R 5066 RESOLUTION NO. 5066
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO
GRANDE, CALIFORNIA, AS A RESPONSIBLE AGENCY ADOPTING
CEQA FINDINGS, A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING
CONSIDERATIONS, AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO FILE
THE NOTICE OF DETERMINATION FOR THE CENTRAL COAST BLUE
PROJECT
WHEREAS, Central Coast Blue ("the Project") is a regional advanced purified water
project intended to enhance supply reliability by reducing the Santa Maria Groundwater
Basin's vulnerability to drought and seawater intrusion; and
WHEREAS, the Project is a multi-agency collaboration between the Northern Cities
Management Area agencies (the Cities of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, and Pismo
Beach, and the Oceano Community Services District) and the South San Luis Obispo
County Sanitation District; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 21069 of the Public Resources Code of the California
Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Res. Code Sections 21000 et seq.) ("CEQA") and
Sections 15096 and 15367 of the State CEQA Guidelines(Cal. Code Res., tit. 14, §15000
et seq.), the City of Arroyo Grande ("City") is a Responsible Agency for the Project and is
making the requisite Findings in CEQA Guidelines Sections 15091 and 15093; and
WHEREAS, the City of Pismo Beach, pursuant to Section 21067 of CEQA and Section
15367 of the CEQA Guidelines, is acting as Lead Agency for this Project; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, the City has considered
the environmental effects of the project and therefore are making the necessary Findings
herein; and
WHEREAS, the City of Pismo Beach issued a Notice of Preparation ("NOP") of a Draft
EIR for the Project on December 20, 2019, for a 45-day agency and public review period,
ending on February 4, 2020; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.9 and State CEQA
Guidelines Section 15082(c) and 15083, the City of Pismo Beach held a duly noticed
Scoping Meeting on January 22, 2020 which the City participated in, to solicit comments
on the scope of the environmental review of the Project and received comments; and
WHEREAS, during the NOP circulation period, the proposed locations of specific project
components were selected, including the advanced treatment facility complex, water
distribution pipelines, and monitoring wells; and
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 2
WHEREAS, as a result of siting of project components, a revised NOP of the Draft EIR
was issued for 45-day agency and public review period starting on April 13, 2020 and
ending on May 28, 2020; and
WHEREAS, a second EIR Scoping Meeting was held on May 8, 2020; and
WHEREAS, a Draft EIR was prepared, incorporating comments received in response to
both NOP periods; and
WHEREAS, the Draft EIR determined that mitigation measures were required to mitigate
impacts to a less than significant level for the following resource areas: air quality,
biological resources, cultural resources, energy, environmental justice, greenhouse gas
emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, noise,
transportation, and land use; and
WHEREAS, the Draft EIR further concluded that despite the incorporation of all feasible
mitigation measures, the Project would nonetheless result in significant unavoidable
impacts relating to land use and noise; and
WHEREAS, as required by State CEQA Guidelines Section 15087(a), the City of Pismo
Beach provided Notice of Availability of the Draft EIR to the public on July 20, 2020, for a
45-day public and agency review period concluding on September 3, 2020; and
WHEREAS, during the Draft EIR review period, the City of Pismo Beach solicited public
comment at the August 18, 2020 regular City of Pismo Beach City Council meeting; and
WHEREAS, the City of Pismo Beach received eleven comments on the Draft EIR, and
responses to comments were provided in the Final EIR; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21092.5, the written responses
to comments contained within the Final EIR were provided to any public agency that
commented on the EIR at least 10 days prior to the City Council's certification of the Final
EIR; and
WHEREAS, on February 5, 2021, the City of Pismo Beach released the Final EIR("Final
EIR"), which consists of the Draft EIR, all technical appendices prepared in support of the
Draft EIR, all written comment letters received on the Draft EIR, written responses to all
written comment letters received on the Draft EIR, and errata to the Draft EIR and
technical appendices; and
WHEREAS, on February 16, 2021, the City of Pismo Beach City Council conducted a
duly noticed public hearing and Certified the Final EIR; and
WHEREAS, on March 22, 2021, the City conducted a hearing to consider the City of
Pismo Beach's EIR for this Project; and
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 3
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo
Grande as a Responsible Agency does hereby adopt CEQA Findings and Statement of
Overriding Considerations as provided in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated
herein by this reference, and adopts a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program as
provided in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this references
On motion of Mayor Ray Russom, seconded by Council Member George, and on the
following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Mayor Ray Russom, Council Members George, Storton, Barneich, and Paulding
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this 23rd day of March, 2021.
