i"��'1"�.....J..1 TI..,t..11.....i.... n...r..mn ev� ' .
mn�nc.
. .__ ,__.. .....�..-.-- .,...�._,_.....�.�..�s._ I
t e� • �
tt:.'
, r�f • .`i� .
��:���� Sir�gle-Family Detached Housing �
�,. (210)
4�:,.
� Average Vehicie Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units �
�-'`°: � On a: Weekday,
�:,.::
'�=: Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic,
`"� One Hour Beiween 4 and 6 p.m. �
.�_
°"�` Number of Studies: 294
�;:
..;��. Avg. Number of Dwelling Units: 216 �
Directional Distribution: 64% entering, 36% exiting
Y�••�'��� - .
::�r.�p•Generation per Dwelling Unit
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
1.01 0.42 - 2.98 1.05
�.;'<<.:..
A`;..
�A.
.;,.
�.P�ot and Equation
�. 3� �
. ; ,.
; ; x
, �,
; � • ��
. ; �.
i:. ; x � '
c 2.000 • • • •.._ .. •-- -• • -•••--• • ••-• •-• •.... . ... .. .... . �'�. ....-• ••-
...__
`W ; �. - • •• • •-. .
'� , ;
F- ; x ,
m , ;
U � �'
t ' i' � ,
��-�� � � i' . '.
,, � � , .
=:� � � �• X ;
> ' �� • �
Q x � ' ' I
z il 1.000 .. .-----• ... .. . ... ... ...f:. ..-•---
,� �.. :L v''/ , .. .. . . . . ...� ; .� ..��.. .� .�. .. ���. �.�. .
r�—
ia
� .. . x '' . � (
�. /�
y�,� ��j' x � . 'y
'`',�,�„y'.±".�k. x . ; ; i
n;:Y,v�t V � � '
.�3,;±� ^ �� � . � �
N�t�,'�` . • � �
�r`' �' 0 � � �
�5. ♦��y� I
'::t:�.'-�e.:' � Q 1 V W GWD �/yy�
S. . JNYII
��=� X=Number of Dweiling Units
E:,x : .
���;: � .� X Actuel Mta Potrtts Fitted Curve ------ py,��p�e <
3�_�.::.;.. � .
..�.�i -.,.y
�,�':�:�- '; Fitted Curve Equetion: Ln('�-0.901 LnOC)+0.527 R2=0.91 �
�.;�:,.
_n�:'
;;:�:= '
��:'_ '
: A�`s,�, . ,
`:��•� ���p Gener�tio�,6th Edition 265 Instldrte of Tre
;�- � r�sportation Engineers
.,�.
... :..i"!�bP,�X�'if!"r . ,. ....
I � t,. S .... E+s.:y .� .:�! •t .7..: . . " - , ..' . .... � � .. .. . ... . .. • -
«i }� „ .., ,?.. t .:,
9., o x ' ' '
}� �
;.
, ;:
� . .
"K : r •x., r� ;,a t --.F
, . >...
s .,.
y,>., �
� ��,
,� FARROLL ESTATES PRO)ECT . �'�
RESIDENTIAL INTERSECTION COUNTS (c� FARROLL ROAD INTERSECT�ONS WITti BAKEMAN LANE AND E. BAKEMA�
TO/FROM WEST TOIFROM EAST �
TIME PERIOD IN OUT TOTAL . IN dUT TOTAL
4:00-4:30 P.M. 5 6 11 5 2 7
5:30-6:00 P.M. 12 8 20 � 11 6 17
DISTRIBUTION
TO/FROM WEST = 5b� ,
TOIFROM EAST = 44% , , .y
� . �
�
� �
--� t " .
, � �
�
��-+-, .
f
i..
'I
�
,«
� pRRO Y0
O �+',�
� INCORPORATED 92
�
V n0f
� JULY 10, 1911 *
c4��F oRN�P
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ROB STRONG, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
VIA: �j;'�. KELLY HEFFERNON, ASSOCIATE PLANNER
SUBJECT: REVISION TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR VESTING
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 02-002; DON MCHANEY (ITEM NO. 9.6.)
DATE: NOVEMBER 25, 2003
To avoid confusion, staff has eliminated all references to a Homeowner's Association in
the Conditions of Approval for Vesting Tentative Tract Map 02-002 (see attached
revised Conditions No. 6, 15 and 114 shown as shaded text). Maintenance of all
common facilities will be performed through a Maintenance District.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 4
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 02-002
Don McHaney and S&S Homes
Farroll Avenue
C�MMl1NITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
G N A .ONDITION
This approval authorizes the subdivision of a 10.3-acre property into sixty-five (65) single-
family residential lots ranging in size from roughly 3,000 to 7,700 square feet.
1. The applicant shall ascertain and comply with all Federal, State, County and City
requirements as are applicable to this project.
2. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of approval for Vesting Tentative
Tract Map 02-002, General Plan Amendment 02-001, Development Code
Amendment 02-002, and Planned Development Amendment 02-001.
3. This tentative map approval shall automatically expire on unless the
final map is recorded or an extension is granted pursuant to Section 16.12.140 of
the Development Code.
4. Development shall occur in substantial conformance with the tentative map
presented to the City Council at the meeting of and marked Exhibit
"B-1"through "B-4" except as modified by these conditions of approval.
5. The applicant shall, as a condition of approval of this tentative map application,
defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Arroyo Grande, its present or
former agents, officers and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding
against the City, its past or present agents, officers, or employees to attack, set
aside, void, or annul City's approval of this subdivision, which action is brought
within the time period pravided for by law. This condition is subject to the
provisions of Government Code Section 66474.9, which are incorporated by
reference herein as though set forth in full.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
6 , , .. .. . �,;.; . .e.
• �
7. The fence on Farroll Avenue and behind custom lots 10 through 12 should be
consistent with the adjacent planned development.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 6
PRIOR TO RECORDING THE FINAL MAP
�__ .. . _ � ,�:��
15. � ... �. � ,:. � �.s,�,;�,
.r,
16. A landscaping and irrigation plan shall be prepared by a licensed landscape
architect subject to review and approval by the Community Development and
Parks and Recreation Departments. The landscaping plan shall include the
following for all public street frontages and common landscaped areas:
a. Tree staking, soil preparation and planting detail;
b. Landscaping to screen ground-mounted utility and mechanical equipment;
c. The required landscaping and improvements. This includes:
(1) Deep root planters shall be included in areas where trees are within
five feet (5') of asphalt or concrete surFaces and curbs;
(2) Water conservation practices including the use of low flow heads,
drip irrigation, mulch, gravel, drought tolerant plants and mulches
shall be incorporated into the landscaping plan; and
(3) All slopes 2:1 or greater shall have jute mesh, nylon mesh or
equivalent materiaL
(4) An automated irrigation system.
17. Prior to recording the final map and to the extent allowed by law, the applicant
shall prepare a work force housing program for residents of and workers within the
City of Arroyo Grande, subject to review and approval by the City Manager and
City Attorney, which shall establish a priority system to enable targeted work force
groups with qualifying incomes the opportunity to purchase units within the
subdivision.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT
18. The applicant shall comply with the City's Construction and Demolition Debris
Recycling Ordinance.
19. The applicant shall allocate 25% of the project, or sixteen (16) units, to moderate-
income households through a thirty (30) year deed restriction, or other enforceable
and recorded restriction. Said document (s) shall be subject to the review and
approval of the City Attorney.
20. The applicant shall submit a fencing plan for the entire development for review and
approval by the Community Development Director.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY
21. All fencing shall be installed. �
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 15
107. All drainage facilities shall be in accordance with the Drainage Master Plan.
108. Conduct a hydraulic analysis of the proposed development and submit to the
Director of Publie Works for review.
109. The project is in Drainage Zone "A" and therefore requires on-site retention. The
drainage basin shall be fenced around its perimeter including gates for access.
The fencing shall not exceed six feet (6') in height. The Directors of Public
Works and Community Development shall approve the design and materials of
the fencing and gates.
110. Phase I drainage shall be directed to the Oak Park West Basin. The basin shall
be analyzed to ensure capacity to handle the additional development. Improve
the basin as necessary to handle the additional runoff.
111. Improve security around the Oak Park West Basin by installing new fence and
access gates. Install a full height fence along the westerly boundary atop the
existing retaining wall. Permission from the City of Grover Beach may be
necessary for constructing full heigMt fence. The Director of Public Works shall
approve fencing ty�e and style.
112. The applicant shall mitigate all Phase II storm water as directed by the Director
of Public Works.
113. Infiltration basins shall be designed based on soil tests. Infiltration tests shall
include a minim.um 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.
s, _:� .,. , a ,,. ,
DEDIGATIONS AND EASEMENTS
115. All easements, abandonments, or similar documents to be recorded as a
document separate from a map, shall be prepared by the applicant on 8 1/2 x 11
City standard forms, and shall include legal descriptions, sketches, closure
calculations, and a current preliminary title report. The applicant shall be
responsible for all required fees, including any additional required City
processing.
116. Abandonment of public easements shall be listed on the final map, in
accordance with Section 66499.20 of the Subdivision Map Act.
117. The applicant shall dedicate pedestrian access easements to the back of the
�
o� pRROY�C
� M/COqPOAATED Z
V T
* JIJLY 10� 1911 *
c4��FOR��P
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: �,;� �KELLY HEFFERNON, ASSOCIATE PLANNER
SUBJECT: SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
NOVEMBER 25, 2003 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA, ITEM 9.b.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 02-001 — FARROLL AVENUE
DATE: NOVEMBER 25, 2003
Attached you will find the project plans for Agenda Item 9.b., the project on Farroli
Avenue applied for by Don McHaney.
c: City Manager
City Attorney
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE 9.C.
CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande will conduct a continued Public
Hearing on the following proposals:
CASE NOS.: Development Code Amendment Case No. 03-005 and General Plan Amendment Case
No. 03-003
APPLICANT: City of Arroyo Grande
LOCATION: City of Arroyo Grande
PROPOSALS: I: Development Code Amendment Case No. 03-005 — a proposed Ordinance
amending Title 16 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code, Chapters 16.04, 16.12, 16.16,
16.20, and 16.28, creating an Agricultural Buffer Overlay District, establishing expanded
findings for rezoning and subdivision applications, modifying allowable uses and
standards in Agricultural Districts and establishing mitigation requirements for
conversion of agriculturally zoned land.
II. General i�lan Amendment Case No. 03-003 —a proposed R�solution amending the
� General Plan Agriculture and Conservation/Open Space Element to create an
Agricultural Conservation Easement Program and an Agricultural Enterprise Program,
and to revise language in objective Ag1.
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION: In compliance with the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Community
Development Department has determined that the proposals are within the scope of the
Program EIR prepared for the 2001 General Plan Update because no new environmental
effects could occur and no new mitigation measures would be required, pursuant to
Section 15168(c)of the CEQA Guidelines.
The City Council will consider the proposed Development Code Amendment and General Plan Amendment that
were initiated by Resolution No. 3699 at the July 22, 2003 City Council meeting to implement recommendations
from a recent report on the Conservation of Agricultural Resources for the City of Arroyo Grande. These items
were continued from the September 23, 2003 City Council meeting. •
Any person affected or concerned by these City initiated proposals may submit written comments to the
Community Development Department at 214 E. Branch Street, Arroyo Grande, Califomia, during normal
business hours (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.) before the Planning Commission or City Council hearings, or appear and
be heard in support of or opposition to the project and the environmental determination at the time of hearing.
If you challenge an item in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at
the public hearings described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior
to, the public hearings.
Failure of any person to receive the notice shall not constitute grounds for any court to invalidate the action of the
legislative body for which the notice was given.
Date and Time of Hearing: TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 25,2003 AT 7:00 P.M.
Place of Hearing: Arroyo Grande City Council Chambers
215 E. B�anch Street
� J Arroyo Grande, California
/ ZZ���
Kelly W mor , Director of Administrative Senrices/Deputy City Clerk
Publish 1T, Friday, November 14, 2003
� p,RR0�0
° ��
� INCORPORATED 92
" T MEMORANDUM
� JULY 10, 1911 *
c4��FORN�P
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ROB STRONG, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOA�F�1"
BY: TERESA MCCLISH, ASSOCIATE PLANNER
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING FOR
DCA 03-005 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE AMENDING TITLE 16 OF
THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO INCORPORATE
REGULATIONS AND AMEND THE ZONING MAP FOR
AGRICULTURAL PRESERVATION OVERLAY DISTRICT
AG-2.2 PLACING A PERIMETER OVERLAY DISTRICT OF
100 FEET AROUND AGRICULTURALLY ZONED
PROPERTIES FOR THE PURPOSES OF AGRICULTURAL
BUFFERS, REQUIRE ADEQUATE FINDINGS FOR
SUBDIVISION OR REZONING OF AGRICULTURAL
LANDS, IMPLEMENT MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS AND
REVISE LAND USE REGULATIONS FOR AGRICULTURAL
DISTRICTS
DATE: NOVEMBER 25, 2003
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City Council 1) Introduce for first reading by title only the proposed
ordinance amending Title 16 of the Municipal Code (Development Code Amendment 03-
005) to incorporate regulations and amend the Zoning Map for Agricultural Preservation
Overlay District AG-2.2 placing a perimeter overlay district of 100 feet around
Agriculturally Zoned properties for the purposes of agricultural buffers, require adequate
findings for subdivision or rezoning of agricultural lands, implement mitigation
requirements and revise land use regulations for Agricultural Districts; and 2) Continue
General Plan Amendment 03-003.
FUNDING:
No fiscal impact.
DISCUSSION:
Backqround
On July 22, 2003, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 3699 to initiate preparation of
regulations and programs based on Planning Commission recommendations from the
Report on the Conservation of Agricultural Resources for the City of A►royo Grande
(Agricultural Report). On September 23, 2003, the City Council adopted a resolution for
S:\COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT\PROJECTS\SPECIAL\AG_STUDY\CC PKT 112503\CC Staff Report 112503.docCC Staff
Report 112503 1 1/21/03
CITY COUNCIL
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
AMENDING TITLE 16 FOR AGRICULTURAL DISTRICTS
NOVEMBER 25, 2003
PAGE20F6
the first series of actions required by Resolution No. 3699 which amended the 2001
General Plan to redesignate certain properties back to Agriculture. The proposed
Ordinance represents another action based on Resolution No. 3699, and contains the
implementing regulations for several policies required in the 2001 General Plan. Included
in the proposed Ordinance are:
Exhibits "A1 — A4" — proposed zoning map amendments for an Agricultural Preservation
Overlay District AG-2.2, placing a perimeter Overlay district of 100 feet around
agriculturally zoned properties for the purpose of providing an agricultural buffer;
Exhibit "B" - language establishing the proposed Agricultural Preservation Overlay District
(16.28.020.C.), regulations for agricultural buffers (16.12.170.E.), findings required for
subdivisions and rezoning applications (16.16.040.E, 16.20.060.0 and 16.202.070.C)
mitigation requirements (16.12.170.F. including definitions in 16.04) and revised use
regulations and property development standards for Agricultural districts to provide
flexibility for agricultural operations (16.28.030 and 16.20.040).
Future actions include revision of 2001 General Plan Agricultural Objective Ag1 regarding
the word "minimize", programs for agricultural conservation easements and agriculture
enterprise (General Plan Amendment 03-003), and specific use regulations for
greenhouses.
The Planning Commission discussed the proposed ordinance on November 4, 2003 and
made the following recommendations by separate roll call votes (please refer to draft
minutes in Attachment 1):
1. approve amended buffer requirements proposed in Exhibit "B" section
16.12.170.E.;
2. approve amended mitigation requirements proposed in Exhibit "B" section
16.12.170.F.;
3. approve amended findings required for rezoning and revised regulations for
Agricultural districts in Exhibit "B" sections 16.16.040.E., 16.20.060.E.,
16.20.070.C., 16.28.030 and 16.28.040;
4. no recommendation was reached regarding the proposed Overlay district in
Exhibit "B" section 16.28.020.C.
Buffer Requlations
There are finro sections of Title 16 proposed for revision or addition relating to agricultural
buffers. Exhibits "A1 — A4" to the attached Ordinance shows the proposed Agricultural
Preservation Overlay district AG-2.2 (°Overlay District") consisting of a 100 foot perimeter
surrounding Agriculturally zoned properties to acknowledge and address the
urban/agricultural interface within the City. The intent of the Overlay District would be to
provide notice for current and future owners adjacent to Agriculturally zoned land that
new residential development within the Overlay District will require discretionary approval
if proposed within one-hundred feet of these lands. As such, it is intended as an
extension of the City's Right-To-Farm requirements contained in Section 16.12.170. New
CC Staff Report 112503 11/21/03
CITY COUNCIL
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
AMENDING TITLE 16 FOR AGRICULTURAL DISTRICTS
NOVEMBER 25, 2003
PAGE 3 OF 6
residential use is not permitted within 100 feet of Agricultural districts. Non-residential
uses within 100 feet of an Agricultural district may be subject to Minor Use Permit to
ensure that the type of use will not adversely affect existing or potential agricultural
production. The proposed Agricultural Presenration Overlay District is shown on Exhibits
"A1 —A4" and described in Exhibit "B", Section 16.28.020.C. �
i
The proposed Overlay District functions to require discretionary review of actions that �
may otherwise be ministerial, including the construction of a new primary residence or a
second residential unit within 100 feet of an Agricultural district that is not part of a j
subdivision or other discretionary permit. For example, a building application to construct �
a new primary residence on a parcel adjacent to an Agricultural district will require a
Minor Use Permit so that the Community Development Director can make a
determination that the proposed residence or a portion of the residence is not located
within 100 feet of an agricultural district effecting an intensification of residential use ,
adjacent to farmland or potential farmland contrary to the General Plan and this proposed
Ordinance. If the proposed residence is located within the Overlay District area, the
applicant would be required to revise their proposed plans and relocate it elsewhere on i
the property, outside the Overlay District. If a property has no alternative location for a
primary residence, the permit would allow for "reasonable use" of the property. Another
example includes an application for a second residential unit, which would also be
considered by Minor Use Permit approval if it is proposed on a parcel adjacent to an
Agricultural district. A second residential unit may be denied if a portion of the proposed
residence is located within 100 feet of the Agricultural district, which would by contrary to
the General Plan and this proposed Ordinance. If a Minor Use Permit is approved for
new residential use, then the applicant will be required to provide for an agricultural buffer
in accordance with the proposed Ordinance, Section 16.12.170.E.
Existing residences within the proposed Overlay District would be affected o� if there is
a proposal to add new residential structures within 100 feet of an Agriculturally zoned
property. Accessory uses appurtenant to existing residential uses and residential
remodels do not have any further requirements resulting from this proposal.
A discussion of the types and implementation of agricultural buffers is contained in the
Agricultural Report. Staff has determined there are 95 existing homes within the
proposed Agricultural Preservation Overlay district: approximately fourteen properties
have potential to subdivide, and four are vacant. Additionally, there are approximately
eight properties with a mixed use land use designation which allows potential residential
development through discretionary action.
The second portion of the proposed buffer requirements includes specific requirements
for discretionary projects, including changes in use, proposed subdivisions, rezoning
applications, or redevelopment. These provisions are contained in proposed Section
CC Staff Report 112503 11/21103
CITY COUNCIL
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
AMENDING TITLE 16 FOR AGRICULTURAL DISTRICTS
NOVEMBER 25, 2003
PAGE 4 OF 6
16.12.170.E. and referred to in Sections 16.20.060.0 and 16.20.070.C. as applied to
subdivision applications.
The Planning Commission considered both the proposed Overlay district and the buffer
requirements for discretionary projects independently to discuss the pros and cons of
including only the buffer requirement language for discretionary projects, without the
Overlay district. Staff has determined that the resutt may be that up to four homes can be
constructed on four residentially zoned vacant parcels, redevelopment of existing
residences, and construction of an indeterminate amount of second residential units can i
all potentially occur within 100 feet of an Agricultural district. Public comment included '
concern that the Overlay District would create a multitude of non-conforming structures
for the benefit of providing review for very few potential new residences. If the Council
directs, an alternative to the proposed Overlay District (such as a specific setback
provision) can be referred back to the Planning Commission for consideration and �
recommendation. ,
According to the Farmland Profection Acfion Guide— 24 Sfrategies for Califomia (Institute �
for Local Government, 2002), agricultural buffers are a proven method to minimize
conflict by creating space or improving the barrier befinreen agricultural operations and
urban residents. Properly implemented, they can also address environmental concerns
such as soil erosion and water quality protection.
General Plan Policy Ag 5-2 requires the establishment of buffers between Agriculture
land use designations and non-agricultural (particularly residential) land use
designations. Implementing policies include the following:
■ Ag5-2.1 Buffers shall be established on all parcels proposed for non-agricultural
development adjacent to agricultural uses when the property is exposed to agricultural
operations.
■ Ag5-2.2 No portion of any new residential structure within a non-Agricultural land use
designation shall be located closer than 100 feet from the site of agricultural
operations within an Agricultural land designation. Greater distances may be required
based upon site-specific circumstances to include consideration of established or
existing farming operations or prac#ices.
■ Ag5-2.3 The buffer area shall be noticed and/or fenced and landscaped in such
manner to discourage human and domestic animal movement between the urban and
agricultural areas and to screen urban uses from dust and wind-borne materials.
■ Ag5-2.4 The buffer area shall contain a minimum 20 feet depth of landscaping.
Plantings shall be sufficiently dense and mature to provide aerosol protection within
the first year of establishment. Greater landscaping depth may be required based
CC Staff Report 112503 1 1/21/03
CITY COUNCIL
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
AMENDING TITLE 16 FOR AGRICULTURAL DISTRICTS
NOVEMBER 25, 2003
PAGE 5 OF 6
upon site-specific circumstances, to include consideration of established or existing
farming operations or practices.
■ Ag5-2.5 — Buffer standards associated with non-residential structures and roadways
shall account for the type of use, building orientation and building and roadways
design.
Mitiqation for Agricultural Conversions
The City Council recently adopted Resolution No. 3711 revising the 2001 General Plan
mitigation policy described in Agriculture, Conservation and Open Space Element
Implementation Policy Ag1-4.2. This policy requires permanent protection in the form of
dedication of a perpetual agricultural conservation easement or other effective
mechanism for conversion of areas having prime farmland soils at a ratio of "at least 1:1
and up to 2:1" with regard to the acreage of land removed from the capability for
agricultural uses. In accordance with this provision, Exhibit "B" contains the
implementing regulations for this mitigation to conserve the remaining prime farmland ,
areas within the City and provide for adequate mitigation for loss due to development. ,
The Planning Commission considered removal of the 2:1 provision for mitigation lands
outside the City Limits to ensure protection of lands within the City. The in-lieu fee
option, if exercised, would then be available for potential purchase of easements outside
the City if easements or purchase of lands within the City limits is determined to be
unachievable. However, this modification was not included in the Commission's motions
recommending approval of the proposed ordinance.
Findings for Rezoninq Applications
As discussed in the Agricultural Report, and in accordance with 2001 General Plan
policies under Ag 3, findings are proposed to be added to Section 16.16.040.E. of the
Development Code in order to provide clear criteria for the possible conversion of
Agricultural lands (please refer to Exhibit "B").
Land Use and Property Development Standards
In order to facilitate more flexibility for uses within Agricultural districts, Section 16.28.030
is proposed to be amended consistent with recommendations from the Agricultural
Report and General Plan Objectives Ag1, Ag2 and Ag4. Additional allowed uses include
greenhouses, wholesale nurseries, guest ranches, and large animal veterinary offices.
Specific use criteria for greenhouse operations is a topic for discussion at the forthcoming
Agricultural Enterprise Workshop discussed further below, and as such, regulations for
greenhouses will be proposed at a later date.
Further Implementation Pro rq ams
Resolution 3699 included several related actions that are intended to comprehensively
comprise a program of resource protection. Part of the actions initiated by Resolution
CC Staff Report 112503 11/21/03
CITY COUNCIL
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
AMENDING TITLE 16 FOR AGRICULTURAL DISTRICTS
NOVEMBER 25, 2003
PAGE60F6
3699 included the development of an Agriculture Conservation Easement (ACE)
program, including appropriate funding sources and processes for acquisition, as well as
Agricultural Enterprise incentive programs to promofe and benefit local agriculture.
These programs, while still in the formative stages, are important to the implementation
and long-term success of the other actions required by Resolution 3699. A workshop
was held on November 20�' to gather public comment regarding specific topics related to
agricultural enterprise and direction for the program.
During the public hearing process for consideration of Resolution 3699, consideration of
appropriate wording for Agricultural Objective Ag1 was also raised. General Plan
Amendment 03-003 will contain proposals for these programs and policies. An ordinance
to revise Chapter 16.52, which establishes specific uses is also forthcoming and will
include specific use regulations for greenhouse operations.
Public Comment
Several comment letters were received and distributed during the public hearing process
concerning Resolution 3699. A total of 958 notices announcing both the Planning
Commission and City Council hearings for August 26, 2003 were sent within a 400-foot
radius of owners of Agriculturally zoned properties. The proposed Development Code
Amendment DCA 03-005 and forthcoming General Plan Amendment 03-003 were
continued to September 23, 2003 and subsequently to the Planning Commission meeting
of November 4, 2003 and the City Council meeting of November 25, 2003.
Environmental Review
The potential environmental impacts of the proposed General Plan and Municipal Code
Amendments were analyzed and considered in the Certified Program EIR for the 2001
General Plan Update and have been determined to be adequate for evaluation of the
subject amendments to Title 16 and appropriate findings are included in the proposed
ordinance.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following altematives are presented for Council consideration:
- Adopt the proposed ordinance;
- Exclude the proposed overlay district in Exhibits "A1 -A4" and portions of Exhibit "B"
and adopt the ordinance with the appropriate changes;
- Make other modifications and adopt the proposed ordinance;
- Refer the ordinance back to Planning Commission for the development of
altematives;
- Do not adopt the proposed ordinance;
- Provide direction to staff.
Attachments:
1. Planning Commission minutes, November 4, 2003.
CC Staff Report 112503 11/21/03
ORDINANCE NO.
. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ARROYO GRANDE AMENDING TITLE 16 OF THE
MUNICIPAL CODE (DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT
03-005) TO INCORPORATE REGULATIONS AND AMEND
. THE ZONING MAP FOR OVERLAY DISTRICT A-1.2,
PLACING A PERIMETER OVERLAY DISTRICT OF 100
FEET AROUND AGRICULTURALLY ZONED
PROPERTIES FOR THE PURPOSES OF AGRICULTURAL
BUFFERS, REQUIRE ADEQUATE FINDINGS FOR
SUBDIVISION OR REZONING OF AGRICULTURAL
LANDS, IMPLEMENT MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS AND
REVISE LAND USE REGULATIONS FOR
AGRICULTURAL DISTRICTS
WHEREAS, the City Council of Arroyo Grande adopted the updated General Plan on
which became effective on October 9, 2001 which recognizes the historic role of
agriculture within the community and outlines goals, objectives and policies regarding the
retention of agricultural lands within and adjacent to the City; and
WHEREAS, the City has a responsibility to assure adherence to the General Plan in
meeting the needs and desires of the residents and the community; and
WHEREAS, the City is required to complete a comprehensive review and necessary
revisions to the Development Code and zoning map for consistency with the General Plan
in accordance with Government Code Section 65860; and
WHEREAS, on August 26, 2003 the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande reviewed
and considered the information in the Report on the Conservation of Agriculture in the
Cify of Arroyo Grande, as well as public testimony presented prior to and at the public
hearings and adopted Resolution No. 3699 to initiate implementing ordinances and
programs;
WHEREAS, Chapter 16.28 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code implements the
policies of the General Plan by providing for areas wherein uses are limited to
agricultural and compatible pursuits and wherein development regulations restrict the
intrusion of urban and rural development; and
• WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande has reviewed and considered
the information in the proposed Ordinance and public testimony presented at the public
hearings, Planning Commission recommendations, staff reports and all other
information and documents that are part of the public record for this matter; and
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE 2 of 5
WHEREAS, the City Coun�cil finds, after due study, deliberation and public hearing, the
following circumstances exist:
A. The proposed amendment to the Zoning Map and revisions to Title 16 is
consistent with the goals, objectives, policies, and programs of the General Plan,
and is desirable in order to implement the provisions of the General Plan based
on Resolution No. 3699 and further finds that:
1. The acreage of prime agricultural land within the City limits is a particularly
important resource, has unique qualities and benefits the community through
the provision of productive open space, economic activity and employment
base, wildlife habitat and an important filter to rain runoff, sustaining rural
community character, and the provision of locally grown produce.
2. The acreage of agricultural land within the City limits has rapidly decreased
over the previous three decades and is particularly threatened due to
encroaching urban development, available infrastructure and land costs tha�
are substantially higher than average costs of agricultural lands within the
County of San Luis Obispa
3. The protection of agricultural acreage within the City's Area of EnvironmentaB
Concern is important to preserving a strong urban edge and preventing urban
sprawl.
4. The protection of agricultural lands within the City limits is the City's greatest
priority as described in the 2001 General Plan followed by lands adjacent to
the City limits, and thirdly, other agricultural lands within the City's Area of
Environmental Concem planning area.
5. It is the policy of the City to work cooperatively with San Luis Obispo County
to preserve agricultural land within the City's Area of Environmental Concerra
planning area, beyond that deemed necessary for development; it is further
the policy of the City to protect and conserve agricultural land, especially i�a
areas presently farmed or having Class I or II soils or areas that are presently
or were historically farmed or are potentially capable of being farmed.
6. Some urban uses when contiguous to farmland can affect how an agricultural
use can be operated, which can lead to the conversion of agricultural land t�
' urban use.
7. By requiring conservation easements as a condition for land being converted
from an agricultural use and by requiring a one hundred foot buffer, the Git�
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE 3 of 5 �
shall be helping to ensure prime farmland remains in or available for
agricultural use.
� B. The proposed amendment to the Zoning Map and revisions to Title 16 will not
adversely affect the public health, safety, and welfare or result in an illogical land
use pattern.
C. The proposed amendment to the Zoning Map and revisions to Title 16 is
consistent with the purpose and intent of Title 16.
D. A Program EIR was prepared and certified on October 9, 2001 for the 2001
General Plan update which incorporated an analysis of agricultural buffers within
the City of Arroyo Grande and the proposed amendments to Title 16 are within
the scope of the Program EIR and the potential environmental impacts of the
proposed amendment are determined by this Council to be less than significant.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: The above recitals and findings are true and correct.
SECTION 2: Development Code Section 16.24.020, also known as the "Zoning Map of
the City of Arroyo Grande", is hereby amended to incorporate overlay district D-Ag-1.2
as shown in Exhibits "A1-A4" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
SECTION 3: Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Sections set forth hereinbelow are hereby
amended as shown in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference:
a. Amend Sections:16.04.070.C.,16.16.040.E.,16.20.060.C., 16.20.070.C.,
16.28.020.C., 16.28.030, Table 16.28.030-A, 16.28.040, and Table 16.28.040-A;
b. Add Sections: 16.12.170.E., 16.12.170.F., and 16.28.020.C.
SECTION 4: If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or
phrase of this Ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be unlawful, such
decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance or any
part thereof. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each section,
subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of
` the fact that any one or more section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentencea
� clause or phrases be declared unlawful. �
SECTION 5: A summary of this Ordinance shall be published in a newspaper publishe�
and circulated in the City of Arroyo Grande at least five (5) days prior to the City Cou�uc�0
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE 4 of 5
meeting at which the proposed Ordinance is to be adopted. A certified copy of the full
text of the proposed Ordinance shall be posted in the office of the Director of
Administrative Services/Deputy City Clerk. Within fifteen (15) days after adoption of the
Ordinance, the summary with the names of those City Council Members voting for and
against the Ordinance shall be published again, and the Director of Administrative
Services/Deputy City Clerk shall post a certified copy of the full text of such adopted
Ordinance.
SECTION 6: This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after the date of its
adoption.
On motion� of Council Member , seconded
by Council Member and on the following roll call
vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Ordinance was adopted this day of ,
2003.
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE 5 of 5
TONY M. FERRARA, MAYOR
ATTEST:
KELLY WETMORE, DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES/
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY
� � � �� s � � � an
�
_
. .
a uo � �n� asa� � n� ��
�
m . .
_ .
x
W
s}iwn�i�
- u si
�e�a
Z'Z J`d 3�.3 .4
I �O
.�,.::
O
:::s;y';
am i -
3
no�B _auo
I . d Z
�
:::�':;'.�;;;,`,'::::::�::�:::-�'�`'�::::���'���:::�::::::;:�:::':::::::::::::�:�:::-::;::: ,
� I
u
a6a
:r:�
p �
.'Y�
:lt.�
.:�:.
.'.'.Y Lt.�':::.S:t t::.:.
'���:::
::7Y•.'J.'J.•J.•J�'.SS�'tY.:
�
•��KJ:.•.
� �:�':','.:5:,'`!):.7,7.:���::)JJ.... .
:::t.:
::tJ.
:hJ
::jS j
.'.J J
�
�
�
�:J:'.l
I
_ (
. ',F;%%•� ... � - �
;��GS::L.LA.`:JS'.