RESOLUTION NO. SO(p(p
PAGE 4
CAREN RAY 029OM, MAYOR
ATTEST:
a
SSICA MATSON, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
it
jii)r /A ,
WHITNEY u DONALD, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
c
TIMOTH J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 5
EXHIBIT A
CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
I. PURPOSE OF THE FINDINGS
The purpose of these findings is to satisfy the requirement of Public Resources Code
Section 21000, et seq., and Sections 15091, 15093, 15096, and 15097 of the CEQA
Guidelines, 14 Cal. Code Regulations, Section 15000, et seq., associated with approval
of the Central Coast Blue Project. These findings provide the written analysis and
conclusions of the City Council regarding the Project. They are divided into general
sections, each of which is further divided into subsections. Each addresses a particular
impact topic and/or requirement of law. At times, these findings refer to materials in the
administrative record.
II. PROJECT OBJECTIVES
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15124, the environmental impact report must
identify the objects sought by the proposed project. As noted in Section 2 of the Certified
Final EIR for the Project, the Project objectives are:
1. Produce advanced purified water of a quality that can safely be used to augment
groundwater supply while maintaining or improving existing groundwater quality.
2. Create a sustainable, drought-resistant, local water supply and improve water
supply reliability for southern San Luis Obispo County.
3. Provide a new source of recharge to the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin to protect
the basin from degradation via seawater intrusion.
4. Reduce wastewater discharges to the ocean and maximize utilization of local water
supplies.
5. Facilitate continued water resources collaboration in the Northern Cities
Management Area.
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Central Coast Blue (the Project) is a multi-agency collaboration between the Northern
Cities Management Area agencies (the Cities of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, and
Pismo Beach, and the Oceano Community Services District) and the South San Luis
Obispo County Sanitation District (SSLOCSD) to construct a regional recycled water
project that will enhance supply reliability by injecting advanced purified water into the
Santa Maria Groundwater Basin (SMGB). This will reduce vulnerability to drought and
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 6
seawater intrusion by creating a seawater intrusion barrier and supplementing the
naturally occurring groundwater. Water for the Project will be sourced from two of the
region's wastewater treatment facilities: the Pismo Beach Wastewater Treatment Plant
(WWTP) and the SSLOCSD WWTP. Prior to injection to the SMGB, water will be treated
to an advanced level of purification at a proposed advanced treatment facility (ATF)
constructed at a site in the City(Assessor's Parcel Number 060-543-016). The proposed
ATF will treat a combination of flows from the Pismo Beach WWTP and flows from the
SSLOCSD WWTP for injection into the SMGB and/or for agricultural irrigation. Project
components in addition to the ATF include an advanced purified water storage tank, an
equalization basin, a pump station, distribution pipelines, injection wells, monitoring wells,
one new production well, and potential agricultural irrigation pipelines. The Project will
alter the pumping regime of existing, operational production wells in the project area and
will include construction of one new production well to optimize groundwater production
in the area.