:;� ''J i
.•'�;❖.• i..
..��
•�Y�;
',�.`
\�' �. . � . . , , ' . � ... .
� `d ��q � uX�
� � i� si � � �n
_
. .
N
� i n n i
m uo � a � � � � �
_ . .
W
5�����,�
Z�Z-Jt/l�u;sia�(e��anp � %
a�n;�noi�By=auoZ �
- puafia� � � i
,
,
��:::_::::
;�
�::
'�,
�� �
::�:
�;�
:�:: ,� .
:;�-:: ;
��� `��,
:�::
t::.'�
�
::��:
..,::
��
�:�;:;�:�:::::�:::��:::::::��.::::::::��:::::::::�:::::.::::::::��::::::::::::::::::..
::��;.
.`.; �
;\
�
-,
��
-,
,, .
\,
J
�`
�.
�
� � I �
� �
z � .a u
�::::::���--.�-::::�::::::::::�:.::.::::.::::::::.. _ .
� __
;
� � � �� s � � aan
$ -
_
$ . .
M
e � �n� asa� �� n n� i� -
_ • �
X
W
s;iw!l�!� __
u si �e�a �"�"""""..
Z'Z-Jt13�.3 a I �O
O
a�n n�u6 =auo
i
i . d Z
�
:.S:�
�
uafia
p �
,
::r::::::::�
r
� : n
;
: :
,� .
��
,,
,
;
Z
::L: ., . ,., , ... .�� , � , .. . �. . . � . . . . .
LS.`.
5.1.'.
,
�'�d ��q � �IX�
.1 _
Exhibit A-4 _
_,�
__,
__�:
, ,' , �
i ( _
i
I
� _
;
i
� _
: j
-c�
_ � �'
�
. j,
��
I I �I
� � �
. , I _ r
, , ;
, i� �
! ounty Agriculture
Legend
� Zone=Agriculture
O Overlay District AG-2.2
City Limits
rn
X
■ . _
r� r r rv i W
cu u e ese a on D
. .
�
vera � s r� c -
.
_ {
�
EXHIBIT B
16.04.070.
C. (Definitions to be added)
Aqricultural conservation easement. The grantinq of an easement over
aqricultural land for the purqose of restrictinct its use to aqricultural land. The
interest aranted pursuant to an aqricultural conservation easement is an interest
in land, which is less than fee simple.
Aqricultural land or farmland. Those land areas of the county and/or citv
specificallv desiqnated or zoned as Agriculture, Aqriculture Preserve or
Apricultural General.
Agricultural mitigation land. Aqricultural land encumbered bv a farmland deed
restriction, a farmland conservation easement or such other f_armland
conservation mechanism acceptable to the citv.
Farmland deed restriction. The creation of a deed restriction, covenant or
condition which precludes the use of the agricultural land subiect to the restriction
for anv nonaqricultural purposes, use, operation or activitv. The deed restrictioro
shall provide that the land subiect to the restriction will permanentiv remain
aqricultural land.
Qualifying entity. A nonprofit public benefit 501 (c)(3) corporation operating
in San Luis Obispo County for the purpose of conserving and protecting land
in its natural, rural or agricultural condition. The following entity is a
qualifying entity: Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo. Other entities may
be approved by the city cbuncil from time to time.
16.12.170 Right to farm provisions and farmland preservation
E. Aqricultural bufFer
1. In coniunction with General Plan policies outlined in the Aqriculture,
Conservation and Open Space Element, and specificallv Objective Aq5,
the citv has determined that the use of property for aqricultural operations
is a high prioritv. To minimize potential conflicts befinreen aaricultural and
nonagriculturaf land uses, including the protection of public health, the
reduction of noise and odor, and the reduction of risk to farm operations
from domestic animal predation, crop theft and damage and complaints
from neighborinq urban dwellers, all new development adiacent to anv
desiqnated agricultural district shall be required to provide an aqricultural
buffer. "DevelopmenY' as used in this section, means subdivision of land,
� use permits and buildinq permits for new residential units.
2. The buffer area shall be a minimum of one hundred feet, measured frorr�
the edqe of the desiqnated aqricultural district. Optimallv, to achieve a
maximum separation a buffer wider than one hundred feet is encouraqed
1
and mav be required if it is determined throuqh environmental review
under CEQA and/or recommended by the San Luis Obisqo County
Aqricultural Commissioner. A decreased buffer distance mav be allowed
if it can be demonstrated that a physical buffer exists (eq. Arroyo Grande
Creek� that is adequate and approved by the San Luis Obispo Countv
Agricultural Commissioner.
1. The minimum one hundred foot aqricultural buffer area shall be
comprised of two components: a twentv foot wide agricultural landscaped
transitio_n__ area contiguous to an eiqhtv-foot wide agricultural buffer
adiacent to the designated agricultural district. The finrentv-foot transition
area may include pedestrian access. The combined one hundred foot
agricultural buffer shall not qualify as farmland mitiqation as required bv
section 16.12.170.F.
2. The following shall be permitted in the one hundred foot agricultural buffer:
native plants, tree or hedge rows, roads, drainaqe channels, storm
retention ponds, natural areas such as creeks or drainage swales, utility
corridors, storaqe, and any use, includinq aqricultural or limited
commercial uses, determined by the planning commission to be consistent
with the use of the proqerty as an aqricultural buffer. No new residential
use shall be permitted within the buffer area.
3. The one hundred foot aaricultural buffer shall be established bv the
developer pursuant to a plan approved by the CommunitV Development
Director and the Parks. Recreation and Facilities Director. The plan shall
include provisions for the use of integrated weed and pest manaaement
techniques and soil erosion control. An agreement in the form approved
� the city attorney shall be recorded, which shall include the
reauirements of this section.
16.12.170.F Aqricultural Land Conversion
1. The citv shall require aqricultural mitigation bv applicants for discretionarv
entitlements which will chanqe the use of agricultural land to any non aqricultural
use.
2. Agricultural mitigation shall be satisfied b�
a. Granting a farmland conservation easement, a farmland deed
restriction or other farmland conservation mechanism to or for the
' benefit of the city and/or a qualifvina entity approved bv the city.
Mitigation shall be required for that qortion of the land which no
longer will be designated agricultural land, includinq anv portion of
the land used for park and recreation purposes. At least as manv
acres of prime agricultural land shall be protected as was chanqed '
2
to a non aaricultural use within citv limits or up to finro times as
manv acres of agricultural land shall be protected outside the citv
but within the citv's Area of Environmental Concern as was
chanqed to a nonaqricultural use, in order to mitigate the loss of
aqricultural land; or
b. In lieu of conservinq aqricultural land as provided above if the ci�
council determines that the payment of in-lieu fees provide a
superior opportunity to satisfy the aoals and policies of the General
Plan, aqricultural mitiqation mav be satis�ed bv the pavment of a
fee, established bv the city council by resolution or through an
enforceable agreement with the developer based upon a farmland
replacement factor of up to 2:1 to be used for acquisition of a
farmland conservation easement or farmland deed restriction. The
in lieu fee option must be approved by the citv council. The fee
shall be equal to or areater than the value of a qrevious farmland
conservation transaction in the city plus the estimated cost of leqal
a�praisal and other costs, includinq staff time to acquire propertv
for aqricultural mitiqation. The in lieu fee, paid to the citv shall be
used for farmland mitiqation �,urposes, with prioritv qiven to lands
with prime agricultural soils located within the citv.
3. It is the intent of this proqram to work in a coordinated fashion with San
Luis Obispo County and State ag,encies, and, therefore, farmland
conservation easement areas mav overlap partiallv or completely with
habitat easement areas approved by the State Department of Fish and
Game. Up to twentv percent of the farmland conservation easement area
mav be enhanced for wildlife habitat purposes as per the requirements of
the State Deqartment of Fish and Game and/or San Luis Ob'ispo Co�rntv
manaqement pro rams: payment of appropriate maintenance, processinq
or other fees may also be required.
4. Comparable soils and water supplLr.
a. To the areatest extent possible, the agricultural mitigation land shall
be comparable in soil quality with the agricultural land whose use is
being chanqed to nonaqricultural use.
b. The aqricultural mitiqation land shall have an adequate water
supplv to support agricultural use and the water supply on the
aqricultural mitigation land shall be protected in the aqricultural
` conservation easement, the familand deed restriction or other
document evidencinq the aQricultural mitiqation.
5. Eliqible lands. The first priority for agricultural mitiqation land shall be
farmland located within city limits. The second prioritv for aqricultural mitiqation
3
shall be farmland located adiacent to citv limits, and the third prioritv, farmland
located within the city's Area of Environmental �Concern, as shown in the 2001
General Plan. The criteria for qreferred locations or zones for aqricultural
mitigation land shall be determined bv the city council after receiving input from
the planninq commission and San Luis Obispo County Agricultural
Commissioner. In making their determination, the following factors shall be
considered:
a. The preferred locations shall be compatible with the 2001 General
Plan and the general plan of San Luis Obispo Count�
b. The preferred locations shall include aomqarable soil types to that
most likely to be lost due to proqosed developmerit.
c. Aqricultural mitiQation land consisting of contiauous parcels shall
be preferred.
d. Land previouslv protected by a conservation easement of any nature
or kind is not eliqble to aualify as a�gricultural mitigation land.
6. Reauirements of instruments: duration.
a. To qualifv as an instrument encumbering agricultural mitiqation
land, all owners of the agricultural mitiQation land shall execute the
instrument. ,
b. The instrument shall be in recordable form and contain an
accurate legal description setting forth the description of the
agricultural mitiqation land.
c. The instrument shall prohibit anv activitv, which substantiallv
impairs or diminishes the agricultural productivitv of the land, as
determined by the planning commission.
d. The instrument shall protect the existinq water riQhts and retain
them with the agricultural mitiaation land.
e. The applicant shall pav an agricultural mitiqation fee to pay the
costs of administering, monitorinq and enforcing the instrument in
an amount determined by citv council.
� f. Interests in aqricultural mitiaation land shall be held in trust by a
9ualifvinq entity and/or the citv, in qerpetuitv. Except as provided in
subsection (g) of this section, the qualifvinq entity or the citv shall
not sell, lease, or convey any interest in aaricultural mitiaation land ,
4
which it shall acquire, except to continue aqricultural uses in
accordance with the encumbering instrument.
q. If iudicial proceedings find that the public interests described in
chapter 16.28 of this title can no longer reasonably be fulfilled as
to an interest acQUired, the interest in the agricultural mitipation
land may be extinguished throuqh sale and the proceeds shall be
used to acquire interests in other aqricultural mitigation land in San
Luis Obispo County, as aqproved by the citv and qrovided in this
chaPter•
h. If anv Qualifving entity owning an interest in agricultural mitiaation
land ceases to exist, the dutv to hold, administer, monitor and
enforce the interest shall pass to the city or its designee.
i. Each aualifvinq entitv shall monitor lands and easements it
acquires under this chapter and shall review and monitor the
imqlementation of the management and maintenance plans for
these lands and easement areas.
7. Violation.
Any person or entity who violates any provision of this chapter shall be deemed
quiltv of a misdemeanor and. upon conviction thereof, shall be punished bv a fine
not exceeding the maximum prescribed bv law. In addition, any qerson or entitv
who violates any provision of this chapter shall be liable to the transferee of the
property for actual damages.
16.16.040 Amendments to zoning districts and other provisions
E. Required findings. The city council may approve amendments to this title,
including amendment to the zoning map only if all of the following findings of fact
can be made in an affirmative manner:
1. The proposed change of zone (or revision to this title) is consistent with the
goals, objectives, policies and programs of the general plan, and is
necessary and desirable to implement to provisions of the general plan;
2. The proposed change of zone (or revision to this title)will not adversely affect
the public health, safety, and welfare or result in an illogical land use pattern;
3. the proposed change of zone (or revision to this title) is consistent with the
purpose and intent of the title (or the portion of this title it is amending);
4. The potential environmental impacts of the proposed change of zone (or ,
revision to this title) are insignificant, or there are overriding considerations �
` that outweigh the potential impacts, ,
5. For aqplications to amend this title for the purposes of rezoninq propertv in
an aqricultural district to a non-aqricultural district, the following additional
findinqs of fact must be made�in an affirmative manner;
�
�
5
a. That the uneconomic nature of the agricultural use is primarily
attributable to circumstances bevond the control of the landowner
and the citv, and there are no other reasonable or comparable
aaricultural uses to which the land may be put, either individually
or in combination with other adiacent farmland parcels; and
b. The proqosed chanpe in zone (or revision to this title) is for a
parcel, or for a contiquous set of parcels, that is legallX
nonconforminq as to minimum area in the Agriculture district; and
c. The proposed chanqe in zone (or revision to this title) will not
result in, intensify, or contribute to discontiguous patterns of urban
development; and
d. The proposed change in zone (or revision to this title) will not likely
result in the removal of adiacent lands from aqricultural use; and
e. The_proposed change in zone (or revision to this title) is for an
alternative use which is consistent with the applicable provisions of
the city's General�Plan; and
f. That there is no proximate land, which is both available and
suitable that would provide more contiguous patterns of urban
development than develoament of the subiect farmland.
16.20.060 Tentative tract maps
C. Findings. Any action taken by the planning commission or citv council
regarding a tentative tract map shall be supported by the findings required by
applicable provisions of Section 21100 of the California Public Resources Code
and Sections 66412.3, 66427.1, 66473.1, 66473.5, 66474, and 66474.6 of the
California Government Code. In addition, the following findings shall be made in
the affirmative prior to the approval of a tentative tract map:
1. The proposed tentative tract map is consistent with goals, objectives,
policies, plans, programs, intent and requirements of the Arroyo Grande
General Plan, as well as any applicable specific plan, and the
requirements of this title.
2. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed.
3. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development.
4. The design of the tentative tract map or the proposed improvements are
not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and
avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
5. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements is not likely to
cause serious public health problems.
6. The design of the tentative tract map or the type of improvements will not
conflict with easements acquired by the public-at-large for access through,
or use of, property within the proposed tentative tract map or that alternate
' easements for access or for use will be provided, and that these
alternative easements will be substantially equivalent to ones previously ;
acquired by the public. '
7. The discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into an existing '
community sewer system will not result in violation of existir��
�
6
requirements as prescribed in Division 7 (commencing with Section
13000) of the California Water Code.
8. Adequate public services and facilities exist or will be provided as�the
result of the proposed tentative tract map to support project development.
9. For a qroposed subdivision that includes, or is adiacent to an Aqriculture
district; the desiqn of the tentative map or proposed improvements shall
provide an adequate buffer. according to Section 16.12.170.F. and as
further determined through environmental review under CEQA, to
minimize potential conflicts befinreen aqricultural and non-aqricultural land
uses and to protect the qublic health, safety and welfare.
16.20.070 Tentative Parcel Map.
C. Findings. Any action taken by the planning commission or citv council
regarding a tentative parcel map shall be supported by the findings required
by Section 66427.1, 66573.5, 66474 and 66474.6 of the Government Code
and Section 21100 of the Public Resources Code. In addition, the following
findings shall be made in the affirmative prior to approval of a tentative
parcel map:
1. The proposed tentative parcel map is consistent with goals, objectives,
policies, plans, programs, intent and requirements of the Arroyo Grande .
General Plan, as well as any applicable Specific Plan, and the
requirements of this title.
2. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed.
3. The site is physically suitable for the proposed densify of development.
4. The design of the tentative parcel map or the proposed improvements are
not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and
avoidably injure�sh or wildlife or their habitat.
5. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements is not likely to
cause serious public health problems.
6. The design of the tentative parcel map or the type of improvements will
not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access
through, or use of, property within the proposed tentative parcel map or
that alternate easements for access or for use will be provided, and that
these alternative easements will be substantially equivalent to ones
previously acquired by the public.
7. The discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into an existing
community sewer system will not result in violation of existing
requirements as prescribed by Division 7 (commencing with Section
13000) of the California Water Code.
8. Adequate public services and facilities exist or will be provided as the
result of the proposed tentative parcel map to support project '
` development. (Prior code § 9-04.070) '
9. For a proposed subdivision that includes, or is adjacent to an Aqricultural
district; the desiqn of the tentative maq or proposed improvements shaU �
provide an adequate buffer, according to Section 16.12.170.F. and as �
further determined throuqh environmental review under CEQA, to
7
minimize potential conflicts between aqricultural and non-agricultural land
uses and to protect the public health, safety and welfare.
16.28.020 Agricultural districts
C. Aqricultural Preservation Overlav (AG-2.1) District. The primaN purpose
of the AG-2.1 overlay district is to provide for a mechanism to minimize
potential conflicts between agricultural and nonagricultural land uses. This
district is to provide for an aqricultural buffer transitional area and requires
that new development and chanqes in use require discretionarv approval in
accordance with Section 16.12.170.E.
16.28.030 Use Regulations for Agricultural Districts.
Subject to applicable general plan policies and Arroyo Grande ordinance
provisions, the following uses identified in Table 16.28.030-A shall be permitted
uses where the symbol "P" appears in the column beneath each agricultural zone
designation as shown. Where the symbol "F�RMUP" appears, the use shall be
permitted subject to the p 'ev� minor use permit process pursuant to
Section 16.16.060. Where the symbol "C" appears, uses shall be permitte�
subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit in accordance with the
provisions of Section 16.16.050. " " ' '
�±s�i�le: Uses not identifred in the table are prohibited.
Table 16.28.030-A
Uses Permitted Within Agricultural Districts
Legend
P Permitted
MUP Minor Use Permit
C Permitted Subject to Issuance of Conditional Use Permit
NP Not Permitted
Use AG AP '
A. A ricultural Uses
1. Field cro s, flower and ve etable cro s, tree cro s P P
2. Greenhouses used only for the purposes of onsite �MUP �MUP
' ro a ation and culture
�3. Grazing of cattle, horses, sheep, goats, or other P P
farm stock or animals, not including hogs, but
includin the su lementa feedin thereof
�4. Farms or establishments for the selective or P P
�
Use AG AP
experimental breeding and raising of cattle, sheep,
oats, and horses
45. The commercial or noncommercial raisin of ho s C C
56. Farms for hatching, raising, butchering, or C C
marketing of chickens, turkeys, or other fowl,
rabbits, fish, frogs, chinchilla, mink, or other small
animals
67. Farms for commercial egg production, including C C
ancillary activities or grading washing, and packing
of whole eggs, and containerizing those eggs
incidentall broken durin such ancilla activities
�8. Dairy farms and dairy calf, heifer, cry cow and herd C C
replacement operations, including the grazing of
cattle
B. Residential Uses �
1. Ranch or farm dwellina aqpurtenant to a principal P P
a ricultural use
�-.2. Single-family detached dwelling on conforminq P P
arcels
3. SinQle-family detached dwellinq on leqal non- C C
conformin lots ursuant to Section 16.16.050-D.2
�4. Farm labor camp (temporary, only during harvest �RMUP �RMUP
season
�5. Employee's residence (permanent - subject to C C
second unit re ulations
46. Second residential dwellin unit C C
7. Guest ranches MUP C
C. Commercial Uses
1. Temporary stand for the display and sale during �RRMUP �RMUP
harvest season of the agricultural produce of any
permitted use that is produced upon the premises
and related roducts
2. Permanent stand for the display and sale of the �RMUP �RMUP
agricultural produce of any permitted use that is '
roduced u on the remises and related roducts
3. Temporary or permanent stand for the display and CUP CUP
sale of agricultural produce of ay permitted use
that is qroduced on or off the premises and related
roducts
� �4. Feed stores C N P
45. Commercial stables C NP
�6. Ridin academies C NP
67. Kennels�and catteries C NP
�8. Winery and appurtenant and incidental uses with C C
established onsite vine ard
9
Use AG AP
9. Greenhouses not otherwise allowed under No. A-2 C C
10. Wholesale nurseries C C
11. Lar e animal Veterina office C NP
D. Industrial Uses
1. The breaking, separation, pasteurization,
containerizing and freezing of eggs
a. For eggs produced onsite C C
b. For eggs produced elsewhere and brought onsite C NP
for rocessin
2. Packaging, processing and marketing of agricultural C NP
waste roducts other than those roduced onsite
3. Drying, packing, canning, freezing, and other C C
accepted methods of processing the produce
resulting from permitted uses when such processing
is conducted primarily in conjunction with onsite
farmin o eration
4. Packaged fertilizer and agricultural chemical
storage P P
a. For exclusive use onsite C C
b. For offsite use
E. Public/Quasi-Public Uses
: 1. Public utility and public service substations, MUP MUP �
reservoirs, pumping plants, and similar installations
not includin ublic utilit offices
2 Communit ardens C NP
3. Other public facilities when required for health, C NP
safet or ublic welfare
F. Home Occupations P P
(Subject to the provisions of Section 16.12.090, and
the issuance of a home occu ation ermit ,
G. Accesso Uses
1. Guest uarters C C
2. . Private swimmin ool, tennis court P P
3. Other accessory uses and structures located on the P P
same site as a ermitted use
4. Other accessory uses and structures located on the �RMUP �RMUP
same site as a use requiring �e�a� minor use
ermit review
5. Other accessory uses and structures located on the C C
� same site as a use requiring a conditional use
ermit
H. Other uses similar to, and no more C C
objectionable than the uses identifed above, as
determined b the lannin commission
10
_ _ _
16.28.040 Aqricultural District Development Standards.
The following property development standards shall apply to all land and
permitted, or conditionally permitted buildings located within their respective
districts. The standards stated herein shall not be construed to supersede more
restrictive site development standards contained in the conditions, covenants and
restrictions of any property. However, in no case shall private deed restrictions
permit a lesser standard in the case of a minimum standard of this section or
permit a greater standard in the case of a maximum standard of this section.
A. General Requirements. Table 16.28.040-A sets forth minimum site
development standards for agricultural development projects.
Table 16.28.040-A
Agricultural Site Development Standards
AG AP
1. Maximum Densitv
a) sinqle family dwellinq 1 1
units per parcel)
b)farm worker housinq As determined throuqh
discretiona review
�2. Minimum parcel size 10.0 10A
ross acres
�3. Minimum lot width 330' 330'
�4. Minimum front yard 50'* 50'*
buildin setback
45. Minimum rear yard 50'* 50'*
buildin setback
56 Minimum interior side 30'* 30'* '
ard setback
67 Minimum street side yard 30'* 30'*
setback
�8 Maximum height for 30' 30'
buildin s and structures
*
. , ,
,
v.\A/�f1. 7.��.
� B.Accessory Buildings and Structures.
1. Accessorv buildincls and structures shall be sited to minimize disruption of
aqricultural operations, avoid conversions of productive farmland and take
maximum advantage of existing infrastructure.
11
2. Accessory buildings and structures shall be permitted in the rear and side
yards provided no building or structure is allowed in the side yard within sixty (60)
feet of the front lot line, nor within ten (10) feet of the side property line, nor
permitted in any street side yard. .
;
12
ATTACHMENT 1
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
215 EAST BRANCH STREET
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 2003 —6:00 P.M.
ROLL CALL Commissioners Brown, Keen, Fowler and Chair Guthrie
present; Commissioner Arnold absent.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE*
AGENDA REVIEW
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of October 21, 2003 were approved as is.
Commissioner Fowler abstained.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS — None
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None
ITEM II.A: NOTICE OF MINOR USE PERMITS APPROVED SINCE OCTOBER 21,
2003. No Minor Use Permits have been approved since the last Commission meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING III.A: PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CASE NO. 03-004 &
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP CASE NO. 03-045; APPLICANT — MILLISSEE K.
THOMPSON; LOCATION — 1169 MAPLE STREET. Staff report prepared and
presented by Assistant Planner, Jim Bergman.
This item to be continued to a date uncertain.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM III.B: CONTINUED ITEM: DEVELOPMENT CODE
AMENDMENT CASE NO. 03-005; APPLICANT * CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE;
LOCATION CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE. Staff report prepared and presented by
Associate Planner, Teresa McClish
Ms. McClish described the proposed Development Code Amendment, stating that this was
the second in a series of actions initiated by City Council Resolution 3699. The proposed
ordinance contains the implementing regulations for several policies required in the 2001
General Plan. Included in the proposed ordinance are regulations for agricultural buffers,
findings required for subdivisions and rezoning applications, mitigation requirements and
revised use regulations and property development standards for the agricultural district to
provide flexibility for agricultural operations.
Ms. McClish discussed the proposed buffer regulations including the proposed Agricultural
Preservation Overlay District AG-2.2 consisting of a 100 foot perimeter surrounding
Agriculturally zoned properties to acknowledge and address the urban/agricultural interface
within the City. Chair Guthrie and Commissioner Brown asked questions clarifying allowed
development on parcels within the proposed overlay district. Ms. McClish responded that
accessory uses appurtenant to existing uses and residential remodels are examples of
actions not affected by the proposed overlay district and buffer regulations. New residential
uses, including second residential dwelling units may be allowed on a property adjacent to
PLANNfNG COMMISSION AGENDA PAGE 2
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 2003
an agricultural district but not within the 100 foot overlay district. Commissioner Keen asked
if non-residential structures could be allowed to be built within the overlay district. Ms.
McClish answered yes.
Ms. McClish asked the Commission to consider the following revisions to Exhibit "B" to the
proposed ordinance after consultation with the City Attorney.
1) In proposed section 16.12.170E. Agricultural Buffer. No. 1, the second sentence
would be amended as follows: To minimize potential conflicts between
agricultural and nonagricultural land uses, including the protection of public
hea/th, the reduction of noise and odor, and the reduction of risk to farm
operations from domestic animal predation, crop theft and damage and
camplaints from neighboring urban dwellers, all new deve%pment adjacent to
any designated agricultural istricts
€a�far�ing shall be required to provide an agricultural buffer. A third sentence is
proposed to be added: "Development"as used in this section means subdivision
of land, use permits, and building permits for new residential units.
2) No. 5. the third sentence is proposed to be revised as follows: An easer�efl�-+�
��e�-e�-t#�e�-si�y avreement in the form a�aroved bv the Citv attorney shall be
recorded which shall include the requirements of this a�tis�e
section or, at the �i�es�e�s-' citY council's discretion the property sbaµ-ma�!be
dedicated to the city in fee title.
3) In proposed section 16.12.170.F. No. 2 is proposed to be revised as follows: the
first sentence should indicate a ratio of 2:1 instead of 1:1. The third sentence is ;
proposed to be replaced by the following; The fee shall be established by City j
Council Resolution which shall be reviewed periodically to ensure that the fee is
adequate to offset the cost of purchasing agricultural canservation easements on
a ratio of up to 2:1.
4) No. C. is proposed to be deleted.
5) No. G is proposed to be replaced with the following; Agricultural mitigation land
consisting of contiguous parcels shall be preferred.
Chair Guthrie opened the Public Hearing
Karen Estes, 811 E. Cherry
Ms. Estes spoke against the buffer overlay proposal stating that the City would have to
accept liability for the buffer and that there is a loss of use of her property. Ms. Estes
suggested that the buffer be placed on the agricultural parcels since agricultural spraying is
the reason a buffer is necessary.
Otis Page, 606 Myrtle Street
Mr. Page stated that the proposed ordinance is inconsistent in application in that there are
other properties containing prime farmland soils that are not protected and that the
Commission should look at this. He referred to the Stillwell property as an example.
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA PAGE 3
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 2003
Bill SummerField, E. Cherry Ave.
Mr. Summerfield stated that the proposal protects farming at the expense of residents. The
buffer should be on the agricultural property since there are far fewer property owners that
would be affected by the buffer overlay compared to 95 residential property owners who will
be affected. Mr. SummerField suggested that farmers could use organic farming techniques
for the agricultural land adjacent to residential areas.
Chair Guthrie closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Keen asked for clarification on the first sentence of proposed section
16.12.170E.2. Agricultural Buffers. Ms. McClish proposed the following wording: The buffer
area shall be a minimum of one hundred feet, measured from the edge of the designated
agricultura/ district. Commissioner Brown asked for clarification on the section
16.12.170F.e.2. Agricultural Preservation. Ms. McClish proposed the following wording: The
agricultural mitigation land shall have adequate water supply to support agricultural use and
the water supply on the agricu/tural mitigation land shall be protected in the agricultural
conservafion easement, the farm/and deed restriction or other document evidencing the
agricultura/mitigation. Both wording changes were acceptable to the Commission.
Commissioner Brown requested further clarification on the allowed uses within the
proposed buffer overlay district. After some discussion, the Commission decided that the
definition of "development" that was proposed earlier in Section 16.12.170.E.2 was
sufficient.
Commissioner Keen stated that he is in favor of the proposed buffer restrictions for new
development but that he is against the proposed buffer overlay district. Commissioner Keen �i
stated that the Right To Farm provisions were adequate for the purposes of notification of !
property owners. �
Chair Guthrie questioned the appropriateness of the 2:1 mitigation ratio for lands outside
the City limits in the area of Environmental Concern, which is quite large. The mitigation
would not be adequate in that it would not provide permanent protection for lands within the
City limits which is the intent of the regulations. The City could use in lieu fees to get
whatever land would be available for permanent protection, inside or outside the City. Chair
Guthrie stated that he would be in favor of removing the requirements for 2:1 mitigation for
lands outside the City.
Commissioner Keen questioned the effectiveness of in-lieu fees for this purpose and that by
eliminating the potential ability to seek mitigation land outside the City would prevent any
conversions because land inside the City in not likely to be available for mitigation.
The commission clarified with staff that the proposed buffer overlay district is intended to
prevent further residential development within 100 feet of any agricultural district that may
otherwise occur through ministerial building permit issuance. Without the proposed overlay
section the buffer regulations proposed in section 16.12.170.E. would apply to all
discretionary actions adjacent to agricultural districts.
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA PAGE 4
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 2003
Chair Guthrie recommended that the Commission break their discussion on the proposed
ordinance into three categories, mitigation, buffer requirements for discretionary new
development and the proposed buffer overlay district.
Commissioner Brown made a motion, seconded by Chair Guthrie, that the Commission
approve the mitigation requirements proposed in Exhibit "B" section 16.12.170.F. as
amended by staff. The commission clarified that the motion did not include the removal of
the 2:1 provision for mitigation lands outside the City Limits.
The motion was approved on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Brown, Keen and Chair Guthrie
NOES: Commissioner Fowler
ABSENT: Commissioner Arnold
Chair Guthrie made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Keen, that the Commission
approve the buffer requirements for discretionary new development in Exhibit "B" section
16.12.170.E. including revisions proposed by staff.
The motion was approved on the following roll call vote: '
AYES: Commissioners Brown, Keen and Chair Guthrie
NOES: Commissioner Fowler !
ABSENT: Commissioner Arnold �
Commissioner Brown made a motion, seconded by Chair Guthrie, that the Commission f
approve the proposed overlay district in Exhibit "B' section 16.28.020.C.
The motion failed on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioner Brown and Chair Guthrie
NOES: Commissioners Fowler and Keen
ABSENT: Commissioner Arnold
Commissioner Brown made a motion, seconded by Ch�ir Guthrie, that the Commission
approve the remaining portions of Exhibit "6", amended sections 16.16.040.E.,
16.20.060.E., 16.20.070.C„ 16.28.030 and 16.28.040.
The motion was approved by the flowing roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Brown, Keen, Fowler and Chair Guthrie
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Arnold
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA PAGE 5
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 2003
NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEM IV.A: PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO. 03-016;
APPLICANT—AGENE GRIGG; LOCATION —563 S. TRAFFIC WAY. Staff report
prepared and presented by Assistant Planner, Jim Bergman.
Mr. Bergman gave an overview of the proposal to convert two houses on one lot into two
separate single-family residences on finro separate lots, and add a garage to the house on
the uppermost elevation. Records indicate that this lot has had civil litigation in the past.
Mr. Grigg clarified that the second residence on the property is a single-family residence,
not a two-unit rental.
Planning Commission comments:
• Chair Guthrie recommended that the proposed garage would need to have a normal
driveway/apron leading to it. If the lot split occurs, he would prefer that it be split into
two 6,000 square foot lots, not a 7,200 square foot lot and a 4,800 square foot lot,
which may not be feasible due to the slope and terrain.
• Commissioner Keen does not want the lot to be split. He would prefer that the
existing single-family residence and second unit remain on the single parcel.
• Commissioner Fowler likes the idea of splitting the parcel into two separate lots.
• Commissioner Brown indicated that a lot split would result in two non-conforming ''
lots. The resulting two single-family lots with increased demand for parking and j
traffic. He is not in favor of splitting the lot. ;
NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEM IV.B: PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO. 03-015;
APPLICANT— MARY GUERNSEY-SMITH; LOCATION — 567 CROWN HILL. Staff report
prepared and presented by Assistant Planner, Ryan Foster.
Mr. Foster gave an overview of the proposal to consolidate the existing eight (8) lots into
three (3) lots and build a new residence on each of the three lots.
Discussion comments:
• Commissioner Brown asked if splitting the eight lots into finro lots would be a better fit
for the neighborhood. The Planning Commission observed that the proposed split
into three lots would make it consistent with the surrounding neighborhood.
• Mr. Smith con�rmed that the lot slope is at about a 7 percent grade.
• Staff indicated that several residences would be served off of the proposed
driveway, eliminating the need for multiple driveway accesses onto Crown Hill, which
would serve the neighborhood well.
• There was discussion a bout turning radiuses f or the residents' automobiles at the
rear of the residences.
• The e xisting r esidence was o riginally o wned by t he B ennett f amily. T he p roperty
owner may attempt to move and reuse the front wall of the old residence by
incorporating it into the new residence.
• The Commission responded favorably to the pre-application.
• The Commission wants sidewalks and underground utilities to be considered for this
project.
__ . _
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA PAGE 6
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 2003
NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEM IV.C: PLANNING COMMISSION ADOPTION OF
REVISED PLANNING COMMISSION BY-LAWS - RESOLUTION NO. 03-1901.
Commissioner Fowler made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Keen to adopt the
Resolution to revise the Planning Commission By-laws:
The motion was approved on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Fowler, Keen, Brown, Guthrie
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Arnold
DISCUSSION ITEMS
The Commission expressed concern about Oak tree preservation related to
underground trenching for utilities. A project was recently approved that required deep
underground trenching on Pine Street. Staff will discuss the situation with Public Works.
The Commission a sked Staff to research a nd handle the situation related to a letter
received from Donald Martin.
PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS AND COMMENTS — None.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR COMMENTS AND FOLLOW-UP — None.
ADJOURNMENT—The meeting was adjourned at 8:40 PM
�
9.d.
� pRROYO
o �,�
� INCORPOAATED�Z
V �
� JULY /0. 1911 *
C4��FORN�P MEMORANDUM
�
i
I
TO: CITY COUNCIL
�
FROM: ROB STRONG, COMMUNIN DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOA�
VIA: �,�,KELLY HEFFERNON, ASSOCIATE PLANNER
SUBJECT; CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 03-005; 2003
HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE (CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING FROM
NOVEMBER 11, 2003)
DATE: NOVEMBER 25, 2003
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the Council review changes made to the 2003 Housing Element since
the November 11, 2003 Council meeting, receive public comment on the document, and
adopt a Resolution approving Generai Plan Amendment 03-005 — the 2003 Housing
Element.
DISCUSSION:
State Law requires each community to have an adopted Housing Element. The Housing
Element consists of a series of goals, policies and programs that are oriented to the
preservation, improvement and development of housing. The Housing Element identifies
sites for all types of housing that are projected to meet the needs of all economic
segments of the community. The Housing Element Update must contain all State
mandated information including quantified objectives and the identification of adequate
sites to meet Arroyo Grande's identified housing needs. It must atso address recently
adopted legislation regarding constraints that hinder meeting the housing needs for
persons with disabilities. �
The City Council considered the 2003 Housing Element on November 11, 2003 and
requested several changes be made to the document. Changes are shown as shaded and
underlined text in the document and are summarized below for reference. Clarifications
are made in instances where questions were raised, but did not necessarily require any
text changes.
1. The following text has been added to Program A.11-1 regarding the application of
density bonuses: "Within Planned Developmenfs, the City is obligated by Stafe law
to provide density bonuses of 25 per�ent for projects that provide either 10 per�cent
of the unifs for very-low, 20 per�cent of the units for low-income, or 50 pe►�cent of the
units for senior housing units, subject to environmental constraints per CEQA
CITY COUNCIL
NOVEMBER 25, 2003
DRAFT 2003 HOUSING ELEMENT
PAGE 2
requirements. �thin Planned Developments, consideration of density bonuses
above the State requiremenfs shall be discrefionary." (Page 8).
2. The words "mixed use and multiple-family' have been added to Program B.4-1
regarding residential building height (page 11).
3. Policy C.1 has been revised to include text from Program C.1-1. (Page 12).
4. In response to questions related to Development Processing and Impact Fees
(page 75), the financial projection table contained in Program C.1-1 has been
modified to address the concern of insufficient funding without State financial
assistance (page 13). Text has also been added under Section 2.2 (Summary of
Quantified Objectives) to further clarify funding issues related to water supply and
other infrastructure improvements (page 26).
5. Program D.1-1 was revised to state "increased residential capacity for multiple
family development" and the words "at least 25%" have been deleted (page 14).
6. The words "and to promote mixed-use development and a jobs/housing balance"
have been added to the end of Program F.3-1 (page 17).
7. Policy H.2 has been reworded as follows: "The City shall ensure zoning
compatibility when integrating public affordable housing projects into existing
residential neighborhoods. Adverse impacts relating to neighborhood stability and
quality of life issues shall also be considered." (Page 19).
8. The following text has been added to the first sentence of Program J.5-1 "The Cify
shall further study the housing needs of farmworkers and if determined necessary
or appropriate, update the Development Code': (Page 22).
9. Table 6 has been modified to bold several of the "Industry" categories, which are
then discussed below to provide further explanation of commuting patterns (page
34).
10. Table 15, starting on page 53, has been modified to reduce, and more accurately
approximate, the number of affordable housing units in the "General Inventory of
Higher Density Land Use Categories" column. The summary page of Table 15
(page 64) shows numbers that are closer to the Regional Housing Needs Allocation.
11. Stronger language has been added under Section 5.2 regarding water constraints
(page 69).
�2. To clarify which building code the City is using, the word "Califomia" has been
added on page 71, and "latest version" of the Building Code has been added on
page 73. The City currently does not use the NFPA Building Code.
i
CITY COUNGlL
NOVEMBER 25, 2003
DRAFT 2003 HOUSING ELEMENT
PAGE 3
�3. The staff response under item 14 (page 92) was expanded to include the benefits of
interagency regional coordination in an effort to gain more of a "jobs-housing
balance".
14. Other minor changes were made to clean up the document.
Note that the deadline to submit the 2003 Housing Element to the State Department of
Housing and Community Development is December 31, 2003, and that the Resolution
adopting the 2003 Housing Element requires thirty (30) days before it becomes effective. '
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for Council's consideration:
- Approve the Planning Commission's recommendation and adopt the Resolution;
- Modify the Planning Commission's recommendation and adopt the Resolution;
- Do not adopt the Resolution; or
- Provide direction to staff. '
S:\COMMUNITY_DEVELOPMENT�PROJECTS\SPECIAU2003 HOUSING ELEMENT1Local Housing Task ForceVuleetings\11-25-03
CC Meeting\CC Staff Rpt..doc
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO
GRANDE ADOPTING THE 2003 HOUSING ELEMENT OF THE
GENERAL PLAN; ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND
INSTRUCTING THE DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES TO
FILE A NOTICE OF DETERMINATION.
WHEREAS, Section 65302(c) of the California Government Code requires all cities and
counties to prepare a general plan housing element; and
WHEREAS, the City of Arroyo Grande has determined that it is appropriate and
necessary to update and revise the previous housing e(ement adopted by the City in 1993
and updated in 2001; and
WHEREAS, a City-appointed Local Housin� Task Force held numerous meetings over
an eight (8) month period to provide technical review of the 2003 Housing Element to
the Planning Commission and City Council, and to help build consensus on policy
direction; and
WHEREAS, the public participation in the development of the housing element included
duly noticed public workshops on the following dates to solicit community input about
the availability of affordable housing and special housing needs in Arroyo Grande:
. November 19, 2002
. February 18, 2003
. May 20, 2003
. July 1, 2003
. July 29, 2003; and
WHEREAS, duly noticed public hearings were held by the Planning Commission of the
City of Arroyo Grande on September 2, 2003 and October 21, 2003, at which time all
interested persons were given the opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, a preliminary draft Housing Element has been reviewed by the State
Housing and Community Development Department and changes to the document were
suggested and requested. State Housing and Community Development Department's
comments were considered and appropriate modifications based on these comments
were made to the Housing Element; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the information and public
testimony presented at duly noticed public hearings held on November 11, 2003 and
November 25, 2003 and the information contained in the proposed Draft Housing
E(ement and staff reports; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds as follows:
A. The City of Arroyo Grande has prepared an initial study pursuant to
Section 15063 of the Guidelines of the California Environmental Quality
� Act for the Housing Element.
B. Based on the initial study, a negative declaration was prepared for review
by the public and review and adoption by the City Council.
C. After holding a public hearing pursuant to State and City Codes, and
considering the record as a whole, the City Council adopts the negative
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 2
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.
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the proposed Housing Element in
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined
that a negative declaration can be adopted.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Arroyo
Grande, as follows:
SECTION 1. The 2003 Housing Element, a copy of which is on file in the Administrative
Services Department, and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in
full, is hereby adopted, and the Director of Administrative Services is hereby directed to
file a Notice of Determination. Said action is taken based on the following findings of
fact:
1. The Housing Element is consistent with the goals, objectives, policies and
programs of the General Plan and will not result in any internal inconsistencies
within the General Plan.
2. The Housing Element will not adversely affect#he public health, safety and
welfare because it will help the City achieve housing for all economic segments
of the community.
3. Based on the initial study and all the comments received, the potential
environmental impacts of the Housing Element are insignificant.
SECTiON Z. Typographica( corrections to the 2003 Housing Element document shall
be perFormed by the Community Development Department prior to final printing.
SECTION 3. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or
phrase of this Resolution, of any part thereof, is for any reason held to be invalid, such
a decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Resolution or part
thereof. The Ciiy Council hereby declares that it wouid have passed each section,
subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase, irrespective of the fact
that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences,
clauses or phrases, be declared invalid.
SECTION 4. The 1993 Housing Element and 2001 Housing Element Update are hereby
repealed.
SECTION 5. This Resolution shal( take effect (30) days after its adoption.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 3
On motion of Council Member , seconded by Council Member ,
and by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this day of 2003.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 4
" TONY M. FERRARA, MAYOR
ATTEST:
KELLY WETMORE, DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES/
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY
�
i
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
2003 D�FT HOUSING
ELEMENT
�
��1T�'' ��
�' � � i` �` �
:� � � ; �
+�i� �
_ _ .
, ._ � :
. �� �
� �
�
�
—�f,> ,� � {�,r�d t i � � ;3 E� ,, ���,a�,, .,���
�' A i # i ; �aa4*,
5 ;
� � � � � � � � � �
_
��� �
�
City Council
NOVEMBER 25, 2003
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE �
City Council
Tony M. Ferrara, Mayor
Jim Dickens, Mayor Pro Tem
Thomas A. Runels
Sandy Lubin '
Joe Costello
Planning Commission
James Guthrie, Chairman
John Keen
Nan C. Fowler
Tim Brown, Vice Chair
Ed Arnold
Architectural Review Committee
Warren E. Hoag, Chairman
Chuck Fellows, Vice Chair
Jamie Ohler
Melanie Hodges
Amy Miltenberger
Department of Community Development
Rob Strong, Community Development Director
Kelly Heffernon, Associate Planner
Teresa McClish, Contract Associate Planner
Ryan Foster, Assistant Planner
Jim Bergman, Contract Assistant Planner
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION PAGE NO.
1.1 Purpose.................................................................... 1
1.2 Relationship to City General Plan................................... 1
1.3 Organization of Housing Element................................... 2
1.4 Public Participation...................................................... 2
1.5 Summary of Key Housing Issues.................................... 3
CHAPTER 2 - GOALS, POLICIES, PROGRAMS AND QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVES
2.1 Housing Element Goa(s, Policies and Programs................ 5
2.2 Summary of Quantified Objectives.................................. 26
CHAPTER 3 - BACKGROUND INFORMATION
3.1 I ntrod u ction............................................................... 27
3.2 Demographic Overview................................................ 27
Population Growth................................................... 27
Household Data...................................................... 30
Incomes................................................................ 32
Employment........................................................... 33
3.3 Housing Characteristics................................................ 34
Types of Housing.............. ................................... 34
Rental and Owner-occupied Units............................... 35
Vacancy Rates........................................................ 35
Overcrowded Units.................................................. 35
Age of Housing Units................................................ 36
Condition of Units.................................................... 37
Housing Prices........................................................ 37
Rental Unit Rates...................................................... 38
CHAPTER 4 - REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS, AFFORDABILITY AND SPECIAL
HOUSING NEEDS
4.1 Regional Housing Needs Determinations........................... 40
4.2 Housing Affordability...................................................... 43
4.3 Special Housing Needs Groups........................................ 47
Elderly/Senior Households............................................... 47
Female Heads of Households........................................... 48
Large Families............................................................... 48
Farmworker Households............................................ .... 48
Disabled Persons/Households.......................................... 49
Homeless..................................................................... 49
Workforce Housing........................................................ 50
4.4 At Risk Housing Units..................................................... 51
ii
CHAPTER 5 - LAND AND SERVICES FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
5.1 Land Availability............................................................ 52
5.2 Public Services & Utilities to Serve Residential Development.. 69
5.3 Constraints to Housing Development................................. 70
Government Constraints.............................................. 71
Environmental Constraints........................................... 84
Non-Governmental Constraints..................................... 85
5.4 Local Housing Funds..................................................... 87
5.5 Energy Conservation Opportunities and Programs............... 87
5.6 Current and Past Housing Efforts..................................... 88
5.7 General Plan Consistency............................................... 96
APPENDIX A— PERSONS CONSULTED......................................... 97
APPENDIX B— BIBLIOGRAPHY................................................... 98
iii
. _ __
List of Tables
Table 1 Population Growth 1990-2000 .................................... 27
Table 2 Tenure by Household Size ........................................ 30
Tabie 3 Tenure by Age of Householder.................................... 31
Table 4 Househoids by Type................................................. 32
Table 5 Employed Civilian Population 16 Years and Older........... 33 ;
Table6 Industry.................................................................. 34 �
Table 7 Total Housing Units................................................... 35
Table 8 Year Structure Built................................................... 37 '
Table 9 Home Prices........................................................... 39 �
Table 10 Income Group ......................................................... 41
Table 11 Income Distribution by Households............................... 41
Table 12 Units By Income Category.......................................... 42
Table 13 Income Limits........................................................... 43
Table 14 Affordable Housing Standards-Rents and Sales Prices..... 44
Table 15 Preliminary Housing Opportunity Sites Inventory.............. 53
Table 16 Village Core Downtown District (VCD) ............................ 66
Table 17 Viiiage Mixed Use District ............................................. 68
Table 18 Urban Land Use Element............................................. 74
Table 19 City Community Development Department Fee Schedule... 76
Table 20 Residential Site Development Standards........................ 79
Table 21 Permit Processing Timeline.......................................... 84
List of Maps
Map1 — Regional Map................................................................... 28
Map2 — Local Map....................................................................... 29
Map 3— Housing Opportunity Sites Inventory..................................... 65
iv
City of Anoyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
CHAPTER 1 — INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose
The purpose of the Housing Element is to identify and provide: a) An analysis of existing ,
and projected housing needs; b) a statement of goals, policies, quantified objectives ;
and financial resources; and c) scheduled programs for the preservation, improvement,
and development of housing. The State Legislature, in its adoption of planning law, has �
set forth the following policies toward the provision of housing:
• The availability of housing is of vital importance, and the early attainment of '
decent housin and a suitable livin environment for eve Californian, includin
5 9 rY 9
farm workers, is a priority of the highest order.
• The early attainment of this goal requires the cooperative participation of
government and the private sector in an effort to expand housing opportunities
and accommodate the needs of Californians of all economic levels.
• The provision of housing affordable to low and moderate-income households
requires the cooperation of all leveis of government.
• Local and State governments have a responsibility to use the powers vested in
them to facilitate the improvement and development of housing to make
adequate provision for the housing needs of all economic segments of the
community.
• The Legislature recognizes that in carrying out this responsibility, each local
government also has the responsibility to consider economic, environmental, and
fiscal factors and community goals set forth in the general plan and to cooperate
with other local governments and the State in addressing regional housing
needs.
The purpose of this document is to comply with Article 10.6 (as amended) of the State
Planning Law and to meet the guidelines set forth for the implementation of Article 10.6.
This document, upon adoption, will replace the Housing Element adopted by the City of
Arroyo Grande on June 22, 1993.
This Housing Element includes all of the following information as required by State law:
• Specific goals, measurable objectives, policies and implementation measures.
• Information about the existing housing stock, covering such items as the amount,
type, cost, tenure, and structural conditions of the units. Other areas of concern
include overcrowding and the needs of special subgroups of the population.
• An analysis of potential barriers to housing production, including both
governmental and non-governmental constraints.
• Information about energy conservation opportunities in housing.
• A summary of the past housing efforts and an analysis of their success or failure.
1.2 Relationship to City General Plan
Housing elements are one of seven elements of the General Plan that every California
city and county is required by State law to prepare. Under State law, a General Plan
1 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
must function as an integrated, internally consistent and compatible statement of
values. The housing, land use and circulation elements form the heart of a community
strategy to promote orderly growth and provide housing for all economic segments.
State law is more specific about the content of housing elements than any other portion
of the general plan. The housing element is also the only part of the general plan that is
subject to mandatory deadlines for periodic updates. It is the only element that is legally
subject to review and "certification" by the State. ,
1.3 Organization of Housing Element '
As noted above, the intent of this Housing Element update is to meet the statutory
requirements of State housing law. Chapter 1 provides a brief overview of the laws and
its relationship to the General Plan. Chapter 2 is the heart of the document, setting forth
all the goals, policies, programs and objectives for housing in Arroyo Grande. Chapter
3 describes relevant demographics concerning housing needs and issues in the City,
while Chapter 4 discusses the regional housing needs. Finally, Chapter 5 provides an
overview of the City's land availability, public services, constraints to housing
development, as well as a review of past housing efforts as provided in the 1993
Housing Element.
1.4 Public Participation
Housing issues affect the entire community, including residents, employers, and the
public and private sectors. The public participation requirement of the housing element
law presents an opportunity to engage constituents in a discussion, defining overall
housing needs and constraints, as well as problems and the creation of solutions. The
inclusion of community stakeholders in the housing element public participation process
helps ensure appropriate housing strategies are more efficiently and effectively
developed, implemented and evaluated.
To address the public participation requirement, the City Council appointed a Local
Housing Task Force (LHTF) to address housing issues in the City. The LHTF
comprised a number of stakeholders in the community, including a representative of the
building industry, two small builders, two representatives of the realty industry, a
representative of the financial industry, a representative of the housing authority, finro
major employers (a school district representative and a hospital administrator), as well
as several citizens at large, including a resident with special experience with developing
affordable housing. The overall purpose of the LHTF was to formulate strategies and
provide preliminary recommendations for the Housing Element to the Planning
Commission and City Council, and to help build consensus on policy direction.
Beginning in November of 2002, the LHTF conducted roughly finrelve (12) public
workshops to address housing issues in the City. Each of these workshops was
publicly noticed and was open to the public. The LHTF seiected severai sub-committees
to address specific issues related to housing needs, which included work force housing,
special needs housing, constraints to housing, and well as a review of financial
resources. The sub-committees prepared reports that were presented to the LHTF as a
whole. The main work product from the LHTF was the preparation of recommendations
regarding goals and polices addressing housing needs that could result in the
preparation of programs. The LHTF, in May of 2003, presented its recommendations in
2 November 25, 2003
_ _
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
a report to the Planning Commission. In addition to the LHTF meetings, were several
joint hearings and workshops with the LHTF and the Planning Commission to review
information and reports that had been generated by staff and consultant during the
review process.
Once the LHTF had completed and submitted its report, the Planning Commission held
a number of workshops to consider the LHTF recommendations and to provide direction
to City staff in the preparation of the draft Housing Element. This process has resulted
in the preparation of the draft Housing Element provided herein. Subsequent hearings
will be conducted that will result in the refinement and adoption of a final Housing
Element.
1.5 Summary of Key Housing Issues
Arroyo Grande is one of several cities in San Luis Obispo County that is being affected
by housing pressures and is in need of housing to address the needs of the region.
Some of the key housing issues affecting the county and the City of Arroyo Grande are
highlighted below.
• The key housing issues that have been identified in the preparation of the
housing element is that of affordability of housing. In the late 1990's, housing
costs started to increase dramatically, as represented by the 1990 and 2000
Census data. Since 2000, the issue of affordability has become a significant
regional economic and social issue for the viability of the City and the County.
Currently, less than 20 percent of those residents seeking housing can afford a
median priced housing unit. Rents have also significantly increased. The
increase in sales prices and rents has increased at a rate that is significantly
higher than that of incomes. Expectations are that this issue will continue into
the near future. There is and will be a need to provide substantially more
affordable housing in the City and the County.
• There has been a lack of affordable housing constructed in the City. Almost all
housing constructed has been market rate housing. Most of the housing
constructed has been single-family detached dwelling units. Very few new
condominium or multifamily projects have been proposed by private builders
during the last ten (10) years.
• The stock of affordable multi-family housing in the City needs to be increased to
address housing needs, especially for low and very-low income households.
• One of the key issues affecting affordable housing construction is the price of
land, both unimproved and improved. In many cases, the price of land itself is at
a level that significantly affects the cost of housing, including multi-family housing
units. TF�is is especially important when dealing with the provision of low and
very-low housing units.
• In addition to the cost of land, there are a number of issues that affect the
production of affordable housing. Many of these involve limited City resources,
� including financing, insurance and liability, adequate local services, and an
3 November 25, 2003
f
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
already strained infrastructure. These are more specifically described in the ,
constraints analysis in Chapter 5.
• In addition to local financial resources, the level of State and federal grants and
funds to support the construction of affordable housing is decreasing. Those
funds that are available seem to be oriented to larger metropolitan areas of the
State. In addition, insurance needed to allow for multi-family rental and
condominium housing has become very limited.
• The dominant housing choice for the development community is the construction
of market rate single-family housing. There is a need to re-orient housing to that
affordable to all income levels.
• According to recent reports and studies, the senior population will increase in the
future, both for existing residents and those re-locating from other areas of the
State. It is predicted that there will be a decrease in families staying or locating
in the area. The latter is likely a result of the increasing cost of housing and the
tack of affordable units.
4 November 25, 2003
__ _
�
;
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
i
CHAPTER 2—GOALS, POLICIES, PROGRAMS AND
QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVES
2.1 Housing Element Goals, Policies and Programs
State law requires that the Housing Element contain a "statement of the community's
goals, policies, programs and quantified objectives relative to the maintenance,
improvement, and development of housing". This Chapter describes the proposed
goals, policies, objectives and implementation programs of the Housing element for the
City of Arroyo Grande. ;
Goa/s refer to general statements of purpose, and indicate a direction the City will take '
with respect to the identified housing problems. Policies are statements of the City's '
intent regarding the various housing issues identified, and provide a link between the
goals and the quantified objectives. Programs are steps to be taken to implement the
policies and achieve the quantified objectives. Some of the programs contain
Quanti�ed Objectives, which refer to the number of units that are expected or estimated
to be constructed, conserved or rehabilitated during the time frame of the Housing
Element, January 2001 to July 2008.
Goal A: To provide a continuing supply of affordable housing to meet the needs
of existing and future Arroyo Grande residents in all income categories.
Policies:
A.1. The City shall adopt policies, programs and procedures to attempt to meet
the present and future needs of residents of the City, and to aim at
providing the fair share regional housing need allocated for each income
classification, within identified governmental, market, economic and
natural constraints.
A.2. The City shall continue to utilize the following incentives for the production
of affordable housing: a) allowing secondary dwelling units under
specified criteria; b) allowing manufactured housing on legal parcels in all
residential zones; c) allowing density bonuses for very low, low, and
moderate-income housing, below market housing, and senior housing
projects.
A.3. The City shall give priority to processing housing projects that provide for
affordable housing, and lower fees shall be charged as an incentive for
low and very low-income housing.
A.4. The City shall establish minimum residential densities that,are no lower
than 75 percent of the maximum densities allowed in each zone, with
exceptions made for properties with significant environmental constraints.
A.5. The City shall encourage housing compatible with commercial and office
uses and promote "mixed use" and "village core" zoning districts to
facilitate residential uses to be integrated into such areas.
5 November 25, 2003
_ ___
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
A.6. The City should consider assumption of regulatory control from the State
for manufactured housing, manufactured home parks and mobile home
parks.
A.7. The City has established and applied a zoning district for mobile home
and manufactured home park uses:
a) Existing mobile home and manufactured home parks shall be reviewed
and appropriate Development Code Amendments will be part of the
update process in 2004-05;
b) The City may identify additional opportunities to create more mobile
home and manufactured home parks, or expand and/or redevelop older
existing parks.
A.8. The City may annex land on the urban edge to promote orderly growth
and the preservation of open space.
A.9. The City shall continue to enable and encourage multiple-family, rental
apartments, senior, mobile home and special needs housing, in
appropriate locations and densities. These multiple family residential
alternative housing types tend to be more affordable than prevailing
single-family residential low and medium density developments.
A.10. The City shall review and revise its development regulations, standards
and procedures to encourage increased housing supply.
A.11. The City shall continue to utilize and expand the Density Bonus program
to encourage affordable housing supply.
A.12. The City shall establish a system to inventory vacant and underutilized
land.
A.13. The City shall pursue adequate water sources and conservation programs
to accommodate projected residential development in accordance with the
General Plan.
Programs:
A.1-1. In addition to implementing the Water Conservation Program adopted
May 2003, the City shall investigate other programmatic approaches
the City will undertake to address the availability of water. The City
shall also inform Arroyo Grande's water and sewer providers about
prioritizing housing development projects for lower-income households
for public services, per Government Code Section 65589.7.
Responsible agency/department: Community Development/Public
Works Departments
Timeframe: July 2004
Funding: General Fund
6 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
Expected Outcome: Reduce water constraints through
implementation of the City's
"Water Conservation Program",
and developing a "Water Supply
Matrix".
A.2-1. The City shall encourage and publicize the secondary dwelling
program to increase public awareness. ;
�
Responsible agency/department: Community Development �
Timeframe: Ongoing starting spring 2004 i
Funding: General Fund
Expected Outcome: Develop information brochure to i
include with the City's '
"Stagecoach Express" newsletter '
(distributed quarterly) and to have
available at the Community
Development front counter.
Expected outcome is increased
production of secondary units as
an affordable housing alternative.
A.2-2. The City shall reduce impact fees for the construction of second
dwellings
Responsible agency/departments: City Manager/ Finance/
Community Development
Timeframe: January - July 2004
Funding: General Fund
Expected Outcome: Reduction in impact fees for
second dwellings adopted as part
of the Fee Schedule review and
update.
A.4-1. The City shall initiate a Development Code Amendment to establish a
minimum residential density of 75 percent of the maximum densities
allowed in each residential and mixed-use zone, with exceptions made
for properties with significant environmental constraints as determined
through the CEQA process.
Responsible agency/departments: Community Development
Timeframe: 2004-05
Funding: General Fund
Expected Outcome: More residential properties will be
developed to their full
development potential.
7 November 25, 2003
t
I
�
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element �
A.5-1. The Development Code Update shall include minimum residential �
densities for properties zoned Mixed Use. Exceptions shall be allowed '
for properties with significant environmental constraints as determined '
through the CEQA process.
Responsible agency/departments: Community Development
Timeframe: 2004-05
Funding: General Fund '
Expected Outcome: Residential uses will be
integrated into mixed use
developments. '
A.9-1. The Development Code sha(I be updated to encourage the use of
alternative housing types, such as pre-fabricated homes, for special
needs housing
Responsible agency/departments: Community Development
Timeframe: 2004-05
Funding: General Fund
Expected Outcome: Increased affordable housing
options.
A.10-1. In order to provide financial incentives for all affordable housing, the
City shall evaluate its development standards such as setbacks,
landscaping, community tree ordinance requirements, parking
requirements, road widths, lot coverage, floor-area ratio open space
and height requirements that prevent builders from achieving any
density bonuses.
Responsible agency/department: - Community Development
Timeframe: 2004-05
Funding: General Fund
Expected Outcome: Process City-initiated
Development Code Amendments
to increased allowance for
affordability.
A.11-1. The City shall modify the Density Bonus regulations to ex and the
,
bonus for all affordable units as indicated below.
8 November 25, 2003
�
i
f
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
• The City shall grant, in designated mixed use corridors such as
East Grand Avenue, a density bonus above the State standard for ;
projects serving households that meet State defined very-low and
low-income income levels (the State requires a minimum 25
percent density bonus for projects that provide either 10 percent of
the units for very-low, 20 percent of the units for low-income or 50
percent of the units for senior housing units).
• The City shall grant a density bonus of at least 50 percent for
residential projects in which at least 35 percent of all units
(including the density bonus units) meet State definitions for very-
low and low-income units.
• The City shall grant a density bonus of 30 percent for residential
projects in which at least 20 percent of all units (including the
density bonus units) will be sold to households earning between 80
percent and 120 percent of the county median income (or low and
moderate-income, respectively).
• The City shall grant a density bonus of 20 percent for residential
projects in which at least 50 percent of all units (including the
density bonus units) will be sold to households earning befinreen
120 percent and 150 percent of the county median income
(workforce housing). The City shall limit the density bonus for
above moderate-income housing to the regional housing allocation
of 400 units until 50 percent of the very low, low and moderate-
income allocations are developed. The City shall track the number
and type of housing occupancy permits issued to ensure that
density bonuses are not offered in the above moderate-income
category until this percentage is achieved.
Responsible agency/department: Community Development
Timeframe: 2004-05
Funding: General Fund
Expected Outcome: Increased densities to allow for
more affordability.
A.12-1. The City shall expand its Geographical Information System (GIS)
mapping and planning database to create and maintain a basic
inventory of vacant and underutilized "opportunity sites".
Responsible agency/department: Community Development
Timeframe: On going
Funding: General Fund
Expected Outcome: Creation and maintenance of a
land availability inventory.
9 November 25, 2003
s
�
!
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element '
i
i
�
Goal B: Ensure that housing that is constructed in the City is affordable to all �
income levels.
Policies: '
B.1. All residential projects that receive additional densities or other City
incentives to include affordable housing shall be placed into a city-
approved program to maintain the affordability for at least 30 years. Any
sale or change of ownership of these affordable units prior to satisfying the
30-year restriction shall be Nrolled over" for another 30-years to protect "at
risk" units. For rental housing, affordability shall be maintained through
recorded agreements befinreen a property owner and the City, its Housing
Authority, or another housing provider approved by the City. For owner-
occupied units, long-term affordability can be maintained by finro methods:
a) the property owner agrees to maintain the designated unit as affordable
for the specified period, utilizing a promissory note and deed of trust,
recorded on the property, or b) utilizing an equity-sharing program,
whereby, the equity share retums to the City for use in other affordable
housing projects.
B.2. The City shall require the monitoring of affordable units to ensure ongoing
compliance with the sales limits or rental rates established by agreement
between the City and the developer. The City shall take the necessary
steps to assure compliance with the regulatory agreement, including
consideration of contracting with a.housing authority or joining a regional
monitoring agency if one is developed.
B.3. The City shall establish lower fees and/or defer collection of impact fees
for very low, low and moderate-income units.
B.4. In order to allow for increased density and thus increased affordability, as
well as allowing for more functional mixed-use projects, the City shall
modify the height limit to accommodate three stories. The City shall also
develop fire suppression policies to accommodate the new height
standard.
6.5. The City shall look for innovated ways to provide functional open space
such as using courtyard design, under-structure parking or multi-purpose
features.
6.6. The City may establish parking districts where appropriate to enable
additional density.
B.7. Affordable housing shall not be concentrated into a condensed,
identifiable portion of a development or subdivision but rather dispersed
throughout and integrated into the development as determined acceptable
considering site constraints, size and design.
10 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
Programs:
B.1-1. The City shall establish a program for tracking all residential projects
that include affordable housing to ensure that the affordability is
maintained for at least 30 years, and that any sale or change of ;
ownership of these affordable units prior to satisfying the 30-year ;
restriction shall be "rolled ove�"for another 30-years to protect"at-risk" �
units.
Responsible agency/department: City Manager/Administration and
Community Development ;
Timeframe: 2004-05
Funding: General Fund
Expected Outcome: Program to monitor affordable
units.
B.2-1. The City shall contract with a housing authority, or similar entity, for the
monitoring of affordable units to ensure compliance.
Responsible agency/department: City Manager/Administration and ;
Community Development
Timeframe: Spring 2004 '
Funding: General Fund
Expected Outcome: Contract agreement approved.
Expected outcome is consistent
monitoring of affordable units.
B.3-1. The City shall modify its development impact fee schedule to charge
no impact fees, excluding water and sewer fees, for very low-income
housing units, and 75 percent lower fees for low-income housing units.
Responsible agency/department: City Manager/Administration &
Community Development
Timeframe: 2004-05
Funding: General Fund
Expected Outcome: Reduction in costs for affordable
housing by amending the City's
Fee Schedule to reduce impact
fee requirements for very low and
low-income housing.
B.4-1. The Ci shall u date the Development Code to increase the�
'`'��",Idli'�'��`'''`°'` �'''''' �'';` " ``!°d� ' ° residential height limit to three stories or 30
feet, whichever is less; a maximum of 36 feet would be allowable
through the Minor Use Permit (MUP) process.
Responsible agency/departments: Community Development
Timeframe: 2004-05
Funding: General Fund
11 November 25, 2003
i
;
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element �
Expected Outcome: Facilitate increased densities.