IV. CEQA PROCESS OVERVIEW
The City of Pismo Beach is the lead agency for the Project. The City is a Responsible
Agency for this Project. All issues recommended in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines
were examined in the Certified Finai EIR. The City of Pismo Beach distributed a Notice
of Preparation (NOP) of the EIR (SCH# 2019120560) for a 45-day agency and public
review period starting on December 20, 2019 and ending on February 4, 2020. The
purpose of the NOP was to inform other public agencies, interest groups and the public
in general of the City of Pismo Beach's intent to prepare an EIR. The NOP also provided
an opportunity for those interested in the proposed project to comment on the contents of
the EIR. The NOP was also sent to the State Clearinghouse, which is responsible for
forwarding it to State agencies that might be affected. In addition, as required by CEQA
Guidelines Section 15082(c)(1), the City of Pismo Beach held an EIR Scoping Meeting
on January 22, 2020. However, during the NOP circulation period, the proposed locations
of the ATF complex, water distribution pipelines, and monitoring wells, which were
previously undetermined, were selected. As a result, the City of Pismo Beach distributed
a revised NOP of the EIR for a 45-day agency and public review period starting on April
13, 2020 and ending on May 28, 2020. In addition, the City of Pismo Beach held a second
EIR Scoping Meeting on May 8, 2020. From July 20, 2020 to September 3, 2020, the City
of Pismo Beach circulated the Draft EIR (titled "Central Coast Blue Project Draft
Environmental Impact Report") for a 45-day public and agency review period pursuant to
the requirements of CEQA Guidelines Section 15105(a). During this review period, the
City of Pismo Beach held a public meeting on the Draft EIR on August 6, 2020 and a
public comment period on the Draft EIR at the August 18, 2020 regular City of Pismo
Beach Council meeting. Eleven comments were received on the Draft EIR, and
responses to comments are provided in the Final EIR. The Final EIR was certified at the
February 16, 2021 regular City of Pismo Beach Council meeting by Resolution No. R-
2021-011.
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 7
V. IMPACTS, MITIGATION MEASURES, AND FINDINGS
The City of Arroyo Grande, as a Responsible Agency, hereby adopts and makes the
following findings related to its respective portion of the Project which requires approval
of the Project by the City(i.e., the full execution of the Operating Agreement by the cities
of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach, acting as Responsible Agencies, full execution of
the Operating Agreement by the City of Pismo Beach, acting as the Lead Agency, along
with the Investor, Member, or Partner Agencies, to undertake the Central Coast Blue
Project). Having received, reviewed, and considered the entire record, both written and
oral, related to the Central Coast Blue Project and Certified Final EIR, the City makes the
following findings associated with significant, potentially significant, and cumulative
significant impacts that can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level through
implementation of mitigation measures identified in the Certified Final EIR.
Air Quality
Impact AQ-2 Construction of the project would generate temporary increases in
criteria air pollutant emissions. Construction emissions of reactive
organic gases(ROG)and nitrogen oxides(NOx)would exceed San Luis
Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD) construction
thresholds during Phase I and Phase II. This impact would be
potentially significant.
Finding: Mitigation Measure(s) Feasible and Required, Impact Reduced to Less-
than-Significant Level. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure AQ-2(a) "Standard Control Measures for
Construction Equipment" has been adopted to reduce construction-related emissions of
NOx and ROG during Phases I and II. Mitigation Measure AQ-2(b)"Best Available Control
Technology for Construction Equipment" has been adopted to implement Best Available
Control Technology for diesel-fueled construction equipment during construction-related
activities.
Support for Finding: According to the SLOAPCD (2012) CEQA Air Quality Handbook,
for projects with estimated construction emissions that are expected to exceed the
SLOAPCD daily thresholds of significance and the SLOAPCD quarterly Tier 1 thresholds
of significance, implementation of standard and Best Available Control Technology
measures would reduce potential air quality impacts to a less-than-significant level. These
measures are required for both phases of construction activities. As shown in Table 4.1-
10 and Table 4.1-11 in Section 4.1, Air Quality, of the Final EIR, implementation of
Mitigation Measures AQ-2(a) and AQ-2(b) would reduce construction-related emissions
of ROG + NOx below the SLOAPCD daily and quarterly thresholds during both Phases I
and II. As a result, implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-2(a) and AQ-2(b) would
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 8
reduce construction-related air quality impacts during Phases I and II of construction to a
less-than-significant level.