I
;
B.6-1. The City shall research appropriate areas to establish or expand
existing parking districts to reduce on-site parking requirements and
thereby enable additional density. `
i
(
Responsible agency/departments: Community Development ;
Timeframe: 2004-05 i
Funding: General Fund
Expected Outcome: Facilitate increased densities.
Goal C: The City shall research and identify various additional financial and other
resources to provide very low and low-income housing for current and future
residents of the City.
Policies:
�� ,
C.1.
C.2. The City shall consider issuance of bonds to finance very low and low-
income housing.
C.3. The City shall aggressively pursue State and federal funds to finance very
low and low-income housing.
C.4. The City shall consider cooperation with non-profit organizations and other
developers for loan and/or grant applications to provide very-low and low-
income housing.
C.5. The City shall create a list of public and private sources to help find
creative funding solutions for the provision of very low and low-income
housing.
Programs:
C.1-1. M
the financial projection from the
RDA housing set-aside fund and In-Lieu Affordable Housing Fund for this
planning period (through June 2008), as shown in the table below.
12 November 25, 2003
__ _ _
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
FY 03-04 FY 0405 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 Total
Redevelo ment $80,000 $40,000 $40,000 $50,000 $50,000 $260,000
In-Lieu Fees $800,000 $100,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $1,125,000
Grants/Other $0 $100,000 $7S,000 $75,000 $75,000 $725,000
Total $880,000 $240,000 $190,000 $75,000 $200,000 $2,110,000
Funding will be used for fmancial incentives to developers for the inclusion of affordable units above the
inclusionary housing requirements and for potential purchase of land for affordable housing development.
Currently,the City has committed$800,000 to a 108-unit affordable housing project and an additional
$40,000 to a second ro'ect. The Ci is also investi atin otential ro erties for urchase and
redevelo ment. '�
Responsible agency/department: City Manager/Community
Development
Timeframe: 2004-05
Funding: In-Lieu Affordable Housing
Fund/Redevelopment Agency
Expected Outcome: Funding to finance affordable
housing.
C.4-1. The City shall meet with local non-profit and private developers semi-
annually, or more frequently if opportunities arise, to promote the very low
and low-income housing programs outlined in the Housing Element. The
City shall direct private housing developers to funding sources (such as
federal and State housing grant fund programs and local housing trust
funds) to promote affordable housing as outlined in the policies of Goal C.
Responsible agency/department: Community Development
Timeframe: Semiannually starting in 2004
Funding: General Fund
Expected Outcome: Increased awareness of the
City's desire to provide affordable
housing and to accommodate
affordable housing.
C.4-2. The City shall participate in financial incentive programs established by
the San Luis Obispo County Housing Trust Fund (newly established local
non-profit agency), such as a revolving loan program.
Responsible agency/department: City Manager/Community
Development
Timeframe: 2004-2008
Funding: General Fund/Redevelopment
Agency
13 November 25, 2003
_ _
�
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
Expected Outcome: Leverage of financial resources
to augment development of
affordable housing.
Goal D: In order to provide afFordable housing, especially for very-low and low-
income households, apartment construction shall be encouraged. '�
E
�
Policies:
�
D.1. The City shall consider creating a specific land use zone restricted to
t
apartments.
. �
D.2. The City shall relax parking standards for apartments containing very low, j
low, moderate and/or senior housing.
D.3. For the purposes of calculating density, fees and other development
standards, an apartment is defined as follows:
• A dwelling unit equivalent equals two bedrooms, or more;
• A one-bedroom equals 0.7 of unit and is defined as 850 square ;
feet or less;� j
• A studio equals 0.5 of a unit and is defined as 600 square feet ;
or less.
�
Programs: i
D.1-1. The City shall encoura e s ecific plans for land within its Sphere of i
Influence that include residential capacity for �
development.
Responsible agency/department: Community Development
Timeframe: 2004/2005 '
Funding: General Fund I
Expected Outcome: Possible increased land inventory '
to support affordable housing. ;
D.2-1. Parking requirements for apartments shall be as follows:
• Studio units require one parking space;
• One bedroom units require one and a half spaces;
• Two bedroom units and above require two spaces plus '/Z space
for each additional bedroom;
• On-site guest parking requirements can be waived or reduced
subject to approval of the Community Development Director
through the Minor Use Permit (MUP) process.
Responsible agency/department: Community Development
Timeframe: 2004-05
Funding: General Fund
14 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element '
Expected Outcome: Possible reduction in
development standards to
increase the affordability of
housing.
Goal E: Residential condominium conversions shall be regulated both to protect
the City's supply of apartments and to allow more moderately priced for-sale
homes.
Policies:
� E.1. Apartments can only be converted and sold as residential condominiums
to families earning State-defined very low, low or moderate-income levels, '
to the extent allowed by law.
E.2. The City shall set a limit on how many rental units can be converted
annually not to exc�ed the annual average of new rental apartments
constructed.
E.3. To the extent provided by law, the property a�vner shall give the current
residents the first right of refusal to buy the units being converted,
providing they meet the income guidelines.
E.4. Residential condo conversion units shall remain affordable through a thirty
(30) year deed restriction, or the property owner may participate in a
"shared equity program"with the City. '
Programs:
E.1-1. Prior to approving any residential condominium conversions, the City
shall establish a monitoring program to ensure ongoing compliance
with the affordable price controls established in the agreement
befinreen and City and the developer.
Responsible agency/department: Community Development
Timeframe: 2004-05
Funding: General Fund
Expected Outcome: Ensure the affordability of
conversions.
E.2-1. The City shall not approve condominium conversion projects in any
one calendar year resulting in more units being converted than the
number of multi-family rental dwellings added to the City's housing
stock during the preceding year. The number of multi-family rental
units added in one year shall be determined as follows: From January
1St through December 31St, the total number of multi-family rental units
given a final building inspection and occupancy permit minus the
number of such units demolished, removed from the City, or converted
to nonresidential use.
15 November 25, 2003
,
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element ;
Responsible agency/department: Community Development
Timeframe: On-going upon adoption of
regulations
Funding: General Fund
Expected Outcome: Control of possible affordable
apartment conversions to market
rate condominiums.
E.4-1. When necessary, the City shall establish a "shared equity program" i
whereby the owner may sell the affordably restricted property within
thirty (30) years of initial sale by sharing the difference in the market
value to the restricted value with the City upon resale of the affordable
unit. Funds generated would then be used to develop additional
affordable housing within the City. �
Responsible agency/department: Community Development
Timeframe: 2004-05
Funding: General Fund
Expected Outcome: Maintaining affordability of
residential condominium
conversions.
Goal F: The City's inclusionary housing ordinance shall be strengthened to
require more affordable units in housing and commercial development projects.
Policies:
F.1. The City shall require housing projects greater than nine (9) units to
contain inclusionary housing. The City may require payment of an in-lieu
fee for housing projects containing up to nine (9) units. An inclusionary
unit is defined as one that will meet the State's standards for affordable
housing.
F.2. The City shall offer multiple options for providing the inclusionary unit(s)
particularly for projects proposed for neighborhoods unable to sustain the
density bonus.
F.3. New commercial and industrial development shall be subject to
inclusionary housing requirements.
F.4. An "affordable housing agreement" shall be required for projects subject
to the inclusionary housing ordinance.
Programs: The City's inclusionary housing ordinance shall be amended as
follows:
F.1-1. At least ten percent (10%) of every housing project greater than
nine (9) units shall contain inclusionary housing. Builders shall receive
16 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element ;
a density bonus of at least equal in number to the inclusionary
requirement.
Responsible agency/department: Community Development
Timeframe: 2004-05
Funding: General Fund
Expected Outcome: Increased provision for affordable
housing units.
F.2-1. The City shali consider aiternatives to construction of inclusionary units
on-site, such as land dedication, off-site development, or payment of
in-lieu fees, subject to the City's determination that the alternative
meets the need for affordable housing at least as well as on-site
incfusionary units.
The in-lieu fee per dwetling unit of those projects not providing an
affordable unit shall be calculated based upon the difference between
the median home value in the City and the median value of a moderate
income dwelling, divided by ten. The amount of the in-lieu fee shall be
established on a quarterly basis unless otherwise established by the
City.
Responsible agency/department: Community Development
Timeframe: 2004-05
Funding: General Fund
Expected Outcome: Increased provision for affordable
housing units.
F.3-1. The City shail conduct a study to determine the appropriate
inclusiona housin re uirement for commercial develo ment
Responsib(e agency/department: Community Development
Timeframe: 2004-05
Funding: General Fund/Redevelopment
Agency
Expe�ted Outcome: Recommendations for
commercial inclusionary housing
requirements.
F.4-1. As a condition of development approval for applicable discretionary
projects, applicants shall submit an "affordable housing agreement" for
City approval. The final agreement shall be recorded and relevant
terms and conditions shall be recorded as a deed restriction on those
lots or affordable units subject to affordability requirements. The City
shall develop a standard agreement form.
17 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
Responsible agency/department: Community Development
Timeframe: 2004-05
Funding: General Fund/Redevelopment
Agency
Expected Outcome: Maintaining affordability of units.
Goal G: Create clearer regulations and streamline the approval process for
affordable housing projects.
Policies:
G.1. The City shall allow staff to grant exceptions or Minor Use Permits (MUP)
for proposing minor deviations from Development Code standards. The
appeal process shall be amended to discourage superfluous appeals.
G.2. The City shall encourage public participation and public agency review
with pre-application submittals.
G.3. The City shall review and periodically amend its Development Code and
design review regulations and procedures to streamline permit processing
for affordable housing projects and minimize application and development
review costs.
Programs:
G.1-1. A Minor Use Permit (MUP) application shall be processed for projects
including affordable housing to allow for reductions within ten percent
(10%) of Development Code standards. Any appeal for such approvals
shall equal the cost of processing the appeal and holding the hearing.
The City Council may refund the appeal fee if it determines the appeal
is in the public interest.
Responsible agency/department: Community Development
Timeframe: On-going upon adoption of
regulation.
Funding: General Fund
Expected Outcome: Streamlining review process to
reduce development costs of
housing.
G.2-1. The City shall maintain a mailing list of persons interested in
development projects containing affordable housing. Agendas for all
City meetings related to these projects shall be mailed to persons on
the mailing list. The City shall also post the agendas on the City's
website.
Responsible agency/department: Community Development
Timeframe: 2004-05
Funding: General Fund
18 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
Expected Outcome: Increased public awareness of
affordabie housing projects.
Goal H: Conserve and rehabilitate the City's older stock, particularly to provide
affordable housing.
Policies:
H.1. The City shall encourage private and public financing of affordable
housing rehabilitation.
H.2.
Programs:
H.1-1. The City shall continue to contract and coordinate with the San Luis
Obispo Housing Authority to maintain and expand Section 8 rental
housing assistance to qualified households.
Responsible agency/department: Community
Development/Redevelopment
Agency
Timeframe: On-going
Funding: General Fund/Redevelopment
Agency
Expected Outcome: Continued affordable housing.
H.1-2. The City shall continue to apply for Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG) funding for rehabilitation of very low, low and moderate-
income housing for both owner-occupied and rental units.
Rehabilitation of second story residential units in the Village Core
and/or mixed use housing within the East Grand Avenue corridor shall
be considered for such programs.
Responsible agency/department: Community Development/City
Manager/Redevelopment Agency
Timeframe: On-going
Funding: General Fund/Redevelopment
Agency
Expected Outcome: Conservation of existing
affordable housing units.
H.2-1. The City shall consider abatement of unsafe or unsanitary structures,
including buildings or rooms inappropriately used for housing, contrary
to adopted health and safety codes. Where feasible, the City will
encourage rehabilitation and allow reasonable notice and time to
correct deficiencies. Where necessary and feasible, very low and low
_ 19 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
income residents dispiaced by abatement action shall be eligible for
relocation assistance, subject to Council or Redevelopment Agency
approval.
Responsible agency/department: Building DepartmenUCommunity
Development/Redevelopment
Agency
Timeframe: 2004-05
Funding: General Fund/Redevelopment
Agency
Expected Outcome: Conservation of existing housing
stock.
Preservation of At-Risk Units: City records indicate that there are not any at-risk units
in the City at this time. However, if a City affordable housing program is successful, this
may be an issue in the future. The policies below are designed to protect any future at
risk units.
Goal I: Preservation of at-risk units in Arroyo Grande
Policies:
1.1. The City shall establish a notification procedure to occupants of affordable
housing units of conversion to market rate units.
Programs:
1.1-1. At least one-year prior written notice shall be required prior to the
conversion of any units for low-income households to market rate units
in any of the following circumstances:
• The units were constructed with the aid of government funding
• The units were required by an inclusionary zoning ordinance
• The project was granted a density bonus
• The project received other incentives
Such notice shall at a minimum be given to the following:
• The City of Arroyo Grande
• State Department of Housing and Community Development
• San Luis Obispo Housing Authority
• Residents of at-risk units
Responsible agency/department: Community Development
Timeframe: 2005
Funding: General Fund/Redevelopment
Agency
Expected Outcome: Preservation of existing
affordable units.
20 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
Special Needs
Goal J: To meet the housing needs of special groups of Arroyo Grande
residents, including seniors, single parents, large families, and farmworkers.
Policies:
J.1. The City shall encourage and shall seek funding to assist in the
development of low and moderate-income senior rentals.
J.2. The City shall permit larger group housing for seniors in appropriate
multiple-family or mixed-use locations, subject to discretionary review.
J.3. The City shall continue to allow small-scale group housing in multiple-
family residential districts, in accordance with applicable State laws.
J.4. The City shall encourage multiple-family housing projects that include a
portion of the units with 3 or more bedrooms to accommodate larger
families.
J.5. The development of housing for farmworkers shall be encouraged.
Farmworker housing may be authorized in non-prime lands zoned
Agriculture as well as mixed-use or multiple-family residential zones.
J.6. Co-housing and similar unconventional housing arrangements shall be
considered in appropriate locations subject to review and approval on a
case-by-case basis.
Programs:
J.1-1. The City shall promote housing opportunities for seniors by identifying
sites suitable for senior housing and if necessary, initiating zone
changes for those sites as part of the Development Code Update.
Responsible agency/department: Community Development
Timeframe: On-going
Funding: General Fund/Redevelopment
Agency
Expected Outcome: Increased housing opportunities
for seniors.
J.3-1. The City shall continue to allow for group housing.
Responsible agency/department: Community Development
Timeframe: On-going
Funding: General Fund
Expected Outcome: Increased housing opportunities.
J.4-1. The City shall consider residential Development Code Amendments
(such as greater lot coverage and floor area ratios for residences with
21 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
more than four bedrooms) to encourage development of housing to
support large families.
Responsible agency/department: Community Development
Timeframe: 2004-05
Funding: General Fund
Expected Outcome: Additional housing for large
families.
�. w..,_... „v,
J.5-1.
to include provisions for development of Farmworker housing on
properties zoned Agriculture , Mixed-Use, and Apartments.
Responsible agency/department: Community Development
Timeframe: 2004/05
Funding: General Fund
Expected Outcome: Additional housing for
farmworkers.
The Homeless
Goal K: To reduce or minimize the incidence of homeless in the community.
Policies:
K.1. The City shall consider joint powers development and cooperation
agreements to develop homeless shelters and related services, or
participate in the operations and maintenance of countywide or south
county regional homeless shelter facilities.
K.2. The City may enable homeless shelter for overnight lodging in appropriate
zoning districts as part of the Development Code Update.
Programs:
K.1-1. The City shall cooperate with other cities, the county and other
agencies in the development of programs aimed at providing homeless
shelters and related services.
Responsible agency/department: Community DevelopmenUCity
Manager
Timeframe: On-going
Funding: General Fund
Expected Outcome: Continued cooperation in
providing homeless shelter and
services.
K.2-1. The City shall consider Development Code update to allow homeless
shelters for overnight housing in appropriate locations. Emergency
22 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
and Homeless shelters are currently allowed through the Conditional
Use Permit process in all Commercial districts (GC, VC, O, HC), the
Public Facilities (PF) district, and the Condominium/Townhouse (MF),
Apartments (MFA) and Senior Housing (SR) residential districts. The
Development Code shall be updated to require administrative approval
only for emergency and homeless shelters in all commercial districts.
Responsible agency/department: Community Development
Timeframe: 2004-05
Funding: General Fund
Expected Outcome: Regulations that allow overnight
homeless housing.
Disabled Persons
Goal L: To ensure that those residents with handicaps or disabilities have
adequate access to housing.
Policies:
L.1. The City shall ensure that all new multiple family developments comply
with the handicapped provisions of the California Building Code and ADA.
L.2. The City shall ensure, through the design review process for multiple
housing projects, that the design of the development, from parking
locations, pedestrian walkways, and direct access to the housing units
accommodates handicapped or disabled access. ?
Programs:
L.1-1. The City shall enforce building code disabled access and design
provisions.
Responsible agency/department: Building Department/Community
Development
Timeframe: On-going
Funding: General Fund
Expected Outcome: Provide access and design
provisions for disabled persons in
new housing developments.
Energy Conservation
Goal M: To increase the efficiency of energy use in new and existing homes, with
a concurrent reduction in housing costs to Arroyo Grande residents.
Policies: �
M.1. All new dwelling units shall be required to meet current State and local
requirements for energy efficiency. The retrofitting of existing units shall
be encouraged.
23 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande �003 Draft Housing Element
M.2. New land use patterns shall encourage energy efficiency.
Programs:
M.1-1. The City shall implement a water and electrical retrofit program for
existing housing units.
Responsible agency/department: Building Department
Timeframe: 2004-05
Funding: General Fund/PG&E
Expected Outcome: Reduce usage of water and
electrical resources.
M.2-1. Housing units of proposed development projects shall be designed for
optimal solar access. The applicant shall show on the project plans
how this is achieved.
Responsible agency/department: Building Department
Timeframe: On-going
Funding: General Fund
Expected Outcome: More energy efficient housing
development.
Equal Opportunity
Goal N: To assure access to sound, affordable housing for all persons,
regardless of race, creed, age or sex. '
Policies:
N.1. The City declares that all persons, regardless of race, creed, age, or sex,
shall have equal access to sound and affordable housing.
Programs:
N.1-1. The City will promote the enforcement of policies of the State Fair
Employment and Housing Commission, and shall resolve housing
discrimination complaints through assistance from HUD, and/or local,
regional private fair housing organizations.
Responsible agency/department: All City Departments
Timeframe: On-going, starting spring 2004
Funding: General Fund
Expected Outcome: Dissemination of information at
the front counter of all City
Departments.
Housing Element Implementation
Goal O: To ensure participation of all economic segments of the community in
the development of housing policy for Arroyo Grande.
24 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
Policies:
0.1. The City shall encourage the participation of all residents of Arroyo
Grande in the development of housing policies for the City.
0.2. The City shall provide a brief summary of key information about housing-
related issues in English and Spanish to help ensure widespread notice to
all residents.
Programs:
0.1-1. Prior to any public hearing where the City is considering amending or
updating its Housing Element or housing policies, the City will notify all
local housing organizations, as well as social service agencies, and
post notices at significant locations in both English and Spanish.
Responsible agency/department: Community Development
Timeframe: On-going
Funding: General Fund
Expected Outcome: Provide information about
housing programs.
Goal P: To utilize Redevelopment Agency funding to support affordable housing.
Policies:
P.1. The City Redevelopment Agency shall encourage affordable housing.
Programs:
P.1-1. The City Redevelopment Agency shall develop a program whereby
their housing set-a-side funds are utilized primarily to support low and
very-low income housing.
Responsible agency/department: Redevelopment Agency
Timeframe: 2004-05
Funding: Redevelopment Agency
Expected Outcome: Additional funding to support low
and very-low income housing.
2.2 Summary of Quantified Objectives
The Final Environmental Impact Report prepared for the City's 2001 General Plan
Update identified impacts to water resources, air quality and transportation/circulation
as being potentially significant despite mitigation, necessitating adoption of a Statement
of Overriding Considerations for approval of the General Plan. The water resources
currently available to the City are 3,590 acre feet per year, which is considered the
minimum supply during drought conditions capable of supporting a City of 20,000
residents (based on an average per capita rate of consumption of 160 gallons per day).
This 20,000 population is considered build out for the City of Arroyo Grande, and is
expected to be reached in the year 2021 given the recent trend of 1% average annual
population growth experienced during the iast ten years. The Regional Housing Needs
Allocation of 1,192 units would have the City reach build out during the next five years,
25 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
or by 2008, rather than over a twenty year period as intended by the adopted 2001
General Plan.
A more recent accounting of the City's water resources and current rate of water
consumption show that the City is utilizing approximately 94% of its total water supply.
Although the 2003 Water Conservation Plan for the City is expected to reduce the
average annual per capita consumption, the current water supply is not able to
accommodate the Regional Housing Needs A�location (RHNA). Given a 6% available
water supply, the City is only able to accommodate an additional 429 housing units
based on current consumption of 190 gallons per day per capita. If the Water
Conservation Plan is successful and consumption is reduced to 160 gallons per person
per day, a total of 509 additional units could be built.
Based on the Preliminary Housing Opportunity Sites Inventory (see Table 15 under
Section 5.1) and excluding the specific"potential" projects accommodated by the 2001
General Plan not yet submitted or evaluated, the inventory indicates approximately 667
"approved or pending" projected units (note that since January 2001, 331 of the 667
residential units have already been issued building permits). It is projected that the prior
decade and recent annual average construction rate of approximately 120 units per
year will drop to less than 100 units per year, in part due to limited remaining sites, but
mostly as a consequence of critical water resource constraints. Even if all the approved ;
and pending projects are accomplished by July 2p08, the community would achieve ,
only two thirds of the Regional Housing Needs Allocated to the City.
, �
In summary, the City has the land and densities available to accommodate the RHNA
numbers, but not the available water supply. The City's rough quantified objective is
therefore 509 dwelling units.
26 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
CHAPTER 3— BACKGROUND INFORMATION
3.1 Introduction
The City of Arroyo Grande occupies 5.45 square miles (3,388 acres) of land along
Highway 101 in southwestern San Luis Obispo County, as shown on Map 1. It is
immediately adjacent to the west, southwest and south to urban development within the
cities of Pismo Beach and Grover Beach, and the unincorporated community of
Oceano, as shown on Map 2. Unincorporated lands adjoin the City to the north, east
and south. Residential rural and suburban developments characterize unincorporated
areas to the north and southeast of the City, while agricultural uses dominate the Arroyo
Grande Valley that extends northeast and the Cienega Valley south of the City. Arroyo
Grande Creek runs in a generally north-south direction through the eastern portion of
the City.
3.2 Demographic Overview
Population Growth
The City of Arroyo Grande's population has grown from 3,291 in 1960 to 15,851, based
on the 2000 Census. Population growth during the 1960's occurred rapidly, some years
exceeding 12 percent. In the 1970's, growth slowed to an average of 7 percent, falling
still further in the 1980's to less than 2 percent from 1980 to 1990. Annual population �
increases of less than one percent have been experienced during and since the 1990's. ;
;
According to the 2000 Census, Arroyo Grande grew 10.2 percent since 1990 to a 2000 �
population of 15,851. Table 1 depicts the growth that has occurred in Arroyo Grande
from 1990 to 2000 as compared to the adjoining cities of Pismo Beach, Grover Beach,
the County of San Luis Obispo, and the State of California. This table indicates that the
growth that occurred in Arroyo Grande in the 1990's was less than the surrounding
communities and below the State average.
Table '1 '
Rt� ul�tion GrQ� 1��tt-20aa
1990 2000 Increase 1990-2000 % Increase 1990-2000
Arro o Grande 14,378 15,851 1,473 10.2
Grover Beach 11,656 13,067 1,411 12.1
Pismo Beach 7,669 8,551 882 11.5
SLO Coun 217,162 246,681 29,519 13.6
California 29,760,021 33,871,648 4,111,627 13.8
Since 2000, Arroyo Grande has continued growth at a similar rate as in the 1990's. The
State Department of Finance (DOF), as of January 1, 2002, estimated the population of
Arroyo Grande to be 16,924. DOF has estimated the population growth through 2008,
which corresponds to the Housing Element planning period, will average approximately
1 percent annually, with a population of 17,787 in 2008. Current estimates by the San
Luis Obispo Council of Governments project the City's General Plan build-out
population of approximately 20,000 residents by 2023, based upon an annual growth
rate of 1 percent.
27 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
MAP 1 - REGIONAL LOCATION MAP
1 �C
-- ,a. ,� .�._ �- ame -� -�'-'�.i�c��� �� �E �
'ap�
' ���. �. �������� � � � �
.. t
�`�� � -��� ��'� � ��. �s���:� � `��1�5 �� , ���`� ��� § �
� '
E ,.
.� � �. ����xi�'�` � �, ''4 �` s`�..�.� . ��.: r ��� �. E ,�
�, 3�
_��� T(E ��.
�t .�t "�� i �� y`�,�� 3�. �:�.'��` �� x d . �,
�' ,�,.. �:: l�h�°" T€��;+� ,��z�'�e .�„� �r,�..� c....� �'E���€��"� 'S� �� {,"'E ,a �`` �` `_ �S
-,..,y���� ' � v �
-e � :, E€�sym€ v - �� s �°„ ' � �` �
� � �
�' � � �� a t �°*-sr-�-�' `'� �:� � a� � k � ��`��`�{� �� t€,���
�
"��an= .�' � "`�z .'� � v`a` *�"�` ,� � �� '
,:: �
���� ���`� �'E ��„i '4 ���-� � $�# E a���y ��' ��a„�; ��� .Z 7e ���
S �
�sKis£"5 . . .. �{` �. J ��fi`#T°�' � E
�. �� � t 'i� „'..� �
`� ��. "�'`���``:.��" `�.�-"�� � .a 6 E F._.... �� � t�,=,�€����t�`H�� ��� �� : ���
c.:: ' � . . . ' .
` `����E ���v�6� �� � ��IEIf���`��"��C �" y
. � .a�. ..�..--�i �� ¢E`�`�c�' s�:kr ;,� P �'���� '��,a
'�'�����a� a�v��`3���� ����(�`€a�� ` � 4rj � ��� ' � *.
.`�?����,�`,'„C"� �.�, �;r. ��3' �.�°�,`� �::E ,�; _,..: Z�'�"z'�rE ��E��
.,.. �" �
_.�-� � �,+��k� � ». � �
_...- ,. . , '� �'� `
<
�,� ,.0,.,
�_: . �� +€ �r..�..: „ , s ,� .._� .,. ":-- ,
. . k t "� G' ?, �. �,.
� � m�"9 ,(���
. . . � � f��E� �`����:,�"`�i� S �F �'� fE W�
y �£ 3 4r 3
�lia � (�2� ''Asf�:d��`'4 '�s' '��"'�-'�:"q k�Ead�
r �
. . '` ,,�-W'=�'""'�- °�".r I� �,�€��xis6 'i
��� :��`� �����`� '� �� �� E'��'�u' �'�`�
� � ��^�E a�x��.�ri' ` _; E��� ���X �
' � � . ����v �u� � ! �.���1���4 ��: �� .
� h E E�E�s E d �.� ; �. i.
' x.�S3Y � �a[�� Y;: ...
.. �t
.. . . ,.� A�� ..
�
San Luis Obisp4 ���������� � �
;:
� � � , ��
_�` 4 �,f1��i�i n�'��'� �
� � �� S��EE �s:., r� .:"dv' ; I
.:: . °jY �. I
��A�,y��_ R�°�. �.
. . � . �i�ZiE; P�
.. . � s,r6F:: ,�„c,_._ �
� �€E
. ��."y��- I
--"�-- y
�� �,_ �,-"�„' I`�., i
� �
�. ,�g 3 _._ .
�„
� 3
� �'" .,,,3r1
t= � G(��(�'�.,.�`����'S'�` �. ,� r�
q �'-Ss,��,._�-'r Pf€
g� ��
�L
� "��aEt�,' �a a ��� S'"v � "� � '� 3 ., i�
���� 'e�j� ' 'YYy ��� `v"/! E�I� � '. RF+:
� ���� ?� € y `'-
��I c��a������ ��� €g�
�E��- �,��,�....A�,...�. �E����EkE EE � °� '
� Y
,�.. , r .1:, . ..
_
�,;-L�.:.��. :+¢ ���ju �. �E¢� r,W��' �'� l .
k.4''3.�E� .� E�,4 .. Yi"
.. E�E r������ , . .
� :„.,,�-'�, y�: ' �.
�� � I y,�y
�''�' ;,,* � --�,�-'s s� ��kt�,,,,�
;� �€
��.k��€F"�;,u � _,�r z > � r'�i�� F� .::'�`- ' �.
,; 'i`a�,+ a Rr;;"�; ,;.. Y��� E • ,.�" .. �, . .
�, b ' :
, . � EE i. Y � ..`•
Alka S Y
J�.�.,, �„'.� �. „
��::
?8,,,
?
�Y��il
28 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
MAP 2 — SOUTH COUNTY LOCATION MAP
€ `�"� ` - �t . �E� .-� ��a � � ��.� :
�.,"� �,�� � a=��`i'i�'�'�,����_�� �. .� a k�•t€ ���.���� : �E ,„ � ���,,(� � ;
.E � ���s'�x�` -e � �` a� �-����
U�3���
� v'�t���"� �,��-z.s � E _� . '' .�.W`���'��� � � r � ��a��ZP � �
:k. � ' ?„� °P � -�3��� \'i E a✓ � - 5
� ' �, � �� � ����i .�''�� � `� a��� � ���� ���
�.�q��`� ��-� �z 4 E � ��
a ; � E �b E� ���"� E fi �a,e � �� ,� �w �� � ���.. :� � �, �����. ��, ,.
� 'k E �(�`� �
t
� ,, ,� � �� ��.�'�.�(t���i,�Y.,_..W_�"`a���`�`�t�� � � ���� ���#�. �� � �� � �
�'`"�3r�� - y '��� �xi: j>:r.r�.,�,, s��`��b „fr� �`��^� � -"
k � kr �
� �� ��� � � � ����� � � P'�sm� E�e��h � � �;�y�� ,���� ��� � ��
��,,�.1..� 'e+�����^� p� ��. � � ;, w� �� ���i � ��.s� g���E ��F� 4 ��:��- �`r`.
.: ��� F � ' � .�.;:,�� �,,."',�€ � ��� �k X� 4.w�^ �3�� i�.
€. �`F' Lze' �` �-'`:��'� �.`f�,L y& �� E�E
� :i�4 ��`��''ss`: .�/ d�y .� �€�� -� �� '�� ��IE, t
�1 . � W:.. : „ . ..
��::. ' �'' �
�d� � I _ "�' EG�'E�'F" -
�,.�„�z�L � ,�+ �e�C�t��.Cf di� �. ,� � - � �fd[' ''
E�{rvF
__ ���m�� r`� �� �€E`��� � � € ,r
�xE�:¢� � v v��.� ..,� �,.�,�� ��"� '
R � ���s� �s ��,� � �'��r
'a..""�?x '�"���,�. k�-� .�-"�� 4€� ����" y �.
��e��.�`�`�. � � y -� � � t 't �� '� °..
� � �,a
e
' �,� �u i' �4� ...�'�.. ����,,�+tM`�n �''��;�Pdf�M E . . �'.L.
..��- _ �.` ...
��� � Arrc�yo Granci�
a��� a�F��� _
�� �� �y
, ��'� �
� �x �b`���4.,.��.
� 4 ; L( �
&`':': d�wez�'"F E�eE9+N'�E �
��� �'"4 v"��
" ,�F� E h,;.�
�MQ:�
£
Gcc���r �e��h; : � ��� €��::
, ,�
�
������- ���
� _.
. . � 'x?n� 1 E E�!�� E�
v"'^ ._v__�
v�M a �`�. f �9.�'�.5��
t�� � r
�nr;�� i+'z'y-`�'n
��� �'�'�'"�'"� � '-
�� �:� ��'v�s�� ''��i�
,�x„� _,,. _,_- : :-�.� ---�,
,_Ty, .. . .!E .x..,r. . . �f . .
�.- C .. ....<..,�.,a..': :
�e '� ��""'`�"�'`�i ��$§ ^:, ' ;,. .
� ,t33ceano
` ;�, ,�: �
,_�� � : � " ��� � ��� ��� .
.u'v�_,' � F ��PF �:� ���lj� '�,
��f r a �.?"� S+ � '` �
.. . �- �?��v��z'�4`*. � a�a.,.�� .
� -a� �b v'�"�"�F�.��=��s y -s,,,,,a� ��'+� � �� ���, �
�s,
'�'-� ��t ��8�4��� � � ��.':
� `"_
�"fi� �. €E �. � .. F
�'� ": � . :" ....�.4,�:'�td'....:..,. . _ /,,, .2 ..+,,,_� ,____ „=, a,,,,.'��:
29 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
Household Data
Household Size. The overall average household size in Arroyo Grande is 2.41, with
owner-occupied units averaging 2.45 persons per household and renter-occupied units
averaging 2.33 persons per household. For comparison purposes, the City's average
household size in 1990 was 2.48. The State of California has a larger household size of
2.87 persons per household, as well as the San Luis Obispo County unincorporated
area, which has an average household size of 2.49 persons per household.
Tenur�e by Househo/d Size. Table 2 provides specific information on household sizes
based upon persons per unit for both owner-occupied and renter-occupied housing
units. For owner-occupied units, the highest percentage is that of a two-person
household, followed by a one-person household. This suggests that more than 60
percent of owner-occupied units are either studios, one or two-bedroom units; more
than 25 percent are three-bedroom units; and less than 10 percent are four bedrooms
or greater.
For renter-occupied units, the highest percentage is a one-person household, followed
by a two-person household. The implication about the types of rental housing units is
roughly same as for the owner-occupied housing units, with the majority of renters '
occupying studio, one and two-bedroom units. Clearly, a four-person household, which !
is commonly utilized for establishing median incomes, is generally a much smaller �
percentage than the one and two person household. These figures are generally lower
than the statewide or unincorporated San Luis Obispo County-wide averages. I
_ _ . _ __ �
; : "I"���a�� � ,
T'enur���l� �It�..' ��� ���, ,
Number Percent
Owner-occu ied housin units 4,528 100.0
1- erson household 1,032 22.8
2- erson household 1,876 41.4
3- erson household 652 14.4
4- erson household 624 13.8
5- erson household 248 5.5
6- erson household 62 1.4
7-or-more erson household 34 0.8
Renter-occu ied housin units 1,950 100.0
1- erson household 734 37.6
2- erson household 512 26.3
3- erson household 300 15.4
4- erson household 238 12.2
5- erson household 104 5.3
6- erson household 41 2.1
7-or-more erson household 21 1.1
30 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
Tenure bv AQe of Househo/der. Tabie 3 indicates the occupancy of housing units by
age of the householder. The largest percentage by age of householder is that of the 65
and older range for owner-occupied units, followed by the 45 to 54 age range. For
renter-occupied housing units, there is not as much of a dominant age group, with the
25-34 and 35-44 age range having the higher percentages.
; �'a�at�� ,
Ten�ce� . . ���r��+�u��a�c�� ��r
Number Percent
Owner-occu ied housin units 4,528 100.0
15 to 24 16 0.4
5 to 34 260 5.7
35 to 44 820 18.1
5 to 54 1,014 22.4
55 to 64 720 15.9
5 ears and over 1,698 37.5
5 to 74 782 17.3
5 to 84 679 15
85 ears and over 237 5.2
Number Percent
Renter-occu ied housin units 1,950 100.0
15 to 24 173 8.9
5 to 34 432 22.2
35 to 44 467 23.9
5 to 54 342 17.5
55 to 64 151 7.7
5 ears and over 385 19.7
5 to 74 150 7.7
5 to 84 166 8.5
85 ears and over 69 3.5
Househo/ds by TyQe. According to the 2000 Census, 67.2 percent of Arroyo Grande's
population was family households, and 32.8 percent were in non-family households.
Table 4 provides the complete information on households by type.
31 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
" T�ble 4
Hous��tc�[ds , ': e :
Number Percent
otal households 6,478 100.0
Famil households families 4,350 67.2
With own children under 18 ears 1,881 29.0
Married-cou le famil 3,561 55.0
With own children under 18 ears 1,423 22.0
Female householder, no husband resent 612 9.4
With own children under 18 ears 365 5.6
Non-famil households 2,128 32.8
Householder livin alone 1,766 27.3
Householder 65 ears and over 933 14.4
Households with individuals under 18 ears 2,025 31.3
Households with individuals 65 ears and over 2,219 34.3
vera e household size 2.41 n/a '
vera e famil size 2.94 n/a '
Ethnic Comaosition. According to the 2000 Census, Arroyo Grande's population is 11.2
percent Hispanic and 88.8 percent not Hispanic. Of the not Hispanic, white alone
makes up 82.7 percent of the population, with the remaining population being African
American, American Indian, Asian, or Pacific Islander.
A4e and Sex Distribution. Based upon the 2000 Census, it is noted that 25.6 percent
of the population of Arroyo Grande is 19 years and under, 44.3 percent of the
population is between 20 and 54 years, and 30.1 percent is 55 years or older. The
highest percentage (15.6%) is in the 35 to 44 age range, followed by the 45 to 54 age
range (15%). The median age in years is 41.9. These statistics generally reflect an
older age range than the State as a whole, with a higher percentage of those
considered in a senior range (55 or over). The ratio of male to female in the total
population for Arroyo Grande is male (47.1%) to female (52.9%).
Comparing the above to the 1990 Census, 25.7% of the population was 19 years and
under, 45.5% were between 20 and 54 years, and 28.7% were 55 years and older. This
is generally similar to the 2000 statistics, with the exception of a small increase in the
senior population. The ratio of male to female in 1990 was generally the same as the
2000 figures.
Incomes
According to 2000 Census data, the median income for Arroyo Grande households as
of 1999 was $48,236. This compares to a 1989 median household income (1990
Census) of$34,796. The median income for the households for the State as a whole in
32 November 25, 2003
_
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
1999 was $47,493. The State 1999 median family income was $55,494, compared to a
1989 figure of$40,504. The median income for families for the State as a whole in
1999 was $53,025. The per capita income for 1999 was $24,311, compared to $16,583
in 1989. The per capita income for 1999 for the State as a whole was $22,711.
The largest percentage income category for household income in 1999 was in the
$50,000 to $74,999 range (25.3%). This compares to the largest percentage income
category for household income in 1989 of$35,000 to $49,999 (21.2%).
Another method to evaluate income is to determine levels of poverty status in a
community. According to the 2000 Census and based upon 1999 incomes, 191 families
or 4.3 percent in Arroyo Grande were considered below the poverty level. This
compares to 1990 Census data (1989 incomes) for 262 families or 6.4% that were
considered to be below the poverty level.
Employment
The 2000 Census provides data on employment for Arroyo Grande residents. Table 5
provides a breakdown of the employed population 16 years and older by occupation.
The largest percentage category is that of management, professional, and related
occupations (37.5%). The second largest category (29.7%) is that of sales and office
occupations. Table 6 provides a breakdown of employed residents by industry. The
largest industry category is that of educational, health and social services (20.4%),
followed by retail trade (14.5%).
_ __ __ _ _ . _ _.
' T��i� 5
��.. ��� �� �����:���.��.MF������3�..33�...��....3.��� .����...� �'�.
Occu ation Number Percent
Mana ement, rofessional, and related occu ations 2,691 37.5
Service Occu ations 1,115 15.5
Sales and office occu ations 2,130 29.7
Farmin , fishin , and forest occu ations 34 0.5
Construction, extraction, and maintenance occu ations 612 8.5
Production, trans ortation, and material movin occu ations 599 8.3
otal 7,181 100.0
The State Economic Development Department (EDD) provides statistics on job growth.
EDD has reported that job growth in Arroyo Grand in the period of 1991 to 2000
increased by 1,230, or 15.95 percent (1.595 percent annually). EDD has forecasted
that Arroyo Grande will increase jobs by 1,320 in the period of 2001 through 2008
(current housing planning period), for an increase of 14.35 percent over the 8-year
period, or 1.79 percent annually. It is assumed that, based upon recent employment
trends, the majority of the job growth in Arroyo Grande will be in the retail trade and
government sectors (e.g. education, health, etc.).
33 r November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
: �+���+R� i
. 1iiC�f,t�. �
riculture, forest , fishin and huntin , and minin 156 2.2
Construction 518 7.2
Manufacturin 471 6.6
holesale trade 255 3.6
Retail trade 1,042 14.5
rans ortation and warehousin , and utilities 551 7.7
Information 196 2.7
Finance, insurance, real estate, and rental and leasin 363 5.1
Professional, scientific, mana ement, administrative &waste mana ement services 680 9.5
Educational, health and social services 1,468 20.4
rts, entertainment, recreation, accommodation and food services 621 8.6
Other services exce t ublic administration 416 5.8
Public administration 444 6.2
Another issue related to employment and residency is the matter of commuting to work.
Census data indicates that of the 7,095 area workers 16 years and over 5,696 or 80.3
percent drove to work. Only 16 or 0.2 percent utilized public transportation. The mean
travel time to work was 21.6 minutes. This would apparently indicate that a ma'ority of
the Ci 's workin residents are commutin to 'obs outside of Arro o Grande.
3.3 Housing Characteristics
Types of Housing
As of the 2000 census, there were 6,806 housing units in the City of Arroyo Grande, a
747 unit increase from 1990. Table 7 provides a breakdown of the total housing units
by type of structure. As indicated, the vast majority of the units (75%) in Arroyo Grande
are single-family units. Since January 2001, according to the City's Building
Department records, an additional 431 dwelling units have been permitted.
34 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
T���� 7 �������
T�tal �i���i� ���� :
Number Percent
otal Housin Units 6,806 100.0
Units in Structure
1-unit, detached 4,516 66.4
1-unit, attached 590 8.7
units 111 1.6
3 or 4 units 382 5.6
5 to 9 units 181 2.7
10 to 19 units 136 2.0
0 or more units 337 5.0
Mobile home 544 8.0
Boat, RV, van, etc. 9 0.1
Rental and owner-occupied Units
Of the 6,478 occupied housing units in the City based upon the 2000 Census, 4,528 or
69.9 percent were owner-occupied in 2000, while 1,950 or 30.1 percent were renter-
occupied. In addition to the occupied units, the Census reported 272 vacant units, 116
units for seasonal, recreational or occasional use. No migratory or transitional units
were reported.
Vacancy Rates
Vacancy rates are commonly used as an indicator of housing market activity in a given
area. The individual vacancy rate for a community theoretically measures the health of
the local housing market. The vacancy rate is a percentage of the total housing stock
that is vacant and/or available for sale or rent at any one time. Generally, a 2 percent
vacancy rate in units available for owner-occupancy and a 6 percent rate for rental units
are considered desirable to keep prices down and to ensure that units are available to
new and relocating residents.
The 2000 Census provides data on housing units and their vacancy rates. For Arroyo
Grande, it was reported that there was a 0.8 vacancy rate for owner-occupied units and
a 2.9 percent vacancy rate for rental units. This is below the optimal rates described
above and indicates a shortage of housing units in the City. However, this is not an
uncommon statistic in the south San Luis Obispo County area. Grover Beach has an
overall total unit vacancy rate of 2.9 percent, Pismo Beach as a rate of 5.1 percent,
while the City of San Luis Obispo has an overall rate of 2.8 percent.
Overcrowded Units
A common method of ineasuring overcrowding is to compare the number of persons to
the number of rooms in the unit. According to State guidelines, overcrowding is defined
as a household that has more than 1.01 persons per room (not including kitchens and
bathrooms). In Arroyo Grande, the data collected from the 2000 Census show that 4
percent of all occupied units were overcrowded, based upon the 1.01 persons per room
35 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
guideline. Census data further indicates that 114 units or 1.7 percent of the total
occupied housing units had befinreen 1.01 and 1.50 occupants per room, and 149 or 2.3
percent of all units had over 1.51 occupants per room.
The 4 percent overcrowded rate is compared to San Luis Obispo County as a whole,
which has a 5.6 percent overcrowded rate, and the State of California, which has an
overall rate of 15.2 percent.
It is noted that the lower rate for Arroyo Grande may be explained by the fact that the
City has a lower rate of persons per household than many communities, which possibly
lowers the incidence of overcrowding. While the rate may in comparison be lower than
many other communities, the incidence of overcrowding is still an issue. The problem of
overcrowding for large families can be addressed by the construction of larger units.
However, the overcrowding issue goes beyond family size to affordability issues. Even
single individual and small families may suffer from overcrowding. Due to limited
incomes and high housing costs and rents, they may be forced to double up with
extended family members or non-relatives in similar circumstances. There is a need to
ensure that larger housing unit sizes, especially for rental units, be constructed in the
City to address the overcrowding issue.
Age of Housing Units
The age of housing is an important characteristic of its relative condition as older units
tend to be in greater need of repair. Many federal and State programs use age of
housing to determine potential housing rehabilitation needs. Typically, the useful life of
major components of an average quality housing structure ranges from 20 to 30 years
for items such as roofing, plumbing, landscaping, paving and electrical. When a
housing unit is over 30 years old, the replacement or refurbishing of major components
is an important factor in the ability of a community to provide safe, decent and sanitary
housing.
Table 8 provides a breakdown of the age of housing units in Arroyo Grande as of the
year 2000. In reviewing this table, the largest percentage of the housing units was
constructed between 1970 and 1979 (28.4%), followed by units built 1980 and 1989
(20.1%). The table indicates that 292 units were build prior to 1940.
36 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
TSa1��$ ������
Y'ea�;�l�ru+��i� ���1# ;'
Year Structure Built Number Percent
1999 to March 2000 211 3.1
1995 to 1998 500 7.3
1990 to 1994 508 7.5
1980 to 1989 1,371 20.1
1970 to 1979 1,931 28.
1960 to 1969 958 14.1
1940 to 1959 1,035 15.2
1939 or earlier 292 4.
Condition of Units
One of the issues required by State housing element law for discussion and analysis is
the condition of the community's housing stock. The purpose for this is to provide a
basis for determining which units are in need of rehabilitation and which units may be
beyond feasible repair and determined to be in need of demolition and replacement.
One of the guidelines set by the State is that units that were constructed before 1960
may be eligible for repair and/or rehabilitation to maintain those units in the existing
housing stock. This is a general criterion, in that many older communities like Arroyo
Grande have many older units that have already been repaired and/or rehabilitated to
maintain the historical nature of the community.
Based upon the review of Table 8, 1,327 or 19.5 percent of the total housing units in the
City were built prior to 1960. While these numbers could represent an estimate of the
number of housing units that could be analyzed for rehabilitation need, the 1993
Housing Element survey was conducted to determine the structural conditions of
housing in Arroyo Grande. The structural condition of housing units reported as
"sound", in need of"minor rehabilitation", "moderate rehabilitation", "substantial
rehabilitation", or"dilapidated". The survey utilized a point system to evaluate the
housing units in the City. The results of this survey was that 99.3 percent of the 1993
housing units were in "sound" condition, 0.4 percent or 26 units were in need of"minor
rehabilitation", 0.3 percent or 13 units were in need of"moderate rehabilitation" and 1
unit was in need of"substantial rehabilitation". No units were determined to be
dilapidated. The conclusion of the survey was that virtually all housing units were in
sound condition and the overall appearance of the City is of well maintained homes. To
update the findings of the 1993 housing survey, City staff conducted a windshield
survey of housing units in the older neighborhoods where housing conditions may be an
issue. The survey located less than ten units that appear in need of substantial
rehabilitation or removal.
Housing Prices
One of the key issues affecting the ability to purchase a housing unit in Arroyo Grande
and San Luis Obispo County as a whole is the price of housing units. This is an issue '
of importance to the whole Central Coast, including Santa Cruz, Monterey, San Luis
37 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
Obispo, Ventura and Santa Barbara counties. According to the 2000 Census, the
median value of a home in San Luis Obispo County was $230,000.00. For Arroyo
Grande, the Census reported the median value of a home at $233,200.00. Median
means a point where 50 percent of housing prices (or rental rates), are below the listed
number and 50 percent are above. While these statistics reflect housing prices in 2000,
housing prices in San Luis Obispo and Arroyo Grande have significantly increased
since 2000.
A review of current housing prices was conducted. In many counties in the State, data
on median housing prices are reported on a monthly basis for the county as a whole.
Generally, local realtor associations provide this information. In January of 2003, the
San Luis Obispo Tribune newspaper reported the median home prices for all the
individual cities in San Luis Obispo County as well as for the County as a whole. Table
9 provides the median home values as of December 2001 and December 2002, as well
as the percentage change. This table indicates that the median home price for the
County of San Luis Obispo increased 23 percent from 2001 to 2002. For Arroyo
Grande, the median home price in the same period increased 20.51 percent, with a
December 2002 median home price of$473,888.00.
The most recent county median home price was reported by the California Association
of Realtors at $357,380.00 for March of 2003, which is drop from the reported figure in
February, 2003 of$361,610.00.
!T�il��'
H�rr�e�"���,
December 2001 December 2002 Percent
Location Median rice Median rice chan e
Coun ide $286,540 $352,320 23.0
Grover Beach $267,500 $356,550 33.3
rro o Grande $393,250 $473,888 20.5
Pismo Beach $500,000 $481,500 -3.7
ceano $268,000 $249,000 -7.1
San Luis Obis o $419,500 $475,000 13.2
Ni omo $320,750 $377,250 17.6
Rental Unit Rates
As with housing prices, rental rates in the Central Coast, San Luis Obispo County, and
the City of Arroyo Grande have become a major issue for those desiring to rent a unit
for occupancy. Again, according to the 2000 Census, median contract rents in San Luis
Obispo County was reported at $654.00 per unit, with median gross rent reported at
$719.00 per unit. For Arroyo Grande, median contract rent was reported at $683.00,
with a median gross rent reported at$725.00. Like housing prices, rents charged for
housing units has significantly increased since those reported in 2000.
38 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
In order to provide a more current reporting of monthly rentai rates, a survey of rents
listed in the Tribune Newspaper were tabulated for the City of Arroyo Grande (February,
2003)
Apartments — Rents Home rentals - Rents
1 bedroom - $775.00 2 bedroom - $1,200.00
1 bedroom - $775.00 2 bedroom - $1,295.00
2 bedroom - $795.00 2 bedroom - $1,400.00
2 bedroom - $825.00 2 bedroom - $1,400.00
2 bedroom - $850.00 3 bedroom - $1,200.00
2 bedroom - $900.00 3 bedroom - $1,300.00
2 bed room - $900.00 3 bed room - $1,500.00
2 bedroom - $950.00 3 bedroom - $1,500.00
3 bedroom - $1,050.00 3 bedroom - $1,595.00
3 bedroom - $1,750.00
3 bedroom - $1,795.00
3 bedroom - $2,050.00
3 bedroom - $2,485.00
4 bedroom - $1,700.00
4 bedroom - $1,700.00
4 bedroom - $1,800.00
4 bedroom - $2,395.00
While the above rental analysis involves a limited number of housing units that are
available for rent, the data does give a prospective on rents being asked in Arroyo
Grande. For one-bedroom apartments, the average asking rent was $775.00. For finro-
bedroom apartments, the average asking rent was $867.00. Only one three-bedroom
unit was listed at $1,050.00. For homes being rented, the average asking rent for a
two-bedroom unit was $1,324.00. For a three-bedroom unit, the average was
$1,686.00. For a four-bedroom unit, the average was $1,899.00.
39 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
CHAPTER 4- REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS, AFFORDABILITY
AND SPECIAL HOUSING NEEDS
4.1 Regional Housing Needs Determinations
State law requires councils of government to prepare Regional Housing Needs Plans
(RHNP) for all cities and counties within their jurisdiction. The intent of the housing
allocation plans is to ensure adequate housing opportunities for persons of varying
incomes and to support housing efforts for the local communities. The State
Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) provides guidelines for
preparing such plans, and ultimately certifies the plans as adequate. Once the plan is
certified, it provides the basis for local jurisdictions to prepare their housing element
updates as specified by State law.
The entity commissioned to prepare the Regional Housing Needs Plan (RHNP) for San
Luis Obispo County, including the City of Arroyo Grande, is the San Luis Obispo
Council of Governments (SLOCOG). During 2002, SLOCOG conducted an analysis of
housing needs in the county as well as housing needs set by HCD. To develop
estimates of future housing needs by jurisdiction, SLOCOG evaluated past construction
trends, the relationship befinreen job and housing opportunities, public service
availability, as well as housing needs provided by the State. SLOCOG, in its
preparation of the Plan, considered the following factors in its distribution of the housing
needs to the individual jurisdictions:
• The jurisdiction's employment base and population growth in relation to regional-
wide share of employment and anticipated growth; and
• The extent to which a jurisdiction's current income distribution differs from that of
the regional average: and
• The HCD determined regional housing needs: and
• The capacity of the presently zoned land in the unincorporated county area for
residential development in the above moderate-income category.
The RHNP was adopted by SLOCOG in early 2003 and was subsequently accepted by
HCD. The RHNP is intended to assure fhat adequate sites and zoning exist to address
anticipated housing demand during the planning period (January 1, 2001 through June
30, 2008). This Plan sets targets to ensure the availability of sites to accommodate the
housing needs of a range of socioeconomic segments of a community. This Plan is
incorporated by reference into this document and is available from SLOCOG.
Within the total number of housing units that need to be accommodated, specified
housing units within specific income levels are designated. State law requires that
RHNP's divide the specified housing allocation into four income groups. The groups are
defined as percentages of county median income. Table 10 displays the criteria for the
four income groups for the City of Arroyo Grande.
40 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
���T�t�le ��1 � �
In�+c�m�Gra�'
e Low Household income is less than 50% of the coun median income.
Household income is between 50% and 80% of the county
Low median income.
Household income is between 80% and 120% of the county
Moderate median income.
bove Household income is greater than 120% of the county median
Moderate income.
Source: HCD Income Definitions
The breakdown of existing households by income categories within Arroyo Grande is
presented in Table 11.
�����3�
������ ���,�,'������;�.��������� :���� ����, �
�
Above
Ve Low Low Moderate Moderate Totals
rro o Grande 20% 15% 18% 47% 100% '
tascadero 19% 15% 19% 47% 100%
Grover Beach 22% 19% 23% 36% 100%
Mo��o Ba 30% 19% 19% 32% 100%
Paso Robles 24% 19% 21% 36% 100%
Pismo BeaCh 24% 16% 15% 45% 100%
San Luis Obis o 35% 17% 16% 32% 100%
Coun Unincor orated 18% 15% 19% 48% 100%
Re ional Total 23% 16% 18% 43% 100%
Sour�ce: San Luis Obis o Council of Govemments
Table 11 indicates that Arroyo Grande has a higher percentage of housing affordable to
households in the above moderate income category and a lower percentage of housing
available to low and very-low income households. To determine regional housing
allocations by income group, SLOCOG set goals that suggest that jurisdictions move
toward parity in the percentages of housing available for each income group. Thus, to
meet the objective of the RHNP, Arroyo Grande should aim to provide a higher
percentage of low and very-low income housing and a lower percentage of above
moderate housing than currently exist.
The Regional Housing Needs Plan or RHNP, as adopted, set forth housing goals for the
City of Arroyo Grande. The total number of dwelling units that needs to be
41 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
� accommodated during the planning period for Arroyo Grande is 1,192 housing units, as
outlined in Table 12. The allocation for the very low and low income categories is
roughly 45 percent.
:'�"�ble ��
� ,;
�r�� �� '���� 3 ���� �
e Lo Low Moderate bove Moderate Totals
rro o Grande 310 223 259 400 1,192
tascadero 345 254 304 456 1,359
GroverBeach 178 142 166 200 686
Morro Ba 185 122 129 162 599
Paso Robles 627 467 520 651 2,266
Pismo Beach 150 102 105 173 531
San Luis Obis o 1,484 644 870 1,185 4,383
Coun Unincor orated 1,029 778 929 4,284 7,02
Re ional Total 4,3082,933 3,283 7,511 18,035
Source: San Luis Obis o Council of Govemments
According to the 1990 Census, there were 6,059 housing units in Arroyo Grande. In :
2000, that figure increased to 6,806. Thus during the years between 1990 and 2000,
based upon Census figures, an average of 75 housing units have been constructed
annually in Arroyo Grande. This number has been verified by City building records.
Applying this trend to the next housing planning period (January 1, 2001 to June 30,
2008), 563 housing units would be constructed. However, with the RHNP allocation,
an average annual construction goal of 158 housing units would have to be
accommodated. Thus to meet the goals of the RHNP, additional units per year would
have to be accommodated, particularly for very low and low income households.
Since the beginning of the housing planning period, January 1, 2001, and through June
30, 2003, 331 housing units have been permitted according to the City Building
Department records. It has been estimated that all of these units are in the above
moderate category. This would reduce the total number of units in the RHNP from
1,192 to 861. However, considering that these units are all in the above moderate
range, it would reduce this income category only, from 400 to 87 remainir�g. None of
the very-low, low or moderate-income housing units allocated by the RHNP have been
constructed since January 2001.
According to San Luis Obispo County Planning and Building Department, based upon
federal income standards, in March 2003 the median household income for a family of
four in San Luis Obispo County was $57,700.00. Based on the income categories
provided in Table 10, Table 13 indicates the income levels for the four income
categories for 2003.
42 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing E4ement
7"�#e "��
' 1��!�r�e Li��� ;
Persons in Famil e Low Income Lower Income Median Income Moderate Incom
1 $20,200 $32,300 $40,400 $48,500
2 $23,100 $36,950 $46,150 $55,400
3 $25,950 $41,550 $51,950 $62,350
4 $28,850 $46,150 $57,700 $69,250
5 $31,150 $49,850 $62,300 $74,800
6 $33,450 $53,550 $66,950 $80,350
7 $35,750 $57,250 $71,550 $85,850
8 $38,100 $60,950 $76,150 $91,400
Source: San Luis Obis o De artment of Plannin and Buildin , Mar�ch 2003
4.2 Housing Affordability
One of the key issues facing the provision of housing in the State of California, as
outlined in Chapter 1, is the affordability of housing. The ability to acquire safe and
sound housing is becoming a major social and economic issue. It is affecting decisions
regarding the location of employment opportunities, community members having to
commute longer distances between their employment and their residences, as well as
the overall quality of life. This is a major issue especially in the central coast of this
State, where San Luis Obispo County and the City of Arroyo Grande are located. This
issue not only affects people with special housing needs, but the population in general.
This housing affordability issue is further complicated by the lack of financial and other
resources available to mitigate the current housing situation.
The issue of housing affordability is a relationship between household income and the
price of housing. There are a number of factors and statistics to measure the issue of
housing affordability. These factors and statistics are discussed below.
Factors and statistics
Table 13 provides the income limits set forth by the Federal Government to define the
income groups listed in Table 10. These are the income limits as of March, 2003. The
County of San Luis Obispo outlines the rents and sales prices for housing in
accordance with the income levels, which are summarized in Table 14.
43 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
'T��II� '14
��f`�r�lab�+��Hou���� ��r�+d�t�� '
�+�r���r�r�,���+�s��r�
Monthl Rents
Ve Low Income Lower Income Moderate Income
Studio $505 $606 $619
1 bedroom $577 $692 $699
� 2 bedroom $649 $779 $886
3 bedroom $779 $935 $1,232
4 bedroom $837 $1,004 $1,454
Initial Sale Prices
Ve Low Income Lower Income Moderate Income
Studio $80,396 $123,220 $191,092
1 bedroom $91,839 $140,758 $218,290
2 bedroom $103,381 $158,448 $245,724
3 bedroom $123,977 $190,015 $294,679
4 bedroom $133,231 $204,198 $316,674
The rents and sales prices provided in Table 14 are based upon generally accepted
standards and assumptions. The maximum monthly rents include the average
estimated costs of utilities. Following are the formulas for rent limits:
• For very-low income households, affordable monthly rents shall not exceed 30%
of 50% of the annual County median household income for the number of
persons expected to reside in the unit, divided by 12.
• For lower-income households, affordable monthly rents shall not exceed 30% of
60% of the annual County median household income divided by 12.
• For moderate-income households, affordable monthly rents shall not exceed
35% of 110% of the annual County median income divided by 12.
The maximum sales prices for affordable housing are based on a formula that accounts
for what a typical very-low income, low-income or moderate household can afford to pay
for housing, following HUD guidelines. Sales prices are determined by multiplying the
annual income limit of the income group, adjusted for household size, by 2.5 for very-
low and lower income households, and by 3 for moderate-income households. These
calculations include assumptions for utilities and taxes, the mortgage interest rate, as
well as a typical down payment.
In order to place the income limits in context with the number of persons per unit, the
City of San Luis Obispo has developed standards for the varying unit sizes as follows:
44 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
• Studio unit—assume the income limit for a one-person household
• One-bedroom unit— assume the income limit for a two-person household
• Two-bedroom unit—assume the income unit for a three-person household
• Three-bedroom unit—assume average of limits for four and five-person
household
• Four-bedroom unit—Assume the income limit for a six-person household
Based upon median housing prices and rent levels provided in this document, it is safe
to assume that housing prices and rent levels are above the median incomes, and only
above moderate income levels can afford current housing prices and rental levels.
Another measure of the affordability of housing is statistics generated by local realtor
associations. According to an article published in the San Luis Obispo Tribune
newspaper, the median-priced home in San Luis Obispo County in May of 2003 was
$388,360. Based upon a traditional loan, a homebuyer would need to purchase a
median priced home with an annual income of$90,000, assuming a 5.72% mortgage
rate and 20% down. According to the California Association of Realtors, the authors of
the data, only 17 percent of county residents could afford the median priced home. The
median home price is the statistical point where half of the homes sell for more and half
for less. For Arroyo Grande, the median income reported for December 2002 was
higher than the county median as a whole, which would imply that the affordability rate
in Arroyo Grande might be less than that of the county. This overall affordability rate
compares to 28 percent of Californians that can afford the State median priced home
($352,780). The Tribune article noted that the San Luis Obispo county median income
was $57,914 in 2002, which is compared to the statewide median for 2002, which was
$62,849. This documents that one of the issues of housing affordability in San Luis
Obispo County (and assuming Arroyo Grande), is that median incomes are lower and
median home prices are higher than the State average.
Overaavment
Another measure of housing affordability is the percentage of income paid for housing.
State housing guidelines utilize a 30 percent of gross income paid for housing as the
standard affordable level, with those households paying 30 percent or more as
overpayment. According to the 2000 Census, 1,102 households or 28.3 percent of the
owner-occupied units were paying monthly housing costs at 30 percent or above. For
renter-occupied housing units, 902 households or 45.8 percent paid 30 percent or more
for rent compared to household income.
Lonq-Term Affordabilitv
One of the issues of the housing programs proposed by this Housing Element Update is
a policy that all affordable housing provided by City incentives be maintained as
affordable for at least a period of 30 years. This issue of long-term affordability is a
subject of a number of existing programs that ensure that affordable units maintain their
status. The issue of long-tern affordability is different for rental and owner-occupied
units.
45 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
Rental housing affordability is generally maintained through recorded agreements
befinreen a property owner and an entity authorized by a City to monitor maintenance of
affordability requirements. These agreements typically specify the following: a) the
maximum rents based on the same formula that established initial rents as a condition
of City approval; b) the term for which rental units must remain affordable; and c) terms
which affordability is maintained after sale or transfer of property. Under the policies of
this Element, all projects that receive a City incentive, the units must be affordable for a
period of at least 30 years. Many of these projects have State or federal funding, which
provide very specific requirements for maintaining affordability.
Based upon the Housing Affordable Standards set forth by the City of San Luis Obispo,
there are finro different approaches to maintaining long-term affordability for owner-
occupied units: 1) the property owner agrees to maintain the designated dwelling unit as
affordable for at least 30 years; or 2) the property owner agrees to participate in a
"shared equity purchase program. Under the long-term affordability program, the
housing must remain affordable for at least 30 years from the original date of sale,
which is a policy of this Element. Affordability terms are secured by a promissory note
and deed of trust, recorded on the property prior to or concurrent with the initial
occupancy (for rental units) or sale of property. The promissory note is based on the
monetary difference between the initial purchase and the initial appraised vale as an
"affordability loan" or"silent second" payable to the City. The loan accrues interest at a
rate set by the City when the note is executed, amortized over 30 years. Monthly
payments (principal plus interest) on the affordability loan are typically waived as long
as eligible residents continue to own and reside in the property. Upon sale, transfer, gift
or inheritance of the property, the City, its Housing Authority, or a non-profit agency
approved by the City, shall have the first right of refusal to purchase the property at its
current appraised value. The consideration for the City's first right of refusal shall
consist of 1 percent of the remaining affordable loan balance. The balance of the City's
loan, after deduction the 1 percent first right of refusal cost, shall be credited toward the
purchase price if the City, its Housing Authority or non-profit agency chooses to
exercise its purchase option.
Under the equity-sharing program, the buyer of an affordable dwelling enters into an
agreement with the city guaranteeing affordability for a specified period of time after the
initial date of sale. Upon resale of the property, the agreement ensures that the City's
share returns to the City for use in other affordable housing developments. The City's
equity share is based on the difference befinreen the property's market value and the
actual price paid by the homeowner, divided by the market value, or the amount of
subsidy provided by the city, divided by the property's market share. Affordable units
sold before the specified period are subject to an additional "Equity Recapture Fee"
ranging from 25 to 100 percent of the property's equity.
It is apparent, based on this data regarding the supply of housing units, including the
lack of supply of rental units, and with the projected needs, that the households that
appear to be in the greatest need of housing assistance are of low and very-low income.
46 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
4.3 Special Housing Needs Groups
This section reviews the characteristics of households with special housing needs,
including elderly or senior households, female heads of households with minor children,
large family households, overcrowded units, farmworker households, and disabled
persons/households. Homeless people who cannot afford any housing are a�so
discussed in this section.