Reference: Final EIR, Pages 4.1-20 through 4.1-24
Cumulative The project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
2001 Clean Air Plan but would exceed SLOAPCD daily and quarterly
thresholds for emissions of ROG + NOx during Phases I and II of
construction activities. The project's contribution to the cumulative air
quality impact would be cumulatively considerable.
Finding: Mitigation Measure(s) Feasible and Required, Impact Reduced to Less-
than-Significant Level. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure AQ-2(a) "Standard Control Measures for
Construction Equipment" has been adopted to reduce construction-related emissions of
NOx and ROG during Phases I and II. Mitigation Measure AQ-2(b)"Best Available Control
Technology for Construction Equipment" has been adopted to implement Best Available
Control Technology for diesel-fueled construction equipment during construction-related
activities.
Support for Finding: As discussed under Impact AQ-2, the project would exceed
SLOAPCD daily and quarterly thresholds for emissions of ROG + NOx during Phases I
and II of construction activities. As shown in Table 4.1-10 and Table 4.1-11 in Section
4.1,Air Quality, of the Final EIR, implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-2(a) and AQ-
2(b) would reduce construction emissions below SLOAPCD thresholds. Air pollution by
nature is a cumulative issue, and significance thresholds for criteria pollutant emissions
are established at the levels at which impacts would be cumulatively considerable. As
such, emissions below the thresholds would not be cumulatively considerable. Therefore,
with mitigation incorporated, the project would not have a cumulatively considerable
contribution to the cumulative air quality impact.
Reference: Final EIR, Pages 4.1-20 through 4.1-24 and 4.1-28 through 4.1-29
Biological Resources
Impact BIO-1: The proposed project would result in direct and indirect impacts to
special status species, if present. This impact would be potentially
significant.
Finding: Mitigation Measure(s) Feasible and Required, Impact Reduced to Less-
than-Significant Level. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 9
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measures B10-1(a) through BIO-1(k) would be
implemented to avoid and minimize impacts to special-status species. Mitigation
measures include: BIO-1(a) "California Red-legged Frog Habitat Avoidance"; BIO-1(b)
"California Red-legged Frog Avoidance and Minimization Measures"; BIO-1(c)
"Southwestern Pond Turtle Avoidance and Minimization Measures"; BIO-1(d) "Monarch
Butterfly Avoidance"; BIO-1(e) "Nesting Bird Avoidance and Minimization Measures";
BIO-1(f) "Biological Resources Assessment"; BIO-1(g) "Special Status Plant Species
Surveys"; BIO-1(h) "Special Status Plant Species Avoidance, Minimization, and
Mitigation"; BIO-1(i) "Restoration Plan for Special Status Plant Species"; BIO-1(j)
"Endangered/Threatened Species Avoidance and Minimization"; and BIO-1(k)"Non-listed
Special Status Animal Species Avoidance and Minimization."
Support for Finding: Mitigation Measures BIO-1(a) through BIO-1(e) require avoidance
and minimization measures to reduce direct and indirect impacts to special status species
from development of project components with known locations. Mitigation Measures B10-
1(f) through BIO-1(k) require completion of a Biological Resources Assessment and
identification and implementation of appropriate avoidance and minimization measures
to reduce direct and indirect impacts to special status species from development of the
project components with unknown locations. As a result, implementation of Mitigation
Measures BIO-1(a) through BIO-1(k) would reduce project impacts on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans,
policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or the United
States Fish and Wildlife Service to a less-than-significant level.
Reference: Final EIR, Pages 4.2-37 through 4.2-44
Impact BIO-2 The project would result in direct and indirect impacts to riparian areas.
This impact would be potentially significant.
Finding: Mitigation Measure(s) Feasible and Required, Impact Reduced to Less-
than-Significant Level. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure BIO-2 "Sensitive Plant Community and
Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area Avoidance and Minimization Measures" has been
adopted to address potential disturbance of arroyo willow habitat during project
construction and maintenance activities.
Support for Finding: Mitigation Measure BIO-2 requires measures to avoid, minimize,
and compensate for direct and indirect impacts to riparian habitat and other sensitive
natural communities from construction and maintenance of the proposed project. As a
result, implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2 would reduce project impacts to
riparian habitat and other sensitive natural communities to a less-than-significant level.