E/derl►r/Senior Househo/ds
An analysis of the needs of elderly or senior households or persons is important for four
reasons: 1) many elderly have fixed, limited incomes; 2) many elderly persons are
"over-housed" (living alone or with 2 people in a three or four bedroom house); 3) some
elderly have mobility and health problems that can create special housing needs; and 4)
recent projections indicate an increase in the elderly population in the planning period,
either those currently living in the area or those that will be relocating to the area.
There are, according to the 2000 Census, 3,222 residents age 65 years and older in
Arroyo Grande, which is 20.3 percent of the total population. This number is compared
to San Luis Obispo County, where 14.5 percent of the residents are 65 and over.
Owner occupied households with householders 65 years and over totaled 1,732, which
is 82.4 percent of the total elderly households.
Acc,ording to the 2000 Census, there are a total of 4,528 owner occupied housing units
and 1,950 renter-occupied housing units. In respect to elderly households, the following
represents householders by tenure and age in the City of Arroyo Grande:
• Of the total owner-occupied family housing units, 1,012 are occupied by a
householder 65 years and over.
• Of the total non-family owner-occupied units, 686 households are occupied by a
householder 65 years and over.
• Of the total non-family owner-occupied units, 125 are occupied by a male
householder 65 years and over and 516 are occupied by a female householder
65 years and over.
• Of the total renter-occupied family households, 85 are occupied by a
householder 65 years and over.
• Of the total non-family renter-occupied housing units, 300 are occupied by a
householder 65 years and over.
• Of the total non-family renter-occupied housing units, 64 are occupied by a male
householder 65 years and over and 228 are occupied by a female householder
65 years and over.
Income levels for a householder 65 years and over below the poverty level are reported
by the 2000 Census as follows:
• Of the total 105 owner-occupied housing units, 48 are occupied by a householder
65 years and over.
• Of the total 338 renter-occupied housing units, 66 are occupied by a householder
65 years and over.
47 November 25, 2003
._ _
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
Several studies predict the age of future residents in the Central Coast area. A recent
study (April, 2003) commissioned by the Tribune newspaper and conducted by the
Solimar Research Group evaluated the future increase in population predicted in San
Luis Obispo County. The study assumed that the county would gain 100,000 persons
within the next 15 years. Of the age categories evaluated, the age groups of 40-59 and
60-plus showed the largest increases. For the 40-59 age group, the study estimates
this group to increase 68 percent and with a median income above the current county
median income. The study further predicted that retirees in the 60-plus age group
would increase 49 percent, with a median income 9 percent below the county median
income. The study indicated that this increase is not only a result of current residents
aging, but that of many Californians relocating from the San Francisco Bay area, the
Los Angeles area and the Central valley.
Female Heads of Families with Minor Children
The 2000 Census reported that of the total 6,478 households, there were 612 female-
headed households in Arroyo Grande. This represents 9.4 percent of the total
households. Of these households, 365 of the 612 or 60 percent had children less than
18 years of age. Based upon the Census data for incomes in 1999 for families below
the poverty level, 61 families with a female householder, no husband present and with
related children under 18 years were reported, with 18.3 percent under poverty level.
La _me Families✓Households
Large families can present special housing needs if they cannot find affordable, large
housing units, then living conditions may become overcrowded. Table 2 shows the total
occupied housing units by the number of persons living within each unit. This ,
information is shown for owner-occupied and rental housing.
For owner-occupied units, the highest percentage is for a 2-person unit (41.4%). Less
than 8 percent of the owner-occupied households are occupied by five or more persons.
For renter-occupied units, the highest percentage is a one-person household (37.6%).
Less than 9 percent of the renter-occupied units are occupied by five or more persons.
These numbers are generally low compared to the State as a whole, as well as many
cities and counties. The existence of large families does not necessarily indicate an
overcrowding problem if there are a sufficient number of larger housing units for these
types of families.
Farmworker Households
According to the 2000 Census, there are 156 residents of Arroyo Grande that are
employed in farming, forestry or fishing operations. Given the location and environment
of Arroyo Grande, it is assumed that a majority of those emplo�ed in these professions
are in the agricultural community.
Several studies that have been completed over the past 10 years found that most of
farmworkers live in seriously substandard conditions. A majority of current farmworkers
have families and thus are residents versus migrant workers who reside or work for a
period of time in the County but live elsewhere. The actual percent of resident versus
migrant in this area is unknown. The major issue for resident farmworkers is that they
are generally low income and thus have to compete for housing with other lower income
48 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
residents. The greatest need is affordable housing. The issue for many migrant workers
is that farm employers are not required to provide housing, so the migrants may have to
find their own housing, which sometimes is living in their car or in illegal units. The
greatest need for migrant workers is temporary seasonal housing. This could be in the
form of bunk houses on the property where the workers are employed.
In summary, farmworkers generally earn low incomes, live in overcrowded units, and
pay a disproportionate share of income for housing.
Disabled Persons✓Households
The 2000 Census recorded the disability status of the civilian non-institutional
population of residents of Arroyo Grande. From a general point of review, for the
population of 5 to 20 years, 260 or 7.4 percent of the population had a disability. For
the population of 21 to 64 years, 1,393 or 16.3 percent of this population had a
disability, of which 55.8 percent were employed. For the population of 65 years and
older, 1,223 persons or 40.5 percent of this population had a disability. The most
significant issue of persons with disability is that of the senior population.
For those persons with a disability, there are two major problems facing this portion of
the community: the need for housing that meets particular physical needs (wheelchair
accessible, etc.) and monetary needs. Because of limited job opportunities for the
handicapped and disabled (at least those whose disability may limit their employment
opportunities), their incomes are often below the median incomes. ,
The disabled or handicapped residents of Arroyo Grande have varying housing needs I
depending on the nature and severity of the disability. Physically disabled persons
generally require modifications to the housing units such as wheelchair ramps,
elevators, wide doorways, accessible cabinetry, modified fixtures and appliances. If the
disability prevents the person from operating a vehicle, then proximity to services and
access to public transportation are important.
If the physical disability prevents the person from working or limits their income, then the
cost of housing and needed modification can be significant. Because physical
handicaps vary, this group rarely congregates toward a single service organization.
This makes estimating the number of persons and specific needs difficult. The physical
modification of housing is not necessary to accommodate mentally disabled persons,
but they will generally require special services and monetary support. Since jobs and
income are often limited, affordable housing is important. Issues related to those with a
mental disability would suggest that there is a need for apartment or other housing
complexes that are reserved or designed to accommodate persons requiring extra
assistance. Many mentally handicapped persons are unable to drive, so access to
public transportation is very important.
Home/ess
There is no specific information about the number of homeless persons in Arroyo
Grande. A recent report indicated that there were befinreen 2,500 and 4,000 people in
San Luis Obispo County that were looking for a place to sleep. Past studies have
indicated that the majority of homeless persons are found within the City of San Luis ,
49 November 25, 2003
_
_ __.
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
Obispo, probably as a result of the fact that most services for the homeless are
centered in the City. A past study indicated that the majority of homeless are in North
County (31 percent) and the City of San Luis Obispo (50 percent). Only 15 percent of
the homeless are estimated to come from South County, which includes the Cities of
Arroyo Grande, Pismo Beach, Grover Beach, and the unincorporated areas of Nipomo
and Oceano. Observations from service providers and law enforcement indicate that a
large share of the homeless in South County reside in the beach towns. It is very
untikely that the City of Arroyo Grande does nat have homeless persons "residing" in
the City.
Since 1989, the Economic Opportunity Commission's (EOC) Homeless Services
program has been working to meet the needs of the homeless in the County, offering
emergency housing, on-site information, referral services and assistance in finding
permanent housing. This organization operates an emergency shelter in San Luis
Obispo, which provides 49 beds nightly year-round. An additional 15 to 25 beds are
added through the Interfaith Coalition for the Homeless, bringing the overflow total to
25,000 shelter nights provided per year.
There are several organizations in the County that provide services and housing for the
homeless, including several churches.
Workforce Housincl
Housing has become out of reach for most workers in San Luis Obispo County and the
City of Arroyo Grande. This has made it very difficult for the employers of many
industries to recruit and retain err�ployees. It has also caused the situation that many
employees must commute from varying locations, causing traffic congestion and related
air quality impacts. At this point, housing is hard to find for many of the local workers in
or in close proximity to the place of employment, and given the continuing escalation of
the local real estate market there will be fewer and fewer workers able to live in the local
community. The issue of inadequate workforce housing is threatening the economic
vitality of many communities nationwide. This is especially true in the central coast
area, which includes the City of Arroyo Grande.
The City of Arroyo Grande, through its review of the Housing Element Update, has
identified work force housing as a priority. The question that is raised is, "What is
workforce housing and how does it relate to housing availability and affordability in
general?" A recent national workforce housing forum, hosted by the Urban Land
Institute, generally applied the term "workforce housing"to households earning more
than 60 percent, but less than 120 percent, of the area's median income (essentially
moderate income affordable housing). In the San Francisco Bay area, workforce
housing has been defined as housing affordable to private and public sector workers
with incomes at or below those of teachers and public safety workers.
Many communities are currently addressing the issue of workforce housing. A
preliminary step is to determine each community's definition of workforce housing based
upon the average incomes of the critical workers that employers are having a difficult
time recruiting and retaining. Once identified, programs need to be established within
the public and private sectors to encourage and retain housing for the local workforce. ;
50 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
4.4 At Risk Housing Units
Throughout California many affordable housing units, including those available to low
and very-low income families that were created through government subsidies, may be
eligible to convert to market rate units. Such conversions may jeopardize a significant
amount of the existing affordable housing stock. Housing elements are required to:
1) identify those low income units that may convert to market rate units within 10 years;
2) analyze the costs of preservation of these "at-risk" units versus replacing them;
3) identify resources for preservation; 4) set objectives for preserving at risk-risk units;
and 5) incorporate programs to try to preserve the units as affordable housing.
No at-risk units were identified in the City of Arroyo Grande. To the extent that
subsidized housing units are established in the City in the future, policies and programs
shall be identified to ensure that these affordable units may remain available for lower
income families.
51 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Draft Housing Element
CHAPTER 5 - LAND AND SERVICES FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
This chapter provides and evaluates the availability of land and public services in Arroyo
Grande to support future residential development.
5.1 Land Availability
State housing law requires that the housing element provide an inventory of land
suitable and available for residential development, including vacant sites and sites
having potential for intensification and/or redevelopment. The purpose of this
requirement is to identify sites that could accommodate residential development as set
forth by the Regional Housing Needs, as set forth by the San Luis Obispo County
Council of Governments and as approved by the State Department of Housing and
Community Development. This analysis is not a construction quota or an anticipated list
of projects that will be constructed, given that the law recognizes that there may be
limitations that would affect residential development, as well as the fact that private
development and market forces in place that affect the level of housing construction.
Following is a partial and preliminary table (Table 15) that provides a listing of those
sites available for housing construction in the Housing Element Planning period followed
by a housing opportunity inventory map (Map 3). Other properties will be identified and
programmed into the City's Geographic Information System (GIS) to maintain an
inventory from General Plan and zoning data for future Housing Elements and other
planning purposes.
It should be noted that the City's Land Use Element was updated in November 2001 to
include a new "Mixed Use" land use category that encompasses approximately 85%
(254 acres) of all the commercially zoned land within the City. Consequently, most all of
the land (the exception is the Regional Commercial zoning district) within the City is
zoned for some level, or density, of residential development. This is a significant
change from what was allowed and analyzed in the City's 1993 Housing Element. It
should be further noted that Table 15 includes a fairly realistic estimate of available in-fill
developable area in the higher density residential land use areas.
52 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
TABLE 15
PRELIMINARY HOUSING OPPORTUNITY SITES INVENTORY
I. General Inventory of Higher Density Land Cumulative Acres Approx. No. Units (in-fill Approx. No.
Use Categories development not Affordable Units
included in specific site
invento below
Medium-Hi h Dens' Residential (9 du/ac 146.8 (146.8 (.05�(9 = 66 66 0.25 = 16 MI
High Density Residential (14 du/ac) 45.4 32 16 M=1
16 L-1
Very High Density Residential (25 du/ac) 5.4 25 - 12 L-1
_ 13 V-�.
Mixed Use (2� du/ac) 253.8 (253.8)(0.20)(0.5)(25) _
635
Second Dwellings ' 1,533.6 ' 34 (based on an estimate 't5 M-1
Properties zot�d for single- of 5 second dweltings per �15 L-t
fam�ly r�sidential "' year)
development, less
undev�l�ped 5p�cific Plan
ar�as ,
��
� :
��� ��
;,.
_ �
- e.
e
_- >,, . , r -� ,�' 4� %; ��
� „- ,,,' , ,...-. i ,r 4 :,.; ,.;!
. ............ .,,
Buildinup�rmits is�ued to date. 331 143 urtits in �t�t11
Between January 1, �t?01 and June �(?, 170 u�its in �tf02
2003 a total of 331 reside�tial units have 18 units so far in 2003
been issued building permits that can be
added to the City's Regional Housing Afl of these are market rate units, or above the median income levei.
Needs Atlocation (RHNA) number.
Page 53 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
9°�N y� '��� .�' u alo� �%i�� ty � g,�;
�r �� .. /, �„ f,= z r i.�r � °'�' :. �'.
r
�� ��. .t ��' � �„ y //�� �� � �i �
� d�.. �?' � � p � � f �i�%�3,.
� ��,. w.:E ���., x � � .
� � /' `� ��
s �." �p�,A��.' �.�. . 1 �;i ��
c
�.' �.' �,a�i :, :; ' Y5 4 :.'" • ; S`- � , ,; ,x ��'..� � , '�'`��.�/y � lx' �d� ..
o � ,.. � ' ' ' ,� �� / 'S", � � i.�,'..
'"`*In-lieu fees are calculated here based on average construction costs of a 2,000 sq�are foot house ($85✓sq. ft.) with a 400 square foot 2-car
garage($2?/sq. ft_). The money collected would be used to assist very low and low-income households with their housing needs through the
City's programs adopted through�he Housing Element.
11. Southwest Neighborhoads. Listed below are areas within the southwest partion of town having distin:ct housing
developrnent oppc�rtunities.
Severa! obvious vacant or underdeveloped residentially zoned properties that are either approved or in process as Planned Unit
Deve�o ments or convent[onal subclivisions.
1 PD/RS 10.30 ac 73 21 M-I Pending Proposed PD 1.5/SF/MF (7 du/ac)
(2.5 du/ac—25 units) (Moderate 13 custom home lots and 60 smaller lots with 3 floor
Farroll Avenue Income) plans;
APN: 077-251-005 A licant- S&S Homes.
2 BG-SP/MF 5.50 ac 47 17 M-I Approved Berry Gardens Subarea 2.
Ash Street (up to 21) Jasmine Place.
APN: 077-121-006 A licant—S8�S Homes
3 MU/MF 4.60 ac 26 3% in-lieu fee Approved Applicant—S8�S Homes
EI Camino Real ($140,400)
APN: 077-051-059
4 HD/MFA 1.00 ac 12 1-3 M-I Approved 12 units in 6 duplexes
185 & 187 Brisco Rd. or 6% in-lieu Applicant—Rick Wheeler
APN: 077-051-042, fee
�5 $81,000
5 HD/MFA 0.58 ac 8 2 M-I Approved 8 units in 4 duplexes
1180 Ash St. Applicant— Kevin Hunstad
APN: 007-181-021
6 MD/MF 0.80 ac 7 1% in-lieu fee Approved Applicant— Kevin Hunstad
325 Alder St. ($12,600)
APN: 077-204-003
<
Page 54 November 25, 2003 s
�
�
�
City of Arroyo Grande
2003 Housing Element
� s,u� ,
.�.; ,� �'� �� y1 � � � �� ,� .
e ✓: � :u rM r�✓ `u�D/� '/�� ��i
`� � � ��� � � � � �� �
��?� �; .6 a�r�' .
,l�. �. F ' � ; ?.,� . �- 6�.
-. � .,r � � < _
� ., :. '�. �� � ., ;, '_: � �y.�� ;. . � ,� �" - y �.
.� ;:, . . �; '
; � a
� . , �r -e� .�,�,.��ii � '�',� ��- . �. .y� �� r� ��� � �,� '��i>
�
;a �
A few vacant, . , � ° ,,, . � 6,2,�.; � " � �� �,y,���f�' � ;;
commerciaily zoned properties near Courtland Street and East Grand Avenue a�e newl re ' � A �yF
accommodate housing. Y �9n+zed °mixed-use"sites that can ✓
7 MU/SR 3.00 ac 108 107 VL-I & L-I Approved Applicant has applied 3 times for tax credits and is
Northwest comer of (76 Very Low waiting the outcome of the 4"' submittal. Project will
Courtland &Grand Income and likely be revised if tax credits are denied.
APN: 077-070-029 31 Lower Applicant— Larry Persons
lncome)
8 MD/SF 1.50 ac 9 6% in-lieu fee Approved The 4.60-acre property is located in Subarea 3 of the
9595 East Grand ($64,800
Ave. � Berry Gardens Specific Pian and is divided into
APN: 077-131-002 residential and commercial land uses.
9 MU/GC A licant—Matsumoto Revocable Trust
6.20 ac 38 10 M-I Potential Two adjacent properties fronting East Grand Ave.
East Grand Ave. under separate ownerships.
APN: 077-131-002 & Applicant— Matsumoto Revocable Trust and S&S
�� Homes
Listed below are less obviaus in�ll and mixec! use hausing opportunity sites that are smaller, sorne#�mes partially developed ro rties.
P pe
10 MU/GC 0.80 ac 8 3% in-lieu fee Potential 7 townhouses and 1 studio were considered as
Southeast comer of ($43,200 a pre-
EI Camino Real and � application.
Oak Park Blvd.
APN: 077-011-010
Page 55 November 25, 2003 '
3
�
i
. _ ,
__ ___ __- --- '
__ _ __ �
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
' y d" %�� �, i�x�;� �� �
I ;' ' ,f�y,�,� �.n ,a, i �y � �.
'..i �� d Y� /j � 4�,�� �by ����a�' �� � �
j . ,. _ � '�'� . j . '� �
I . : / , ..�,,: � r �� � �
°�� i �t �'�u a' , a
; „,. ,;�h . �v�a� ''�. -� �,�� f '`z�- � ��'r «'��r� ,.�T "`.
; s, �, !3��:U,, �f, , �,��' �a:" y ��v �� �" � ' �i, , _��'.
• .�,, , ;
11 MU/MF 1.20 ac 12 3 M-I Potential � Possibly 12 hillside townhouses could be developed
South of Hillcrest Dr. on this site, which is located behind the 26-unit PUD
and EI Camino Real (ID map no. 3). Property is owned by Howard
APN: 077-015-052 & Mankins.
053
12 HD8�0/MFA&O 5.00 ac 60 15 L-I Potential Potential for 60"special needs° housing could be
South of Elm Street 15 M-I constructed. Property is developed with 1 single-
Pa� family residence that is accessed from a narrow
APN: 077-241-013, driveway off of Elm Street. The property is listed for
035 8�062 sale and the residence is in poor condition. Wider
access easement from adjacent property is needed,
although the City would consider a narrower access
driveway if all the residences were constructed with
fire sprinkler systems. The adjacent 5-acre site is half
developed with a convalescent care facility and the
remaining 2.5 vacant acres could be utilized for higher
�
density residential development. The combination of
these two properties would provide numerous
development opportunities. Possible City incentives
are discussed in Chapter 2 (Goals, Policies and
Programs).
13 MU/GC 1.27 ac 40 8 M-1 Pending The property is zoned Mixed Use and is adjacent to a
Southwest corner of convenience market, agricultural land and residential
Elm St. and The Pike development. The °Mixed Use" land use designation
APN: 077-332-025, allows up to 25 dwelling units per acre, so a zone
026, &027 change is not necessary with this application. The
pre-application for 39 senior condominiums received
favorable Planning Commission review and the formal
application was submitted in October 2003.
A licant— Richard Shar
Page 56 November 25, 2003
:
_ _ _ _ _ . i
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
� � x � � :� ' r i :;�����
' � � � �. �`G� y�� � � ����
�
k 3�q ��� /�;�y�a �'�^�' a. �..�i � ���i,,„�'
.'u '�, s � � , ,� ��sd�i �., �
� ' � , � � .�' ¢e.�.,, � .% � �� ��,.
i �i ��� "- r � - � u.
' � ��� `� '�, ��. �t s � `�'' � r. fi� ����..: „�. � � �:
a �,
s a �� � �; � �.;
,� �
�.: �' � �.
� �
-<�
�, e = �uj ,,x , y �, �� ��
j s , , ,, /� :, ;, , „�_ �.:' , :< ,,, �;, �;,° ,
14 PF 8� LD/AG & RH 60 ac 40 10 M-I Potential The property consists of undeveloped hillsides
Valley Road, behind southeast of AROyo Grand High School that could be
AG High School developed as a clustered PUD (ave. 1.5 du/ac). The
APN: 006-095-001, Lucia Mar School District owns a portion of the
003, & 020; 075-021- property, which could be deemed and sold as surplus
002, 013, &045 land.
15 O/O 5.50 ac 60 15 L-I Potential The property is currently zoned Office Professional,
Fair Oaks Ave., east 15 M-I but has the potential for 60 "special needs"
of Halcyon Rd. townhouses or multi-family housing with a land use
APN: 006-391-044 change to High Density Residential, allowing up to 14
dwelling units per acre. The site is located adjacent to
Arroyo Grande General Hospital and Arroyo Grande
Creek, an ideal environment and location for special
needs housing. Because there are known
archeological sites in the vicinity, specific studies and
mitigation will be required through CEQA review.
Projects approved with known archaeological sites
within the City have been subject to specific mitigation
(e.g. capping of areas, deviation from development
standards to minimize grading, etc.) and mitigation
monitorin . Because of the roximit of the
16 PF/PF 4.00 ac 60 15 L-I Potential Church property where a portion is in a flood plain and
Orchard Street 15 M- I developed with playground and pa�lcing area. Possible
APN: 006-095-020 senior or other special needs affordable multiple-
family housing. Residential uses such as
convalescent homes, residential care, congregate
care, and assisted living facilities are allowed in the
PF zoning district. Habitable finish floors, exclusive of
parking areas, are required to be raised one foot
above the base flood elevation. Alternatively, the
structures can be certified as flood roofed.
Page 57 November 25, 2003
,
�
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
� �` �^� `; � ` �r '�
`� � r
�� � .�' '�, `1 "�i / � ,� s.
. ':,/ . , t ��� �i %
� y` � a `.•'r`��� ,�`� v
/ - �� :..� � �� �
' ," � � � ��� ���' ��% � �� ��y��, y� ���,,,;�t� s;
Y� �
��� ..,RS � v ��� '�3'� ^� � � ° � � ���� �� � `� /.
� dJ � ;�� '� „� ;, e'�' ��:. ��' ;�� �s .,,� y�� ��`}�� 3/: '�r' i
,�. �... , s�� �'� % � �� ��i��i�- ,. ;,� �i s. `�-���P
�17 MH/MF 0.40 ac 2 1 M-I, or 3% in- Pending 3 lot subdivision. One unit already exists.
1169 Maple Street lieu fee Applicant—Millissee Thompson
APN: 077-391-012 $16,200
18 MD/SF 0.48 ac 0 6% in-lieu fee Approved Subdivision of one lot into 3, whereby 3 residences
1060 Maple Street (3 units ($32,400) already exist. No new residential development is
APN: 077-173-023 exist) proposed.
Applicant—Anthony Toste
19 MD/SF 0.40 ac 1 1 M-I Approved Subdivision of one lot into 2; one house already
1171 Sunset Drive or exists. �
APN: 077-212-026 6% in-lieu fee Applicant— Larry Ventresca
($21,600)
I:I. Southeast Nei�hbofioods
�
20 MU/AG 12.00 ac 0-50 0-13 M-I Potential The property's land use designation was changed from
Southeast of Traffic AG to MU with the 2001 General Plan Update (GPU).
Way and East Cherry This decision is currently being re-evaluated through
Ave. the City's Agriculture Study.
APN: 007-621-001,
023, & 073
Page 58 November 25, 2003
_._ �
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
�= , � : � � ,�: , -
w , �: r%,- r F�
�- � i�, �� � y �� � €�a=
� � �
.. �� �J � ���i.. '�5 f-i�'� k� �. �'.
��� � i� � � ��, �� �n�� �`�� � � �
� � ��7 y ,� s �
.�iy�� : � ��. X� � F. '� , ; i ��.:, � �,� � � . �.�'
� �` .+ �. , i�. i'�` �s � r � r r � � �`
'��' S ,�y ,�,�^�,� .� �_� � � /i � ��� .�
a�., �' S; �z,, „�,t�: �`�� a %�r� � � a.� �.
.... /,X.'v..
21 MD-NP/RR � 14.00 ac 50 �� 13 M-I Potential This area consists of about 12 developed parcels that
Myrtle Ave. and Lierly (Half of were changed from low density to medium density with
Lane maximum a °Neighborhood Plan° overlay in the 2001 GPU. The
APN: 007-565-004 & estimated purpose of the NP designation is to study infrastructure
054; 007-571-001, potential— needs and desired development patterns.
011; 017, &018 west
portion
only).
22 SP/RH 107.00 ac 47 12 M-I Potential This area is within a Specific Plan designated area
Southeast of Trinity (on-hold) where the °Arroyo Linda Crossroads Specific Plan"
Ave. and Traffic Way was being processed in 1999 but has since been put
Extension on hold pending resolution of regional transportation
APN: 007-610-017; issues, mainly the need for a Highway 101
007-631-024, 026,& interchange. The project design includes a wide mix of
029 land uses including single-family residential,
professional office, research &development,
commercial &visitor servin , and arks & o en s ace.
23 VCNC 6.00 ac 60 15 M-I Approved The Village Core Mixed Use area is appropriate for
East of historic (East Village rental housing over commercial development, or
Downtown district Plaza) clustered with commercial development through the
along East Branch planned unit development (PUD) process. "East
St. Pending Village Plaza", a 2.4-acre property approved through
APN: 007-501-035- (Creekside the PUD process for a mixed-use development, can
045; 007-191-036 & Center) accommodate up to 10 residential units. Other
049; 007-192-038; properties in this area can accommodate another 50
007-202-013, 014, & Potential units.
017 (Scolari and Applicant— DB & M Property, LLC
adjacent
properties)
Page 59 November 25, 2003
�
�
i
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
,�„ ;�
�;,. � ;�, �
� �. � � /��� �y ° � �
��y � � y � E�� �,.
� ` � ' � �e >� ; ,�,��u � � �: � � �� � r s
n ,l�;s yw,, :_ _N, s�' e �. ' 'r' �y .,,�� i'�".� � i ' � a'
,,�. � '�� � �i N � � /� ^�L,s/ �� � :. �� � �✓� ,. � ��i .� ' y y �, �
�
' r,� �v ,a � , ,c � � . -,�, � � , %*'P, ,� �� �.�. ��; ti 5 y r �-
.,,
,'; � ., , ; . . � ;�, ��s �,F �'�ir''.. ,��, r.�., s, � `;•r' �e ��'�ea�%� �!ie�'�� ° �'
„�. � �"r�„�"..�,.. . `; � ' ,�. > _ � ^.:�
.. ,. .. . . ., .,.,:. . . . . ,. :;,, ... � � „. . . �.,. ,� ., - . . �� ', >, ✓:
�
24 LD & LM/RS & RH 17.00 ac 25 7 M I Potential This area consists of underdeveloped infill properties
Stagecoach Road that could be further subdivided.
and Huasna Road
area
APN: 007-301-004;
007-441-034 &
035;007-751-004;
007-861-018 & 070
25 VCNC 0.32 ac 5 t 1 M-I or Pending Proposed subdivision for 5 townhouses and 1 mixed-
125 Nelson St. 3% in-lieu fee use building.
APN: 007-491-057, ($32,400) Applicant—Phil Zeidman
058
III. North�ast NeiqhbvrF�aods
26 LM/RS 1.93 ac 3 3% in-lieu fee Approved 4 lot subdivision where one unit already exists.
Corbett Canyon Rd. ($21,600) Applicant— Blake Chaffee
APN: 007-031-041
27 LM/RR 3.22 ac 2 1% in-lieu fee Approved 3 lot subdivision where one unit already exists.
Canyon Way ($5,400) Applicant—Catherine Benson
APN: 007-220-014
Page 60 November 25, 2003
�
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
��� �v� ` ��NN � �,f" � �
��5' ' .Y � � � /%-.
. f i " ;,3 ?', u / �i ,f 6 ',
� S xi*', 5�.,P � �' a� l/ �lb�;,
�
.s
,.��, �� s; 1,/�� ,�:�' �u {�.
A : { �`'`ny y�'��'`.'��Y �'
.. " - _ �� l :S�Y % ��. � �F- k � rdy @.,
r
;. , �s,. .\ ,-_ Fk/'/
� ._v°§ s, :; - r?w,� ��-: -, � / Z.y � � w f. r
, i
�
,. , ,'. ' .- , ' - ,��' .;�, /y Z
,.. , , g.,, , ,r;':.x , .
.,
,
i r/�
„�- ,- �,:i, , . ,. ...,- v'!'„ I'i`/ ,,�:, � ,r�k;;.,.,4= , ' „ 4'..., , � ?..,.f. /i ..F' ':�% ,�„L<.: �:
IV. Northwest N�i�h�orhoods
28 LD-PD/PD 1.3 29.00 ac 15 4 M-I Pending The property is located in the Royal Oaks Planned
Rodeo Drive and or Development (PD 1.3). Proposed is a clustered
West Branch St. or 6% in-lieu fee single-family subdivision for 15 custom home lots and
APN: 007-011-041 & 19 (with ($162,000) an open space parcel.
042 density
bonus
29 LD/RR 11.00 ac 25 7 M-I Potential The undeveloped property is located adjacent to
North of James Way Hidden Oaks Elementary School.
APN: 007-070-001,
002, & 007
30 LD-PD/PD 1.2 79.00 ac 40 10 M-I Potential 53 acres off of Noyes Rd. and 26 acres near La
South of Noyes Rd. Canada are potential Planned Development areas for
near Equestrian Way, clustered residential development.
and northeast of La
Canada and James
Way
APN: 007-781-024,
055, &056
31 AAD/SF 5.00 ac 12 3 M-I Potential This property consists of 27 separate parcels ranging
Elm Street south of in size from 5,862 to 10,743 square feet. This area is
East Grand Ave. adjacent to commercial, multiple-family and single-
APN: 077-153-003- family residential development. The land use
005, 008, 009, 011, category and zoning of the 5-acre property could be
014, 015, 019-021, changed to multiple-family (MF) allowing for infill
025, 033-036, development at higher densities, and for existing legal
038,039, 040, 041, non-conforming multi-family units to become
043, 047-051 conformin .
Page 61 November 25, 2003
�
_ __ ___ _.
�
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
9�
�� ' %% �'�
�r� i;" � �r . �' s x .'� y ��'.
�,� ��� a °K,� � �C� � � �'/�r y �'- .
''�- ,�r:� x � . � �� �•s : �,�
,a. yj �r �y v w,� ��: .� �:i `�,�. �� i� �� �� '�
� � � �a.ri � f �.'� t i � /�2���'��' � � :
4`�� a� � f Fta, ...,�, �,>� :s g '� � �'y y�e �; � ' �4 , ���.
� . ,. . , ,�� , F
. . , . �:,, ,, „ . , -
., ,�, . .,, �
. ,... _...,. , �. .,„ ,�. s .
. .. , E', ,:, „�.�r,�b ,...,,, ri .t,%, i,''%�::
TOTAL: 397.93 1,280 195 M-I Approved (26), Pending (27), Potential (162)
acres units
not Approved 76 L-I Approved (31), Pending (0), Potential (45)
includinq (564)
e9 nera/ Pending
;nvenrorv (�04) 76 V-L Approved (76), Pending (0), Potential (0)
of land Potential
use (6�2) $633,600 A roved $379,800 Pending ($210,600), Potential
cateaories) PP ( ),
($43,200)
$631,882 Existing in the Affordable Housing Account
$1,265,482 Total
SUBTOTQL OF 668 53 M-I
APPROVED AND units 31 L-I
PEND/NG PROJECTS 76 V-L
(Subtotal includes the
331existing permitted
units)
Page 62 November 25, 2003 '
1
a
�
__. _ _ __ �
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
,�, , y ,
�
f�: �,;: �
% d� � `� �� f / �� y ✓M� Y '
v� � n 'u� � �/a� s /� '%z�'.
o%;�� / R,i ��'° � � ar"'� � `� . � L,�.,;'� s '�`.
�. �x Y � �/ �! � % C � � yfi.
,�-; , , .�`, .' • � / : .^' d:'.
� . ,.N . � �r.'t�' j / ��'
., - . �., „z' . , , . .. , ,;: �� 5d £ y�/ ,,,, „ . . � y rr?,� fi :'" �'
'' ' 6<E �� ,��:/ ,y,�� ., '�. ,,,'
. . ; „ ; - , .- ': � �, ' �� i; ;a , 2�'F,�'�%�. � ;7 F,: . .,
V. SQhere of Influence Areas (THESE AREAS ARE NOT INCLU�ED IN THE OVERALL INVENTORY DUE TO INFEASIBILITY OF CONSTRUCTION WITHIN THE
HOUSING ELEMENT TIMEFRAME)
Outside the current city limits, but part of the 2001 General Plan Sphere o# Influence area northeast of Highway 101 near EI Campo Road, are
two undeveloped hillside properties that may be future phases of AROyo linda Grossroads Speci�c Plan.