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 10
Reference: Final EIR, Pages 4.2-45 through 4.2-46
Impact BIO-3 The project would potentially impact state and federally protected
wetlands through direct removal, filling, or hydrological interruption. This
impact would be potentially significant.
Finding: Mitigation Measure(s) Feasible and Required, Impact Reduced to Less-
than-Significant Level. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measures BIO-3(a) through BIO-3(c) have been
adopted to avoid and minimize impacts to state and federally protected wetlands.
Mitigation measures include: B10-3(a) "Jurisdictional Delineation"; B10-3(b) "Drainages
and Wetlands Impact Mitigation"; and BI0-3(c) "Drainages and Wetlands Best
Management Practices During Construction."
Support for Finding: Mitigation Measures B10-3(a)through B10-3(c) require preparation
of a jurisdictional delineation to identify jurisdictional areas and implementation of
avoidance, minimization and mitigation measures to avoid, minimize, and compensate
for direct and indirect impacts to state or federally protected wetlands from development
of the project. As a result, implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-3(a) through B10-
3(c) would reduce project impacts on state or federally protected wetlands (including but
not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means to a less-than-significant level.
Reference: Final EIR, Pages 4.2-47 through 4.2-49
Impact BIO-5 The project would result in impacts to biological resources protected by
local policies. This impact would be potentially significant.
Finding: Mitigation Measure(s) Feasible and Required, Impact Reduced to Less-
than-Significant Level. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure B10-5 "Native Tree Inventory, Protection, and
Replacement" has been adopted to minimize impacts on native trees in the project area
that could potentially be affected by project construction activities.
Support for Finding: Mitigation Measure BIO-5 requires implementation of avoidance,
minimization, and compensation measures for protected trees. As a result,
implementation of Mitigation Measure BI0-5 would avoid conflict with any local policies
or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance, reducing impacts to a less-than-significant level.
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 11
Reference: Final EIR, Page 4.2-51
Cultural Resources
Impact CR-2 The proposed project has the potential to cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of unique archaeological resources and
archaeological resources that may be considered historical resources.
This impact would be potentially significant.
Finding: Mitigation Measure(s) Feasible and Required, Impact Reduced to Less-
than-Significant Level Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measures CR-2(a)through CR-2(d) have been adopted
to avoid, minimize, and mitigate potential impacts on archaeological resources. Mitigation
measures include: CR-2(a) "Worker's Environmental Awareness Program"; CR-2(b)
"Archaeological and Native American Monitoring"; CR-2(c) "Unanticipated Discovery of
Cultural Resources"; and CR-2(d) "Archaeological Resource Studies."
Support for Finding: Mitigation Measures CR-2(a) though CR-2(c) require
implementation of a Worker's Environmental Awareness Program, monitoring of ground
disturbance by a qualified archaeologist and Native American monitor, and evaluation of
any unanticipated cultural resources for all project components. In addition, Mitigation
Measure CR-2(d) requires completion of archaeological resource studies for the
agricultural irrigation pipelines and new production well once the locations of these project
components are identified. These measures would require identification, evaluation,
treatment, and mitigation of impacts to archaeological resources in accordance with
CEQA. Therefore, impacts to archaeological resources would be reduced to a less-than-
significant level.
Reference: Final EIR, Pages 4.3-19 through 4.3-21
Enerav
Impact E-2 The project would be potentially inconsistent with the energy efficiency
and renewable energy policies of the City of Pismo Beach's Climate
Action Plan and the City of Grover Beach's General Plan. This impact
would be potentially significant.
Finding: Mitigation Measure(s) Feasible and Required, Impact Reduced to Less-
than-Significant Level. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 12
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measures E-2 "Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy Measures" and GHG-2 "GHG Emission Reduction Measures" have been adopted
to achieve consistency with energy-related measures and policies of the City of Pismo
Beach's Climate Action Plan and the City of Grover Beach's General Plan.