32 A�royo Linda Specific 185.00 ac 52 13 M-I Potential The 185 acres within the A�oyo Linda Crossroads
Plan Property project area and�he adjoining Williams property to the
(Fredricks family) southeast could be considered for clustered hillside
APN: 075-341-002 residential development, as well as other potential
32 Williams Property 200.00 ac 208 52 M-I Potential urban uses. It should be noted, however, that
APN: 075-341-008 development would be subject to major resource and
infrastnacture prerequisites such as supplemental
water supply, a Highway 101 interchange, an
� extension of Traffic Way, and other water, sewer,
street and drainage improvements that are improbable
during the next five years. Therefore, these potential
housing opportunity sites are NOT included in this
Housin Element invento .
Projects within the City listed as "potential" are not yet evaluated and my or may not be pursued or approved. Therefore these
potential projects are NOT included in the City's "Quantified Objectives"for this Housing Element.
Page 63 November 25, 2003 �
;
"r
__ _ �
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
Re ional Housin Needs Allocation Com rison
Ve -Low Income Lower-Income Moderate-Income Above Moderate Total Units
RHNA 31'0 223 259 400 1,192
Totai Housing
Opportunity Sites 76 76 195 978 1,325
invento
General
Inventory of
Higher Density
Land Use
Cate ories
Subtotal
� ;
Difference ` ,
Preliminary
Quantified 76 31 53 508 668
Objectives (includes the 331 existing
ermitted units
Differenc� 234 =192 -206 +108 -524
Page 64 November 25, 2003
_ _ __ _ _ �
• • • •- 11 • � - -
' � � � . . � . • �
-"�'�,
�oy
��i��„;..awyhjr,SC.a 4:oii4�,y,,��\�
°�. (i/r '*w
` �°q�:,�te4.i;??:v�;�L
�J� e�I/j �`j`,,,��"°'�. `'",�'
::►*�,1�` .''� k`."`
, '' �~ ���"��`'N�#� �
;t� �i� � '�ti�a
�..' •1 .. 91�'�� � °,� �--�
..�'� '�� �'�:'�°'`'1F.
.>��_:� „ �
�.• � �i��1 , '�B'�"�"!1 ` t� ,y
e��
I � mi���6fj� �� r
►,` '�"h�r .,�/�.s.gr• •`..""
�''a�4�-' �.�w it K, �, �.�. . �i ♦.
� t '°,�4a4� #° y '��" '�'�'+i'4+.r�`eeh'�flr�+� L; s r �
11 R��,�����r���✓``, v��p,� ,. yc'.a'���` �q`��p.`�.�.�is�R _. t�`Mi�� �.4,.N m M, .
� ; " .+. tiui rt,M►��Fi�yta .^. .,q��'� o� �°''Sr.F�����`� �� °��#��tpa�"���y�a�.
, ���� � ����o� ������,��_ ����r ��� � � �� .�.
� .,,��.` .ti kX ,„' x.� ,� .
� e-, �j►e 1 � ` r� \f a ,�,�,,:a'a
0 � . a*�f`�' . • �` ( ;syl�srn�
���w�d . � �w_'�, r� �� �. � ae��� .n�t . � �� ' 'n�•-
� t�i ��`,�a�i' �:�'. -` � ���,,, s! I'" �1��i`� �tf�" � �,
�r:�� �t'�l:a�� '�✓����a�t,"° e #r`��t !
l�H7I�...m f `h �'s.,.- 's,t��-r'� �'�
� _;-ry�tPU;�:.�LS :�a..,. rF '��:3v di� ��~°°"� 0.�.�" °`''''•
w<. ;P,,ur � ' t�r����` �• � � �• � f v
e�v� s � � ► ... �a+nio�x� � ��aM • w��s�g
_ I/�/'+;i`sy�
,-� �, ,��� ,
4.W9 j��NpOa ' `�., � 4, ,^.. i1�'Y yt�a� :y` w� �„ �$�`i��°•*^.y, r� �I����
��t�J�iY h� °0.
� ,� • u .u„�,`1��Ja � �,,���Mways- ,1�� `:�:�� l;�t�� �,�@�,��':e,�'` I II
�+v, i1�i� �fv�;ll�o ,�� �j�"`a� r0�`*"`�` �3t°..
n k� � .E
�i e •°.ijseg t 1A`A 4 r�'l �W ° �'4 u� .
� ' q�y t�'tU 2�! .'�� L c lt.�y�_ .' ,�
,��� #�ut�W �i U E I'�� �� a ���y+: \
� si ■ !� - zr s Ka �\a �,}�'} ���ttiti/
�� -1.3_. �Y / e e lin �� � i.• �'��*,;;�„-, ..
�r� ����� :� � "*�y �.., s"� �; � �/.' .>'°,�� �"�," �
�!_1��r `t/. �li"�rK�.7 11G: �ei IP�+iBYe � bw,�>. .
i�:'lz Yf�"' ���'?� T� J' u� `�,°�,
[A wllll .ri��� --� ��:� �. ` e►�I7 ��zs
� �� '���'� =°111'`�' I �� z;•r. .� .���r,�� �,;�
;
',r°+� J.4 A� ��=. tS� �W?� ����
i � 'n _��- '- w
y, �S-+ j � .. . \��
��HL f � �,_l..y� xxx y �. , .
4 - �•
; �� � S.2 pttti �l ifi{�:
"ry$'�1NS Y�
'� .-. j `:5�`?,.�.;,_;...d-1�q »ai;,,` ;
:�: °I:.. _ ..ow.+ ��r ;�;_
,�� '
..r. t 12�,d3:1: ",...ab� ��
9� - :i::'+� ���
�~, ��
�� ' • • ' •' ��
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
The City is in the process of a comprehensive review and update of its Development
Code for consistency with the 2001 General Plan, focusing on rezoning existing
commercial properties to Mixed Use and developing new Mixed Use standards. To
date, the City has rezoned properties within the Village Area to Village Core Downtown,
Village Mixed Use, Village Residential and Single-family Residential. New development
standards for the Village Core Downtown (VCD) and Village Mixed Use (VMU) districts
have been established (see Tables 16 and 17 below), and the City will conduct a similar
Development Code update for other commercial areas along East Grand Avenue, EI
Camino Real and Traffic Way during the next year.
TABLE 16
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE VILLAGE CORE DOWNTOWN DISTRICT
(VCD)
Village Cc�re Q�wintawn �1tGD)
The prirnary purpose'of the VGD di�trict is to pravide f4r a combination of cornmercial,
office, upper-story residential uses and cornpatible! related development ta promote
pedestrian use and enjoym�nt of the downtown Village area. ReguiatiQns for the VCD
district cornbined with the Historic Character C)verla� district, pr�mote and preserve
older architectural styles compatible with the historical, small-town nature of Arroyo
Grande. Typical uses may inelude, but aze not limited to, second-story resid�ntial and
office, specialty retail and studios sueh as art gall�ries, bookstores, antique stares, flower i;
shops,personal s�rvices, small mazkets and restaurants (without driue-through windows). ;
The vCD district implements and is consistent with the village Core land use
designation of the General Plan.
1. Maximum Densi Mixed Use Pro'ects 15 dwellin units er ross acre
2.Minimum Lot Size 2,500 s uare feet
3. Minimum Lot�dth 25 feet
4. Front Yard Setback 0—15 feet. Structures typically built at
back of sidewalk. Exceptions include
entrance courtyards and areas for outdoor
dining determined through discretionary
review.
5. Rear Yard Setback 0-15 feet
6. Side Yard Setback 0 feet
7. Street Side Yard Setback 0-15 feet
Page 66 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
8. Building Size Limits Maximum height is 30 feet or three stories,
whichever is less;a maximum of 36 feet is
allowable through the MUP process.
,� Maximum Building Size is 20,000 square
ry�l � feet.
MYi �
4•••i � ' y��� � � �vr.
� �+��� �1
a �
a►
. . • �
.
•w
�
` �Y����1
9. Site Coverage Maximum coverage of site that may be
covered by structures and pavement is
100%.
Maximum Floor Area Ratio is 2.
Floor Area Ratio of 2
10. Site Design See Design Guidelines and Standards for
Historic Districts
11.Off-Street Parking and Loading See Parking and Business Improvement
District Plan in Section 16.56.020
12. Signs See Section 16.60 and Design Guidelines
and Standards for Historic Districts
Page 67 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
TABLE 17
VILLAGE MIXED USE (VMU)
Viliage Mixed Use (YMU)
Village Mixed Use (VMLJ) District. The primary purpose of'the VMLT district is to
provide for a mixtuze af cvmmercial, office and' residential uses compatible with
surrounding resid�ntial district�, in small-scale pedestrian-arient�cl developments.
Regulations for the VML7 district combined with the Historie Character Overlay district
promote and preserve older azchitectural styles, and' encourage a hannonious
intermingling of other structures. This distriet encourages use-of �xisting residential
buildings for non-residential uses. Typical uses may'�nclude singie and multiple family
residential, specialty retail saie�,professional offices,personal servic�s and neighborhood
markets. See Table 16.36.030-A-1 fur allowabl� uses and Table 16.36.020-B for
minimum site development standards.
1. Maximum Densit Mixed Use Pro ects 15 dweliin units er ross acre
2. Minimum Lot Size 5,000 s uare feet
3.Minimum Lot Width 40 feet
4. Front Yard Setback 0-15 feet
5. Rear Yard Setback 0-15 feet. If project is mixed use and/or
abuts a residential district then 10 feet
��u�+ required.
evMn
��
��
�
6. Side Yard Setback 0 feet unless a project is mixed use and/or
abuts a residential district,then 5 feet is
required for single story structures and 110
feet is required,on one side,for a multiple
stories.
7. Street Side Yard Setback 0-15 feet.
8. Building Size Limits Maximum height is 30 feet or three stories,
whichever is less;a maximum of 36 feet is
allowable through the MUP process.
Maximum Building Size is 10,000 square
feet.
Page 68 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
9.Site Coverage Maximum coverage of site that may be
covered by structures and pavement is
100%.
Maximum Floor Area Ratio is 1.
Floor Area Ratio of 1
�
i.--. —::.---a —;.
2 STORtE8
9.Site Design See Design Guidelines and Standards for
Historic Districts.
10. Off-Street Parking and Loading See Parking VMU and HCO combining
district in Section 16.56.020.C.
11. Signs See Section 16.60 and Design Guidelines
and Standards for Historic Districts.
5.2 Public Services and Utilities to Serve Residential Development
Water
The City receives water from both groundwater and surFace water. Groundwater is
extracted primarily from the Arroyo Grande Plain of Tri-Cities Mesa sub-basin of the
Santa Maria Groundwater basin, with an estimate total of 1,200 acre feet of supply. The
City also receives about 100 acre feet of groundwater supply from the Pismo formation.
The significant supply is the 2,290 acre-feet entitlement from Lopez Lake. This brings
the total available water supply to 3,590 acre-feet.
Based upon per capita consumption of 190 gallons per day, the maximum average
considered at that time, the 1990 population of 14,057 was consuming 2,990 acre feet
of water per year. If the same rate of consumption were to continue to the projected
20,000 City population at General Plan build-out, it was estimate that approximately
4,149 acre feet per year of water resources would be required,1556,uacre feet more than
currently available. Without additional water supplies or a �' reduction in
current usage, it is that an adequate water supply is available to accommodate
the assigned regional housing allocation.
The 2001 General Plan Update proposes that average per capita consumption be
reduced by conservation measures to a maximum of 160 allons er person er da .
This Water Conservation Plan was ado ted in Ma 2003.
Sewer
The South San Luis Obispo Sanitation District provides wastewater treatment and
disposal. The treatment plant is located in the unincorporated community of Oceano
and treats wastewater from various sources in the vicinity, including the Oceano area
and the Cities of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach. The District has completed
expansion of treatment facilities in the early 1990's, and the plant can now process 5
million gallons of effluent per day with existing effluent quality guidelines. It has been
estimated this will provide ample service to at least 2010.
Page 69 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
Public Services
The City of Arroyo Grande police department is responsible for law enforcement,
investigations and crime prevention programs with the City limits. The fire department,
composed largely of volunteers, is responsible for providing fire protection and medical
response. The City has historically has low levels of major crime or fire loss despite
below average police and fire department staffing. There are no uniform standards
regarding appropriate or adequate numbers of officers per number of residents. One
issue however regarding the fire department is that with the one downtown station,
average response time with the City limits is 11.2 minutes, which for some of the areas
of the City is well above a recognized standard of 5 minutes. This may affect the
development of lands in the City that may be beyond the desired response time.
It is generally expected that police and fire resources improve with additional
development that generates increased tax revenues. However, with the recent shifts of
local tax revenues to the State, and decreasing State revenues being provided to local
governments, additional development may cause a decrease in public safety for the
community.
Schoo/s
School facilities for Arroyo Grande are provide by the Lucia Mar Unified School District,
which provides educational services in the South County Area, which includes Grover
beach, Pismo Beach, Oceano, Nipomo and the remaining unincorporated county. The
District operates and maintains 10 elementary schools, 3 middle schools, and 2 high
schools, with the addition of Nipomo High School that opened in the fall of 2002.
Recent studies have indicated that most of the schools, with the exception of Nipomo
High, were built in the 1950's and 1960's and thus may be subject to needed
renovation. Information provided in the Arroyo Grande General Plan EIR adopted in
1991 indicated that many of the schools were operating at an over capacity level. With
the opening of Nipomo High, the high school level capacity seems to be resolved.
Residential development is of a concern to schools because of increased enrollment.
However recent newspaper reports have indicated that enrollment seems to be
decreasing. Recent studies report in the San Luis Obispo Tribune newspaper indicate
that the population in the area will be shifting from families to a more senior population,
mainly because of the cost of housing. Recent State budget cuts are also affecting the
operation ability of the school district to provide education senrices.
5.3 Constraints to Housing Development
There are a number of constraints that affect the construction of housing in a
community. State law recognizes this and requires an analysis of these constraints.
Following is an analysis of governmental constraints, environmental or public service
constraints, as well as nongovernmental constraints.
Government Constraints
Page 70 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
The intent of this sub-section is to identify governmental constraints that affect housing
development, as well as to analyze those that may be modified so as to not create a
barrier to the maintenance, improvement or development of housing to all income
levels.
The price of a home is based upon several basic costs: land, materials, labor, financing
rates and insurance, government requirements and fees, as well as environmental
constraints. The cost of the first three items are determined by the market economy,
while the fourth items, lending rate, is largely set by the federal government, while
insurance is controlled by insurance carriers. These items are discussed under
nongovernmental requirements and fees. This sub-section focuses on the forth items,
governmental constraints. In addition, there are a number of environmental constraints
that affect housing construction.
The California Legislature has delegated to local governments specific responsibilities
and a certain amount of discretionary control over the development and use of land.
Through land use controls, building codes and development review procedures, these
and other requirements and fees, cities may influence the location, density, type, size,
quality and appearance of housing units within their jurisdiction. These requirements
and fees, while not completely under full control of the city, affect the cost and
availability of housing.
Governmental requirements may generally be divided into land use and development
controls, such as general plan requirements, zoning, subdivision, environmental review,
and annexation requirements. Other governmental regulations include the ' ��`" r�� "
Building Code, development processing and development impact fees, as well as permit
processing requirements. Many of these controls are regulatory, required by local
government in response to State and federal mandates to protect public health and
safety, and others are adopted to implement State mandates or to achieve the welfare
and desired quality of life, values and objectives of the local community. It should be
noted that the City has adopted the State Uniform Building Code (minimum
requirements), and has not amended this Code to include stricter regulations that would
add costs to housing development.
Constraints on Housing for Disabled Persons
Governmental constraints related to group housing for persons with disabilities are
handled through the Discretionary review process. Conditions of approval would be
imposed through the Conditional Use Permit process to require compliance with current
disabled access standards for that use.
Land Use and Develoament Confro/s
Land use and development controls determine the amount, type, and location of
housing. The primary policy tool for promoting a balanced use of land and resources is
through the City's General Plan. The General Plan establishes an overall framework for
development and conservation of land in the City; primarily through the Land Use
Element. State law divides the required content of a general plan into distant elements,
and requires that the General Plan be designed as a balanced, integrated document
that is internally consistent. Residential land use is one consideration of the plan, and
Page 71 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
Housing is one of seven Elements and has a number of issues the City must address.
The City in its required General Plan elements must address traffic and circulation,
safety and noise, conservation and open space, as well as other statutory matters. The
Housing Element has a direct relationship to most other General Plan elements.
The primary means to implement the General Plan is the Zoning Ordinance or
Development Code, which establishes development standards, intensity of
development, and minimum site standards. Various residential zones are established
along with a minimum set of requirements for densities, which are intended to
implement the densities set by the General Plan. Other requirements are setbacks, lot
coverage, parking, open space and other re�ated property development standards.
Table 18, inserted here from the 2001 General Plan land Use Element, provides the
densities for the various land use zones as set by the recently adopted General Plan.
The City is in the process of Development Code Amendments intended to implement
the General Plan and make revisions for consistency. It is the intent of the City to
include within the Development Code changes to the development standards included
as policies of the adopted Housing Element. Some of these standards by their nature
may increase the cost of housing, however, those proposed standards included as
policies in this element, are not considered excessive and are deemed to be the
minimum required to protect the general welfare and regulate the quality of
development in the City.
State law requires that any subdivision of land must conform to the standards and
procedures set forth by the State Subdivision Map Act. The City's Development Code
implements these State requirements and procedures in a manner considered
necessary and reasonable means despite affecting residential development
improvement costs.
Development applications for housing as well as other development apptications are
subject, in most cases, to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). CEQA
requires that development applications be subject to an environmental review of the
impacts that would result from implementation of a project..
The City, as part of its 2001 General Plan, prepared a program environmental impact
report (EIR) to address the impacts of development proposed by the Plan. The
anticipated residential development evaluated in the Plan is similar to that required by
the Regional Housing Needs established for the City. The Program EIR concluded that
there were several significant environmental impacts that could not be mitigated to less
than significant levels. Required findings and statements of overriding considerations
also involve mitigation measures that will influence future residential and also require
possible project EIR's that will increase the cost of the development. These costs are
unavoidable given the State mandated requirements af CEQA.
Several areas designated for future residential development in the City's 2001 General
Plan are located within the City's Sphere of Influence or proposed Urban Reserve not
currently in the City. Changes to the Sphere and annexation to the City are under the
jurisdiction of the county Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), as well as the
City. Recent changes to State annexation laws now require service plans that
Page 72 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
demonstrate the ability of the city to serve the annexation area as well as a financial
analysis of the service ability. These requirements may have a significant affect on
whether lands may be annexed to the City as well as time required to effect the
annexation. Additionally, the General Plan requires that these potential annexations be
subject to Specific Plan and pre-zoning approval prior to annexation. These processes
and related EIRs will take several years to complete, thus precluding these areas from
this Housing Element.
Building Code Repuirements
The Arroyo Grande building requirements are based upon the ��"��� °' '�'f" '����E:��i�
California Building Code, which is a version of the Uniform Building Code adopted by
the State. This Code is mandated by the State, and a jurisdiction may not set standards
that are less stringent than the State Code. The Code ensures safe housing and is not
considered a significant constraint to housing production.
Page 73 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
TABLE 18
URBAN LAND USE ELEMENT
RESIDENT/AL DENSITY. ZON/NG AND POPULAT/ON DENSITY
Residential land uses, ranging from large-lot single-family homes to multiple-family apartment buildings are the
predominant uses within the City of AROyo Grande. Most of the land within the City designated for residential
use has been developed. The demand for additional residential development is evidenced by requests for
conversion of non-residential classifications to residential designations as well as requests to increase the
density allowed within residential and non-residential classifications.
Residential density, zoning categories and population density shown on the Urban Land Use Element, Map 2
are summarized on Table; LU-1.
Residentiai Densitv, Table LU-1
Classification DU Densiri Consistent Zonin9/Min Lot Size Persons/Household An�roximate
Pooulation Densitv
Persons/aae
Agriculture(Ag) 1 du/10ac. Gen or Exclusive Agriculture/ 2.4p/du 0.24 p/ac
20 ac. (currently 10 ac. In City)
1 du/20ac. 0.12 p/ac
Conservation/ 1 du/10ac. OS&PF 2.4" 0.24 p/ac
Open Space(C/OS)
1 du/5ac. 5ac, 10ac, &20 ac. 0.5 p/ac
County Residential 1 du/5ac County RR/5-10ac 2.4" 0.5 p/ac
Rural (RR)
County Residentiai 1 du/2'/:ac.' County RS(Proposed) 2.4" 1.0 p/ac
Suburban(RS) (County LUO currently allows 1 -3 ac. lots)
Single Family Residential (SFR)
Very Low Density(VLD) 1du/2�ac. RE/2� ac. 2.4" 1.0 p/ac
Low Density(LD) 1 du/1'/ac. RH/1'/:ac. (cluster) 2.4" 1.6 p/ac
1 du/1 ac. City RR/1 ac. 2.4" 2.4 p/ac
Low Medium Density(LM) 2.5 du/1 aC. City RS 2.4" 6.0 p/ac
Medium Density(MD) 4.5 du/ac City SF 2.4" 10.8 p/ac
Multi-Family Residential(MFR)
Medium High Density(MHD)
Townhouse/Condo 9.0 du/ac City MF 2.0 p/du 18.0 p/ac
Mobile Home Park(MHP) 12.0 du/ac MHP-MHD 1.5 p/du 18.0 p/ac
High Density(HD) 14 du/ac City MFA 2.0 p/du 28.0 p/ac
Apartments
'**Very High Density(VHD) 25 du/ac *"*Senior Residential 2.0 p/du 50.0 p/ac
Mixed Use(MU)
Village Core(VC) 25 du/ac See 2.0 p/du 50.0 p/ac
Office(0) Devt.
PD, SP and CF Code
"*General Plan Land Use Element Policy LU3-4:"Accommodate the development of apartment buildings and
group housing in areas classified as Multiple Family Residential-Very High Density(MFR-VHD)°
LU3-4.1 Allow a maximum density of 25 du/acre within the MFR-VHD designation.
Page 74 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
LU3-4.2 Enabie development of very high density muiti-family residential uses in locations with good
access to major transportation routes and in close proximity to Community Facilities, Offices, Regional
Commercial and/or Mixed Use zones.
LU304.3 Allow for apartment buildings that do not adversely affect surrounding residential uses.
LU3-4.4 Encourage senior and other special needs housing facilities within the MFR-VHD designation.
Develoament Processing and Develoament Imaact Fees �
Table 19 summarizes the development processing fees including fees charged by the
Community Development Department for processing housing applications. These fees
are established by the City Council to cover the staff and other costs associated with
processing a housing development application. These fees are comparable to other
area jurisdictions and not considered excessive.
The fees charged at the time of the issuance of a building permit for residential
development include standard building permit plan check and inspection fees as well as
impact fees set by the City. Building fees are set by the Building Code and represent
the costs for plan review and inspection of the project construction. Given the nature of
these fees, they are not considered excessive in that they are essential to ensure the
health and safety of the project construction.
The City also charges impact fees to cover the costs of cumulative infrastructure and
certain service requirements of the projects. Given the current tax structure the City
must operate under, there are not adequate general funds to provide the services and
infrastructure necessary for new residential development, thus development impact fees
must be charged to cover the costs of the services or infrastructure requirements. Many
of these fees are a result of environmental mitigation measures adopted and required
by the project environmental review. Many of these fees are not unusual or high
compared to other cities in the region and they are deemed necessary to cover costs.
Similarly, school impact fees that have been imposed by the local school district to help
cover their costs to provide additional building construction needed to support additional
school population associated with additional residential development. These
development impact fees increase the cost of housing, and proportionally affordable
housing. This Housing Element proposes waiving or deferring all or part of certain
development impact fees as a public incentive and means of assisting affordable
housing.
The total fees charged at building permit issuance for the average single family is
approximately $20,000 per unit, which includes building fees and impact fees. For
condominium projects, the estimated building and impact fees are estimated at between
$13,000 and $14,000 per unit, while the same fees for an apartment are estimated at
$13,000 per unit. These fees are one of the substantial costs of housing, but as noted
above, these fees are either required by the building code, are needed to finance
infrastructure or services, or serve as mitigation for the project impacts.
Page 75 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
TABLE 19
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
FEE SCHEDULE—JANUARY 1, 2003
E��.� �� � � �
APPEALS
• From Community Development Director to Planning Commission $ 195 N/A
• From Planning Commission decision to City Council $ 195 N/A
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
• Within P.D.Zone or requires City Council approval
� Architectural Review Only N/A N/A
• Architectural Review with associated project $ 415 N/A
• Outside P.D.Zone or requires Planning Commission approval N/A
• Architectural Review Only N/A
• Architectural review with associated project $ 220 N/A
$ 67 N/A
• Minor Project(ARC Referral/Community Development Dir.Approval)
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW AMENDMENT
• Within P.D.Zone or�equires City Council approval $ 415 N/A
• Outside P.D.Zone or requires Planning Commission approval $ 220 N/A
• Minor Project(ARC ReferraUCommunity Development Dir.Approval) $ 220 N/A
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
• Within P.D.Zone $ 450 Recording Fee
• Outside P.D.Zone
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP)
• Within P.D.Zone $ 1,205 N/A
• Outside P.D.Zone $1,005 N/A
CONDITONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT
• Within P.D.Zone $ 865 N/A
• Outside P.D.Zone $ 665 N/A
CONDOMINIUM,CONDOMINIUM OR.MOBILEHOME PARK � �� �� ��
�� �" �
�,' " ' " � � ��
CONVERSION (see CUP and Tentative Map) � ti�, � ��`
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT $2,oso N/A
DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT (includes rezoning, g�,2so N/A
prezoning, and P.D. rezoning)
15%of EIR or Environmental Doc. Contract
EIR/ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES and cost of document preparation by
consultant or staff(time and materials)
Page 76 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
������������: �zaa ;_„� ��� �' �;rx
� �.
wr F
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT $�,s7o N/A
HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT $ so N/A
LARGE FAMILY DARE CARE PERMIT $ 2ss N/A
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT
• Within P.D.Zone $ 800
• Outside P.D.Zone $ 605
LOT MERGER $ 605
MEETING CONTINUANCE REQUESTED BY APPLICANT $ �3o N/A
>6 weeks
MINOR EXCEPTION � 2so N/A
�,, � ���..:
� �
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONING z '
�.;
see Develo ment Code Amendment � `
�. ;4
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, SPECIFIC PLAN, OR GENERAL $ �,155 N/A
DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PERMIT �
• Processed concurrently with Tentative Map and Architectural Review $ 1,155 N/A
• Processed alone $ 1,155 N/A
PLANNING COMMISSION INTERPRETATIONIWAIVER/REFERRAL $ 4�o N/A
PLOT PLAN REVIEW $ 23o N/A
PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE $ 315 N/A
PREZONING (see Development Code Amendment) � �yr ��'
,.
RESEARCH (per hour) $ �o N/A
REVERSION TO ACREAGE
• Within P.D.Zone $ 415 $21/lot to be merged
• Outside P.D.Zone $ 220 21/lot to be mer ed
�.� � ,
REZONING (see Development Code Amendment) ��� '���� �
F yµ , �� s� �
y a �`� tl� \\ �a
*� �,�€,��
Page 77 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
,,: ;
. < ;,R,�' , ..:-;�.,
F, . � ,.
��,���, t
�
�,..
�
SECOND DWELLING UNIT (see CUPJ ���F� ° � �` `� �� N �'� s ,�� �
, >,,,,� `� ..�,,,_.. �� >:«� �;,,.
SIGNS (Includes referral to ARC)
• PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM
• wthin P.D.Zone $ 615 N/A
• Outside P.D.Zone $ 415 N/A
• ADMINISTRATIVE SIGN PERMIT $ �o N/A
� ADMINISTRATIVE SIGN PROGRAM $ �ss N/A
• MURAL PERMIT $ 165 N/A
SPECIFIC PLAN $3,550 N/A
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT $�,155 N/A
SURFACE MINING PERMIT (see CUP) �`
�y
TEMPORARY USE PERMIT g �os N/A
TENTATIVE PARCEL/TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
• Within P.D.Zone $1,000 $21/lot
• Outside P.D.Zone $ 805 $21/lot
TENTATIVE PARCEUTENTATIVE TRACT MAP AMENDMENT $�,000 $2�not
• Within P.D.Zone
• Outside P.D.Zone $ 805 $21/lot
TIME EXTENSION (Tentative Parcel or Tract Map✓CUP/PUD ext.J
• Within P.D.Zone $ 510 N/A
• Outside P.D.Zone $ 310 N/A
� ,,�� E��
VARIANCE �� � � �
i
;,x ��. ' � ���:
� �aa
• Within P.D.Zone $1,000 �� ��` , ���
• Outslde P.D.ZOne $ 805 � s+��` a'"
.:,,�
VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL OR TRACT MAP
• Within P.D.Zone $1,000 $21/lot
• Outside P.D.Zone $ 805 $21/lot
VIEWSHED REVIEW PROCESS
• Staff Review $ 350 N/A
• Planning Commission Review $ 350 N/A
Updated 11/12/02
Page 78 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
Land-Use Controls
Land use controls, broadly outlined in the General Plan Land Use Element and
implemented through the City's Development Code, specify the kinds, location, and
intensity of land uses. Specific development standards include parking requirements,
lot coverage, lot sizes, unit sizes, floor area ratios, setbacks and open space
requirements. The current standards are outlined below in Table 20 for atl residential
districts. Standards for Mixed Use development are discussed above in Section 5.1
under Land Availability.
As part of the Development Code Update for residential and mixed use districts, the City
will study how development standards can be modified to enable higher densities
described in the Land Use and Housing Elements. Specifically, the City will focus on
increasing the allowable height and reducing parking requirements (especially for all
affordable housing and senior housing) to enable higher densities. This issue is
addressed under Policy A.10.
TABLE 20
RESIDENTIAL SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
SINGLE-FAMILY ZONES
RE RH RR RS SF VR
1. Maximum 0.4 0.67 1.0 2.5 4.5 4.5
density(DU's
er ross acre
2. Minimum 92,500 49,000 40,000 12,000 7,200 6,750
building sitea
(Net azea in sq.
ft.
3. Minimum lot 200' 130' 120' 80' 70' S0'
width°
4. Minimum lot 250' 200' 200' 100' 100' 100'
de th
5. Minimum front 50'* 35'* 35'* 25'* 20'* 15'*
ard
6. Minimum interior 30'* 10%of lot 10%of lot 5'one 5' one 5'*
side yard width* width* side, 10' side, 10'
setback other side* other
side*
7. Minimum street 30'* 15%of lot 15%of lot 15'* 15'* 10'*
side yard width width*
setback
8. Minimum reaz 50'* 40'* 25'* 20'* 10' (1 1-' (1-
yazd setback story) story)
15' (2- 15' (2-
story)* story)
Page 79 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
9. Maximum lot 35% 35% 35% 30% 40% 40%
coveraged
10. Maximum 30'or 2 30' or 2 30'or 2 30' or 2 30'or 2 30'or 2
height for stories, stories, stories, stories, stories, stories,
buildings and whichever whichever whichever whichever whichever whichever
structures is less is less, 14' is less, 14' is less, 14' is less, 14' is less, 14'
for for for for for
accessory accessory accessory accessory accessory
buildin s buildin s buildin s buildin s buildin s
11. Minimum 20' 20' 6' 10' 10' 10'
distance
between
building
(including
main
dwellings
and
accessory
StrUCtUTeS e
�
RESIDENTIAL SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
MULTIPLE FAMILY AND OTHER ZONES
MF MFA SR MHP
1. Maacimum density 9.0 11.0 25.0' 6.5
(DU's per gross
acre
2. Minimum building 10,000 10,000 20,000 5 acresg
site
(Net area in sq.
ft.
3. Minimum lot 80' 80' 80' 60'g
width°
4. Minimum lot 100' 100' 100' 100'g
de th
5. Minimum front 20'* 20'* 20' 20'
ard setback
6. Minimum interior 10'* 10'* 10' S'
side ard setback
7. Minimum street 10'* 10'* 10' 15'
side ard setback
8. Minimum reaz Average 15' Average 15' Average 15' S'
yazd
setback
9. Maximum lot 40% 45% 60%' S0%
covera ed
Page 80 November 25, 2003
_ __ � ----
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
10. Maximum height 30' or 2 30' or 2 stories, 30' or 2 stories, 30' or 2
for buildings and stories, whichever is whichever is stories,
shuctures whichever is less, 14'for less, 14' for whichever is
less, 14' for accessory accessory less, 14'for
accessory buildings buildings accessory
buildin s buildin s
11. Minimum distance 10' 10' 10' S'
between buildings
(including main
dwellings and
accessory
Stri1CtUI'eS�e
Notes to Table 16.32.050-A and B: Residential Site Development Standards
a See Table 16.32.050-A for minimum lot sizes for parcels with slope greater than seven
percent.
b Area shall be increased to five acres for slope conditions exceeding twenty(20)percent.