Support for Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measures E-2 and GHG-2, which
require implementation of applicable energy-related measures and policies of the City of
Pismo Beach's Climate Action Plan and the City of Grover Beach's General Plan, would
achieve project consistency with these plans. Impacts would be less than significant with
mitigation incorporated.
Reference: Final EIR, Pages 4.4-14 and 4.6-18
Cumulative The project would be potentially inconsistent with the City of Pismo
Beach's Climate Action Plan and the City of Grover Beach's General
Plan, which were adopted to reduce the cumulative impact of energy
consumption in Pismo Beach and Grover Beach, respectively. The
project's contribution to the cumulative energy impact would be
cumulatively considerable.
Finding: Mitigation Measure(s) Feasible and Required, Impact Reduced to Less-
than-Significant Level. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measures E-2 "Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy Measures" and GHG-2 "GHG Emission Reduction Measures" have been adopted
to achieve consistency with energy-related measures and policies of the City of Pismo
Beach's Climate Action Plan and the City of Grover Beach's General Plan.
Support for Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measures E-2 and GHG-2, which
require inclusion of applicable energy-related measures and policies of the City of Pismo
Beach's Climate Action Plan and the City of Grover Beach's General Plan, would achieve
project consistency with these plans. Therefore, with incorporation of mitigation, the
project would not have a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative
impact related to the plans adopted for renewable energy and energy efficiency.
Reference: Final EIR, Pages 4.4-14 through 4.4-15 and 4.6-18
Environmental Justice
Impact EJ-1 Project components would be constructed in Oceano and Grover Beach,
which are identified as environmental justice communities. The
proposed project would potentially result in disproportionately high and
adverse impacts to these communities during project construction and
operation. This impact would be potentially significant.
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 13
Finding: Mitigation Measure(s) Feasible and Required, Impact Reduced to Less-
than-Significant Level. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures have been adopted to avoid and minimize
adverse, localized project impacts to environmental justice communities related to air
quality, hazards and hazardous materials, noise, and traffic. Mitigation measures include:
Mitigation Measures AQ-2(a) "Standard Control Measures for Construction Equipment";
AQ-2(b) "Best Available Control Technology for Construction Equipment"; HAZ-1(a)
"Hazardous Materials Management and Spill Prevention and Control"; HAZ-1(b)
"Preparation of Hazardous Materials Business Plan"; N-1 "Construction Noise Reduction
Measures"; N-2 "Acoustical Analysis of ATF Complex Operations"; and T-1
"Transportation Management Plan."
Support for Finding: As discussed under the findings for Impacts AQ-2, HAZ-1, N-2,
and T-1, implementation of the mitigation measures would reduce most of the project's
potentially adverse localized impacts to a less-than-significant level with the exception of
the project's significant and unavoidable construction noise impact associated with 24-
hour drilling of the injection, monitoring, and production wells. However, the entire project
area is located within the environmental justice communities of Oceano and Grover
Beach, and the project's significant and unavoidable construction noise impact would be
evenly distributed throughout the project area at 18 well locations, not focused on a single
area. Therefore, this impact would not affect one area or population more than another.
Furthermore, construction noise impacts would be short-term, temporary, and typical of
construction projects occurring throughout the region, which often generate temporary
increases in noise. Therefore, although this impact would occur in the environmental
justice communities of Oceano and Grover Beach, this impact would not be
disproportionately high and adverse. As such, with mitigation incorporated, construction
of the proposed project would not result in any disproportionately high impacts on
minority, low income, or disadvantaged communities. Therefore, environmental justice
impacts would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.
Reference: Final EIR, Pages 4.1-20 through 4.1-24, 4.5-6 through 4.5-8, 4.7-9 through
4.7-10, 4.10-24 through 4.10-27, 4.10-32 through 4.10-34, and 4.11-11 through 4.11-13
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Impact GHG-2 The proposed project would be potentially inconsistent with the City of
Pismo Beach's Climate Action Plan. This impact would be potentially
significant.