° Width measurements for cul-de-sac or otherwise odd-shaped lots shall be determined on
the basis of the average horizontal distance between the side lot lines, measured at right
angles to the lot depth at a point midway between the front and rear lot lines.
* If a lot is located within a residential zone and was created prior to June 13, 1991,
effective date of the Development Code, buildings may conform with the setback and lot
coverage standards of the previous zone as outlined in Appendix C.W.-D-2.19
d The following floor azea ratios shall be adhered to in all zoning districts in addition to lot
coverage requirements:
Lot Size Floor Area Ratio FAR
0 — 4000 s uare feet net 0.35
4001 — 7199 s uare feet net 0.40
7200 — 11999 s uare feet net 0.50
12000 — 39999 s uare feet net 0.45
40000+s uare feet net
The above FAR's shall not apply to condominium or PUD projects where the proposed lot
consists of a building footprint.
e Within a planned unit development, building sepazations may be reduced to zero feet,
provided that fire walls are provided per UBC standards.
f Unless a minimum of twenty-five (25) percent of the units are reserved for low and
moderate income residents, the m�imum density of independent living developments
shall be eleven (11) units per gross acre (11 du/ac). Congregate and residential care
facilities shall have a maximum density of twenty-five (25) dwelling units per gross acre
(25 du/ac).
g The minimum pazcel size within the mobilehome district may be reduced to three
thousand six hundred (3,600) square feet with a minimum average width of forty (40)
feet and a minimum frontage of not less than thirty (30) feet if common open space areas
Page 81 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
and recreational facilities aze provided as part of the subdivision and if the open space
areas and recreational facilities are reserved for the exclusive use of residents of the
subdivision. Standazds for the provision of common open space required to permit a
reduction in lot size aze as follows:
(1) A minimum of five hundred (500) squaze feet of common open space and
recreational azea shall be provided for each residential lot in the subdivision.
(2) T'he combined square footage of common open space, recreational area, and
residential lot area, not including public and private streets and cannon parking
areas shall average not less than six thousand(6,000) square feet per lot within the
subdivision.
(3) Open space and recreational areas shall be designated on the subdivision map, and
shall be located entirely within the subdivision.
h For two-story buildings average rear yard setback shall be twenty (20) feet. Average
includes all buildings along reaz property line and is subject to city approval.
' The permitted sixty (60) percent lot coverage includes main and accessory buildings,
pazking azeas, driveways, and covered patios. The remaining forty (40) percent of the
total azea shall be devoted to landscaping, lawn and outdoor recreation facilities
incidental to the development, such as, but not limited to, outdoor recreation game areas,
putting greens,patios, walkways and fences.
RESIDENTIAL PARKING STANDARDS
1. RESIDENTIAL USES
a. Sin le-famil homes
Conventional size lot 2 s aces er unit within an enclosed aza e
Small lot(PUD) 2 spaces per unit within an enclosed garage and
0.5 s ace/unit for visitor azkin
b. Duplexes 2 space per unit within an enclosed garage and
1 uncovered s ace er unit
c. Second residential units 1 covered space per unit and 1 uncovered space
er unit
d. Townhouse and condominiums Attached ownershi units
RESIDENT PARKING:
Studio 1 s ace er unit within an enclosed ara e
1 bedroom 1 space per unit within an enclosed garage and
1 uncovered s ace er unit
2+bedrooms 2 spaces per unit within an enclosed garage and
0.5 uncovered space per unit for each additional
bedroom over 2
VISITOR PARKING: 0.5 uncovered s ace er unit
e. Apartments and multifamily
dwellin s rental units
RESIDENT PARKING:
Studio 1 covered s ace er unit
1 bedroom 1 covered space per unit and 0.5 uncovered
s ace er unit
Page 82 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
2+bedrooms 2 covered spaces per unit and 0.5 uncovered
space per unit for each additional bedroom over
2
VISITOR PARKING: 0.5 uncovered s ace er unit
f. Senior housin -inde endent livin
RESIDENT PARKING:
Studio 1 covered s ace er unit
1 bedroom 1 covered s ace er unit
2+bedrooms 1 covered space per unit and 0.5 uncovered
s ace er unit
VISITOR PARKING: 0.5 covered s ace er unit
g. Senior housing- assisted living 1 uncovered space per 3 beds and 1 space per
em lo ee on the lar est work shift
h. Mobilehome arks 2.5 uncovered s aces er unit
i. Lazge family day care facilities 1 uncovered space per staff person other than
the homeowner in addition to the required
azkin for the residential buildin
On and Off-Site Improvement Requirements
Typical on and off-site improvement requirements for residential subdivisions and/or
mixed-use projects are imposed as part of the approval process for a subdivision and/or
conditional use permit application. Current improvement standards include submittal of
the following improvement plans: Grading and drainage; erosion control; street
improvements; curb, gutter and sidewalk; public utilities; water and sewer; landscaping
and irrigation. These improvement plan requirements are generally based on health,
safety and to a lesser extent, aesthetic issues. Deviations from standards such as
driveway width, street width and undergrounding of utilities occur on a case-by-case
basis through the discretionary review process and will be formalized through
implementation of Housing Element policies and programs to encourage affordable
housing construction. As another incentive to produce more affordable housing, the
City intends to update its Fee Schedule to reduce the amount of impact fees required
for very low and low income housing (see Policy 6.3-1).
The City adopted a Level of Service and Traffic Impact Study Policy in March 2002. A
Level of Service (LOS) 'C' was established as the threshold, or peak hour design
objective for all movements, including cumulative traffic at build-out of the study area.
Permit ProcessincLRepuirements
Permit processing times in Arroyo Grand are comparable to other cities in the county.
Most of the processing times are a result of State mandated reviews and hearings,
including the time required for preparation of the required environmental documents.
Projects requiring an EIR can be processed in a year. Those not requiring an EIR may
be processed in 6 months or less. While application and permit processing times may
seem excessive by some, they are generally prescribed by law. The Housing Element
includes a policy stating the City's intent to expedite the processing of development
proposals that include affordable housing, to the extent allowed by CEQA and State
planning, zoning and subdivision procedures. Estimated timelines for different permits
Page 83 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
are indicated in Table 21 below. It should be noted that timelines can also change
depending on if a proposed project is in a Planned Development Area. Any project
within a Planned Development requires City Council approval. The 2001 General Plan
Land Use Map eliminated reference to already developed Planned Development (PD)
areas, but retained vacant areas. The Development Code Update will include this
change and will result in shorter permit processing timelines for projects in developed
PD areas.
TABLE 21
PERMIT PROCESSING TIMELINE
Initial Comments
Permi#T e Due: Tar et IssU�nce Uate:
The goal of the City of Anoya Grande Community I3eveloprnent'Deparhnent is to issue a decision within the time
periods listed below. These time periads begin when a complete agplication is submit#ed and are e�ctended when
additional information is requested by the City. To assist agglicants, we aze praviding with timeframes below for
our "target issuance date"—when yau �an expect a decision on your application, and an "initial comments due"
dat�—when you can ex�ct to receive initial review�omments fr�m us.
Minor Use Permit(administrative)
(Formerly Viewshed, Plot Plan,
Architectural Review, and Minor
Exce tion rmits 14 da s 21 da s
Tem r Use Pertnit(administrative 7 da s 14 da s
Administrative Sign Permit
administrative 7 da s 14 da s
Conditional Use Permit discretion 30 da s 120 da s
Lot Line Ad'ustment discretion 30 da s 90 da s
Tentative Pazcel Ma discretion 30 da s 90 da s
Tentative Tract Ma discretion 30 da s 120 da s
Development Code Amendment
discretion ) 30 da s 120 da s
General Plan Amendment
discretion 30 da s 120 da s
S ecific Plan discretion 30 da s 180 da s
Variance discretion 30 da s 90 da s
Environmental Constraints
The City adopted a General Plan Update in 2001. As part of the process of adopting
the update, a program EIR was prepared to address the environmental issues attributed
. to the growth proposed. It is important to note that the General Plan Update evaluated
residential growth that is very similar to that included in the Regional Housing Needs
Assessment adopted for the City of Arroyo Grande, except that the General Plan
assumes a longer planning period than the Needs Assessment. The General Plan
Update EIR concluded that there were three major environmental impacts that were
significant and could not be feasibly mitigated to less than significant, thus findings and
Page 84 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
statements of over-riding consideration were adopted. These critical issues are
considered constraints on residential development as discussed below.
Wafer Availabilitv
As outlined in the public services section of the Program EIR, water resources are
limited in the City. According to the City Public Works Department, the City is currently
using more than 94% of its available average annual water resources. The current
resources are not adequate to serve the increased population proposed by the General
Plan, and thus, not adequate to serve the projected population proposed by the
Regional Housing Needs Assessment. To address the water supply issue, the City has
adopted a water conservation ptan. The intent of this plan is to reduce wasteful or
excessive water consumption to provide a margin of safety for existing users and
enable more efficient use of existing resources to accommodate growth anticipated by
the adopted 2001 General Plan. However, due to the fact that the conservation plan
was only recently adopted, its effectiveness is yet to be determined. In addition, the
Local Housing Task Force (LHTF) recommends that other sources of supplemental
water supply should be considered soon due to the lengthy time required for regional
water resource or project development. Other than pending conservation measures,
these resources were determined to be beyond the time frame of the Housing Element
planning period. It is therefore concluded that water availability is a critical constraint to
continued residential development.
Traffic/Circu/ation
The General Plan Program EIR evaluated traffic impacts, both from proposed City
development as well as regional impacts of growth. The EIR concluded that many local
streets and Highway 101 will be significarrtly impacted. The 101 impacts are signrficant
in that the improvements required to serve many of the undeveloped land in the
southeast and south portions are not yet planned and likely will not be implemented until
after the Housing Element planning period. It is therefore concluded that additional
development will cumulatively impact area roadways and thus is another constraint to
continued regional residential development, including within the City.
Air uali
Like traffic%irculation, air quality has been determined in the General Plan Program EIR
to be a significant impact that cannot be mitigated to less than significant, and will
require a Clean Air Plan amendment. This is a cumulative impact attributed to
additional growth, thus is considered a significant constraint to continued residential
regional development, incfuding within the City.
Non-Governmental Constraints
This sub-section provides information related to constraints to producing housing,
specifically affordable housing, that result not from governmental regulation, but from
other forces on the housing market. Primarily, this examines the economic factors that
contribute to the price of housing in Arroyo Grande. Other factors that have an effect on
housing costs that are not addressed are sales and marketing costs, property taxes,
and developer profits.
Page 85 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
Land Costs
Land costs vary substantially based upon a number of factors. The main influences on
land value are location and zoning, and to a degree available supply of land. Land that
is conveniently located in a desirable area that is zoned for residential uses will likely be
more valuable, and thus more expensive.
The LHTF developed several proformas that evaluated the costs of residential
development, including land costs. It has been estimated that unimproved residential
zoned land in the City ranges from $300,000 to $500,000 per acre. Improved lots can
be even more costly. The range sometimes varies due to the site zoning, with higher
density zoned land being more expensive per acre (but less per unit). Given the
median cost of housing identified in this chapter and the median costs for affordable
housing, then it is evident that land costs clearly present the most significant constraint
to the production of affordable housing in the City.
Site Imarovement Costs
Site improvement costs include the cost of providing access to the site, clearing and
grading the site, and constructing required improvements. In the case of a subdivision,
such costs may also include major subdivision improvements such as building roads,
installing sewer, water and other utilities. As with land costs, several variables affect the
amount of such costs including site topography and proximity to established roads and
utilities. Engineering and other design and technical assistance costs are usually '
included with site improvement as these senrices and City fees are required to ensure
the development is constructed to established codes and standards.
The City requires that curbs, gutters and sidewalks be placed along the frontage of
every lot on which new construction is done. Many of these improvements, especially
sidewalks, generally are required to provide pedestrian access and access for the
handicapped. These costs have been estimated in a range of from $40,000 to $60,000
per unit for a standard single-family housing subdivision. While these costs contribute
to the cost of a housing unit, the improvements required by the City are typical of all
cities in the State and do not impose a significant constraint on the development of
housing in the City. City regulations are intended to generally encourage high-quality
private development and new construction.
Construction Costs
Construction costs are those incurred in actually constructing a dwelling unit. These
costs can vary depending on the location or style of development. Important
determinants of construction costs include the amenities built into the unit, materials
used, the prevailing labor rate (a significant issue with subsidized affordable housing
given recent legislation), and the difficulty of building on the site. In Arroyo Grande,
expansive soils may necessitate more extensive foundations for housing units.
Residential construction costs per square foot vary, with an estimated $102.00 per
square foot for single family, $95.00 for condominiums, and $93.00 for apartments
Financia/Costs
Because of the size of most housing developments, developers generally have to
borrow money to cover the costs outlined above. As with all loans, interest must be
Page 86 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
paid to the lender. Interest rates for construction loans, as well as mortgage, tend to be
tied to the prime rate (the prime rate is the interest rate at which banks loan money to
their best corporate clients). Construction loans are generally finro or more percentage
points above the prime rate. Currently, interest rates are generally low, but recent
reports indicate that they may be increasing over the Housing Element planning period.
The prime rate is currently at 4 percent (July, 2003). While this is not considered a
significant constraint, the time it takes to process and construct a project can affect the
amount of interest paid. This Housing Element includes a policy to streamline the
processing of affordable housing that could reduce the financial costs of these projects.
Insurance Availabilitv
One of the sign�cant issues identified by the Housing LHTF as reported by local
developers is the cost and/or availability of workers compensation and liability
insurance. These types of insurance have become very costly or are not available at
all. This is having a negative effect in the construction of multi-family units such as
condominiums and apartments as well as a substantial cost per unit. This situation has
escalated to a point that only single-family residential development appears profitable.
This has and continues to be a constraint to multi-family and condominium
development, which are the types of housing most feasible for affordable housing. This
is a situation that needs to be addressed at the State level in that it is generally out of
the control of the City.
5.4 Local Housing Funds
The City of Arroyo Grande has a Redevelopment Agency (RDA) in place that collects
tax increments to finance public projects as well as affordable housing. Under State
law, 20 percent of the tax increment must be set aside for affordable housing. The
Agency currently has $85,719 in its housing fund. While it is expected that this fund will
increase over the years as the Agency was only recently established in 1996, the
increased amount will not generate significant funds during this housing period.
The City also adopted an inclusionary housing program in March 2000 that generates
in-lieu housing funds. As of July 1, 2003 this program had funds in the amount of
$631,882 devoted to affordable housing. To date, the City has allocated funds from this
source for two affordable senior housing projects. Like the RDA fund, this fund will
increase during the housing period as additional projects are developed.
The RDA fund and the inclusionary in-lieu fund can support affordable housing. These
funds can be directly utilized to assist affordable housing projects in the City or can be
leveraged toward qualifying for State and federal housing funds. It is the intent of the
City to utilize available funds to support affordable housing projects and programs.
5.5 Energy Conservation Opportunities and Programs
The California Building Code (specifically Title 24) requires that all new residential
development comply with specific energy conservation standards. These require a
multitude of ineasures to reduce energy usage in a housing unit, thus reducing the
monthly costs for the housing unit occupants. Energy costs are an important factor
when determining the affordability of a housing unit. All new construction in the City
must comply with Title 24. These regulations are periodically modified to reduce energy
Page 87 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
usage as part of ongoing updates to Title 24 and the California Building Code, which are
required to be adopted by the City.
The major issue with energy conservation is with existing housing units, maintaining
their level of affordability. Factors that affect energy use must be put in the context of
identifying opportunities for conservation. Additional insulation, weather stripping, and
energy e�cient windows are three methods to reduce energy consumption. Several of
the local utility companies have programs to retrofit existing units to encourage reduced
energy consumption. A policy is provided in this Housing Element to require
compliance with energy regulations and codes in new development and to encourage
and support retrofit programs for existing units.
5.6 Current and Past Housing Efforts
Evaluation of 1993 Programs
Below are the programs identified in the 1993 Housing Element followed by a brief
evaluation or status comment.
1. The City will establish an afforolab/e housing fund to accept housing-related
fees; this fund will be used to construct /ower income housing, write-down
land or financing costs, rehabilitate or preserve existing units, or pay for
implementation programs within this housing element. At the same time that
the City establishes said funds, it will also adopt guidelines for the utilization
of the monies, including establishment of general priorities and procedures.
Response: The City enacted an affordable housing fund in March 2000 in
Ordinance No. 514 C.S. entitled "Affordable Housing Requirements". An affordable
housing in-lieu fee was established for projects requiring General Plan amendments
and/or changes to the zoning designation increasing residential density, and for all
other residential development projects greater than four (4) units (projects producing
less than 4 units are exempt from affordable housing requirements). The in-lieu fee
associated with General Plan/Zoning Map amendments was established at 2.5% of
the value of new construction for each required affordable unit, and 1% of the value
of new construction for all other residential projects.
During the 2001 General Pan Update, the program was amended to increase the
affordable housing in-lieu fee to 3%.
2. The City will establish a str�eamlined permit processing procedure for low-
income housing projects.
Response: The City has not formally adopted a streamlined permit processing
procedure for low-income housing projects nor received any applications proposing
such use. Recent projects proposing affordable housing above what the Affordable
Housing Ordinance requires have received priority and been processed
expeditiously.
Page 88 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
3. The City will review, and where necessary amend, its zoning ordinance to
ensure that the fallowing incentive programs ar�e in compliance with the most
current provisions of State law: second units in residential zones; mobile
homes and manufactured housing in all residential zones; density bonuses for
subdivisions fhat include an affordab/e housing component. In addition, the
City will incorporate density bonus provisions to imp/ement policy A.21. for the
condominium/townhouse and mu/tifamily districts.
Response: The City's Second Residential Dwelling Ordinance was amended June
10, 2003 in compliance with State law (AB 1866). The ordinance provides a simpler,
more expedient process, much broader opportunity, and incentives for property
owners to establish second dwellings, while still maintaining oversight through basic
criteria and uniform development standards. The incentives are through decrease in
development fees and the elimination of the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) process.
City control is maintained through the Minor Use Permit (MUP) process when
deviations to the ordinance are sought. Mobile homes are allowed by State law in all
residential districts, and the City has a separate Mobile Home Park (MHP) zoning
district as well. The City's Affordable Housing Ordinance allows for density bonuses
consistent with State law, and the proposed Housing Element Update includes
programs to strengthen the City's inclusionary housing requirements including
greater and broader density bonuses.
4. At least biannually, the City will review development-related processes and
procedures and report on ways to eliminate unnecessary de/ays or other
costs that affect the pr+�duction of housing. Said report shall be submitted to
the P/anning Commission who shall forward a recommendation to the City
Council.
Response: The City did not produce biannual reports that specifically relate to the
processes and procedures for eliminating unnecessary delays associated with
housing development projects, but this Housing Element Update serves this
purpose.
5. The City will formally adopt an orolinance re/ated to tra�c impact mitigafions.
If said ordinance includes fees, they shall also include provisions for reducing
those mitigation fees for lower income units as an incentive for affordab/e
housing. Said reductions may be "sca/ed" so that greater reductions will be
afforcled projects meeting very low income housing needs and/or the needs of
other specia/groups in the community.
Response: The City adopted a Level of Service (LOS) Policy and Traffic Study
Guidelines in February 2000 that established thresholds of significance for traffic
impacts and standardized traffic study requirements. Mitigation impact fees are '
required for projects that exceed the City's tra�c impact threshold, but there is no
specific provision for reducing these impact fees for lower income units as an
incentive for affordable housing. The City Council has the authority to reduce these
fees on a case-by-case basis for any project believed to have justification. The
Page 89 • November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
proposed 2003 Housing Element addresses proposed impact fee reductions for
affordable housing projects.
6. At/east annually, the P/anning and Public Works Departments will provide an
update to the City Council on availab/e water supplies, projected demand
under the Genera/ P/an and fhe status of projects to ensure adequate supply
to meet the needs of the community in accordance with the (1991) General
P/an, including this (1993 Housing) E/ement
Response: Every five (5) years, the Public Works Department prepares an Urban
Water Management Plan that is submitted to the State, and a Water Master Plan
that is prepared for the City Council. If this program is retained in the updated
Housing Element, it should be revised to read "periodically" instead of annually to
better reflect the reality of preparing these Plan updates. The City Council does,
however, receive at least annual report of water resource utilization and per capita
consumption, including most recently the Water Conservation Program report.
7. The City will requir�e the continued affordability of low-income units that are
constructed as a resu/t of govemment funds or regu/ations or that receive a
densify bonus or other incentive. The term of such condition shall be ,
determined on a case-by-case basis but shall comply with applicable
requirements of State /aw.
Response: Affordable housing projects constructed with financial assistance from
non-profit organizations ar government subsidies are in compliance with applicable
State law requirements applicable at the time of approval. Affordable housing
projects approved since the adoption of the City's Affordable Housing Ordinance are
required to ensure affordability for 30 years though deed restriction and/or
development agreement.
8. The City will adopt an ordinance that requires that new housing projects and
subdivisions of at least 50 units in size to provide at least 1 D% of the units as
affordable to low income households; and projects and subdivisions of 25-49
units or lots in size to provide at /east 5� of the units as afforclab/e to low
income househo/ds. Said ordinance may allow exceptions based on findings
that provision of such units is infeasib/e on the site; however, in cases of
exceptions, the City will require dedication of /and or payment of fees in
accor�dance with Policy A.12. The ordinance shall a/so allow a 10% density
bonus in cases where the requiried low-income units are constructed on site.
Said orolinance will a/so require the payment of fees for projects with fewer
than 25 units in accordance with Policy A.13.
Resqonse: These provisions are included in the current Affordable Housing
Ordinance, but the few projects of more than 25 units pursued since 1993 were also
allowed to pay fees in lieu of providing 5 to 10% affordable housing without
requesting use of a density bonus.
Page 90 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
9. The City will study altemative methods for calcu/ating allowab/e r�esidential
densities to allow a gr�eater number of smailer units instead of large units in
appropriate circumstances. For examp/e, if senior housing is found to
generate fewer public service and other impacts, it may be appropriate to
allow more such housing instead of/arge sing/e family dwellings. The results
of this study shall be incorporated into an ordinance that specifies the
conditions necessary for modified density calculatiorrs to be used.
Response: The 2001 General Plan added greater flexibility for higher densities by
creating a Mixed Use (MU) district that allows up to twenty-five (25) dwelting units
per acre. Pending Development Code Amendments also provide dwelling unit
equivalents for smaller and larger than two bedroom units to calculate density.
10. The City shall continue to work with Peop/e's Se/f He/p Housing Corporation,
or other non-profit agencies to secure funds through State and federal
programs for deve/opment of new /ow-income housing, and r�ehabilitation of
existing low-income households.
Response: Several projects were developed since 1993, and although there are no
current projects pending, the City has been in communication with both People's
Self Help Housing and the San Luis Obispo Housing Authority regarding potential
additional affordable rental housing, including farmworker and senior or special
needs housing projects.
11. The City will amend its zoning ordinance to allow, (in addition to allowing
residential uses in the Village area) the following: a) residential in conjunction
with commercial in all commer�cial zones, subject to discretionary review.
Criteria for approving r+esidential uses shall be included in the orolinance.
Response: The 2001 General Plan includes Mixed Use (MU) zoning districts and
pending Development Code Amendments will implement these provisions district by
district as required. .
12. The City will maintain a /and inventory of availab/e vacant property zoned for
residential uses and make the list available to the public and developers.
Response: The City has not developed nor maintained a vacant land inventory for
public use. However the City is currently developing a Geographic Information
System (GIS) that will enable such an inventory to be generated The 2001 General
Plan Update included the basic inventory of vacant and underutilized sites used for
this Housing Element Update.
13. The City Building Department shall track all new construction and
rehabilitation projects and provide information to the Planning Department on
a month/y basis in order to keep the City's computer-based Land Use
Inventory updated.
Page 91 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
Response: The Building Department provides other City departments with a monthly
list of building permit activity, but it is not yet integrated into a GIS. Monthly reports
of the limited changes to the City's housing inventory are considered excessive but
an annual summary would be realistic.
y ��The City shall meet with representatives of the Cities of Pismo Beach and
Grover Beach to discuss the possibilit of formin an inter-cit housin
authorit ,
Response: Representatives from communities within the South County area have
met to discuss Housing-related issues. The concept of forming a South County
regional housing authority has not yet been specifically discussed, however.
15. The City will consider a citywide funding mechanism to accumulate monies
for the projection of lower income housing. Options may include a citywide
special tax. If such a funding mechanism is approved, then Policies A.12 and
A.13 r�equiring "inclusionary"housing or in-lieu fees may be modified.
Response: Such a citywide funding mechanism has not yet been considered, but ,
are again proposed as part of this Housing Element Update.
16. If grant application assistance is available from People's Self Help Housing
Corporation, or other groups, the City will apply for CDBG rehabilitation funds
to enab/e rehabilitation for/ow-income househo/ds.
Response: The City has been working with the Economic Opportunity Commission
(EOC) using CDBG funding for its home repair program.
17. The City will coordinate its efforts with the San Luis Obispo Housing Authority
to continue receiving Section 8 subsidy monies.
Resqonse: The City has continued to work with the local Housing Authority for
Section 8 subsidy monies.
18. The City will provide home repair videos to the public at little or no cost.
Response: This program has not been implemented, nor is the demand or need
evident due to the few substandard units within the City.
19. The City will conduct a biannual inventory of the housing stock condition and
prepare a report for pr�esentation to the City Council.
Response: This program has not been implemented: See response to number 13
above.
Page 92 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
20. The City will develop and adopt a revised condominium conversion ordinance
that requires tenant notice, opportunities for fenant purchase of units and
mitigations for the /oss of /ow-income renta/ units through the conversion.
Such mitigations may inc/ude, but are not necessarUy limited to, provision of
replacement housing, r�elocation assistance, and/or payment of fees into the
housing fund.
Response: The Development Code standards for condominium conversions include
all of the above requirements, but the lack of vacancy factor prerequisite has
prevented any condominium conversion despite requests.
21. The City will develop and adopt an ordinance intended to encourage the
retention of existing mobile home parks and to provide tenant protection in
cases of approved conversions. Such protection shall include, but is not
necessari/y limited to, notice to tenants at least one year in advance of any
conversion, reasonab/e opportunities for park purchase by the tenants, and
re/ocation assistance for low-income tenants.
Response: This program has not been implemented. The City would utilize the
same criteria and procedures required for condominium conversion, however by
interpretations until this issue is considered.
22. The City will adopt an ordinance requiring tenant notice and relocation
assistance in cases of demolition of mu/ti-family housing. Such an ordinance
shall provide for at /east one years notice to tenants except in cases of
imminenf risk to hea/th or safety. The ordinance will a/so specify minimum
requirements for relocation assistance for displaced tenants. Such
assistance may inc/ude providing information about other availab/e housing
and previding a stipend to help offset moving expenses for low-income
househo/ds.
Response: This program has not been implemented.
23. The City will periodically review its user charges for public services and
facilities to ensure that the charges are consistent with the costs of
improvements and maintenance.
Response: The City reviews its user charges for public services and facilities on an
annual basis.
24. The City will require new projects to be reviewed by the Staff Advisory
Committee and by the P/anning Commission and/or the Ar�chitectura/ Review
Committee to ensure compatibility with existing neighborhoods.
Response: The Staff Advisory Committee, Architectural Review Committee and
Planning Commission review all discretionary development projects to ensure
compatibility with existing neighborhoods.
Page 93 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
25. The City will require housing deve/opments for low and moderate-income
househo/ds to be designed so that they do not stand out in the neighborhood,
in order to enhance the sense of belonging to the community. Forms,
materials, and proportions should be utilized which are compatible with the
character of the surroundings.
Response: Design review of affordable housing projects is conducted on a case-by-
case basis to ensure that the units blend architecturally with the surrounding
neighborhood.
26. The City shall maintain a list of all dwellings within the City that are subsidized
by govemment funding or /ow-income housing deve/oped through local
regulafions or incentives. The list shall include, at a minimum, the number of
units, the type of govemment program, and the date at which the units may
convert to market-rate dwellings.
Response: This program has not been implemented, but the Housing Authority,
People's Self Help Housing and City records enable potential annual inventory.
27. The City shall add to existing incentive programs, and include in all new
incentive or regulatory programs, requirements to give notice prior to
conversion to market rate units as described in Policy C.2.
Response: This is currently a requirement.
28. The City will r�eview its zoning to allow group housing in residential zones in
accorolance with State law; co-housing and similar "unconventional" housing
arrangements; farmworker housing in the agricultural zone; "life care" and
other combinations of r�sidences with nursing care for seniors.
Response: The City intends to include group housing in the 2004-2005
Development Code Amendments for residential districts.
29. The City will institute an "operation match-up" program to match owners of
underutilized housing units with seniors, single parents, and other low-income
persons needing housing. �
Response: This program has not been implemented, nor are many units
"underutilized".
30. The City shall continue to provide information about housing opportunities
and services for home/ess persons through the Police Department, as well as
City Hall.
Resaonse: The City currently provides this information.
Page 94 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
31. The City shall cooperate with the other cities, the County and other agencies
in the deve%pment of programs aimed at providing home%ss she/ters and
re/ated services.
Response: The City continues to cooperate with other jurisdictions and agencies
regarding homeless programs.
32. The City will revise its zoning ordinance to allow the establishment of
homeless shelters for ovemight lodging in religious or social organization
buildings in those areas designated for high density residential, commer�ial or
public facility uses, subject to approva/of a Conditiona/ Use Permit(CUP).
Resqonse: The City allows these facilities in all multi-family and some mixed use
districts subject to CUP approval.
33. The City will implement Title 24 of the Califomia Code on all new
development.
Response: The City requires Title 24 comptiance on all new development.
34. The City will work with PG&E and Southem Califomia Gas Company to
encourage existing residents to participate in energy e�ciency retrofit
programs. The City will consider sponsoring an energy awareness program,
in conjunction with PG&E and/or Southem Califomia Gas Company to
educate residents about the benefits of various retrofit programs.
Response: This is an on-going program.
35. The City will amend its subdivision ordinance to implement the subdivision
map act related to subdivision orientation for solar access.
Response: The City's Development Code includes a provision for solar access
easements.
36. The City will amend its zoning orolinance to allow for mixed residential and
commercial development, wher�e appropriate.
Response: The City enables Mixed Use (MU) developments in the 2001 Land Use
Element of the General Plan and is currently updating its Development Code to be
consistent with the General Plan.
37. The City will amend its subdivision ordinance to require that new subdivisions
inc/ude transit opportunities and bicycle and pedestrian routes, where feasib/e
and appropriate.
Response: The City's Development Code includes provisions for dedication of land
for local transit facilities and other public amenities such as walking paths, bicycle
paths and horse trails. The 2001 General Plan identifies other alternative circulation
Page 95 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
proposals that will be implemented by Bikeway Plan, Transit Plan and other Specific
Plans.
38. The City will continue to provide information from the Department of Fair
Emp/oyment and Housing. Such information will be posted at City Hall, the
City/County Library, the Chamber of Commerce and other frequented public
p/aces.
Response: The City provides this information at multiple locations.
39. The City will r�efer persons experiencing discrimination in housing to Califomia
Rura/Lega/Assistance, and the Department of Fair Employment and Housing
district o�ce in Ventura.
Resqonse: The City will refer persons as stated above.
5.7 General Plan Consistency
The City's land use element of the 2001 General Plan currently designates the sites
noted in this Housing Element for residential purposes at densities consistent with the
goals of providing housing to households within the full range of incomes. The policies
in this Housing Element will guide that process, ensuring internal consistency among
the General Plan elements.
Page 96 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
APPENDIX A
PERSONS CONTACTED
Ted Bench, Dana Lilly. County of San Luis Obispo Planning Department
Peter Brown. San Luis Obispo Council of Governments
Jerry Bunin. Home Builders Association of the Central Coast
Paul Dirksen, Jr. Housing Policy Analyst, California Department of Housing and
Community Development
Caro/Hatley. Housing Authority of San Luis Obispo
Don Spagno/o. Arroyo Grande Public Works Director
Page 97 November 25, 2003
City of Arroyo Grande 2003 Housing Element
APPENDIX B
� BIBLIOGRAPHY
California Department of Housing and Community Development, Housing Element
Questions and Answers, June 2001
City of Arroyo Grande, Housing Element, June 1993
City of Arroyo Grande, 2001 General Plan Policy Document and Elements, October
2001
City of Arroyo Grande, 2001General Plan lntegrated Program Environmental lmpact
Report, May 2001
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments, Regional Housing Needs Plan, January 2003
�;
San Luis Obispo County, Tribune Newspaper, Numerous Articles on Housing, 2002-
2003
United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 2000 Census of
Population and Housing, Summary Tapes 1 and 3,
Page 98 November 25, 2003