Finding: Mitigation Measure(s) Feasible and Required, Impact Reduced to Less-
than-Significant Level. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 14
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure GHG-2 "GHG Emission Reduction Measures"
has been adopted to achieve consistency with the City of Pismo Beach's Climate Action
Plan.
Support for Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-2, which requires
implementation of applicable measures from the City of Pismo Beach's Climate Action
Plan, would achieve project consistency with this plan. Therefore, impacts would be less
than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Reference: Final EIR, Pages 4.4-14 and 4.6-18
Cumulative The project would be potentially inconsistent with the City of Pismo
Beach's Climate Action Plan, which was adopted to reduce the
cumulative impact of greenhouse gas(GHG)emissions in Pismo Beach.
The project's contribution to the cumulative GHG emissions impact
would be cumulatively considerable.
Finding: Mitigation Measure(s) Feasible and Required, Impact Reduced to Less-
than-Significant Level. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure GHG-2 "GHG Emission Reduction Measures"
has been adopted to achieve consistency with the City of Pismo Beach's Climate Action
Plan.
Support for Finding: The issue of climate change involves an analysis of whether a
project's contribution towards an impact is cumulatively considerable.As discussed under
Impact GHG-2, the project would be potentially inconsistent with the City of Pismo
Beach's Climate Action Plan. Implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-2, which
requires implementation of applicable measures from the City of Pismo Beach's Climate
Action Plan, would achieve project consistency with this plan. Therefore, with
implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-2, project impacts would therefore not be
cumulatively considerable.
Reference: Final EIR, Pages 4.4-14 and 4.6-18
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Impact HAZ-1 Construction and operation of the project would increase the routine
transport and use of hazardous materials in the project area but would
not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. The
project has the potential to result in the release of hazardous materials
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 15
through reasonably foreseeable upset or accident conditions during both
construction and operation of the project. This impact would be
potentially significant.
Finding: Mitigation Measure(s) Feasible and Required, Impact Reduced to Less-
than-Significant Level. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measures HAZ-1(a)"Hazardous Materials Management
and Spill Prevention and Control"; HAZ-1(b) "Preparation of Hazardous Materials
Business Plan"; BIO-3(c) "Drainages and Wetlands Best Management Practices During
Construction"; and HWQ-1 "Initial Quarterly Radioactivity Testing" have been adopted to
reduce the project's potential environmental effects with hazardous materials.
Support for Finding: Mitigation Measure HAZ-1(a) includes preparation of a Hazardous
Materials Management and Spill Prevention and Control Plan prior to commencement of
construction activities to reduce potential construction-related impacts resulting from the
routine transport and storage of hazardous materials. Implementation of Mitigation
Measure HAZ-1(b) entails the creation and implementation of a Hazardous Materials
Business Plan for the ATF complex to reduce the potential for adverse impacts to occur
in the event of spills and/or accidental releases of hazardous materials. Implementation
of Mitigation Measure BIO-3(c) requires implementation of construction best
management practices, including measures for handling hazardous materials near
jurisdictional areas such as Arroyo Grande Creek, which would further reduce the
potential release of hazardous materials through foreseeable upset or accident
conditions. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HWQ-1 requires implementation of
initial quarterly radioactive monitoring to identify violations of radioactivity levels and
resolution of exceedances via additional treatment processes to reduce water quality
impacts related to radioactive toxicity. Altogether, these mitigation measures would
address the potential release of hazardous materials into the environment and would
reduce the potential for adverse impacts to occur in the event of spills and/or accidental
releases of hazardous materials. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with
mitigation incorporated.
Reference: Final EIR, Pages 4.2-47 through 4.2-49, 4.7-9 through 4.7-10, and 4.8-27
through 4.8-28
Impact HAZ-2 Although construction activities for the project would be conducted in
compliance with all applicable regulations for the transport, storage, use,
and disposal of hazardous materials and precautions would be taken to
reduce potential risks, there is potential for an accidental release of
hazardous materials within 0.25 mile of a school. This impact would be
potentially significant.
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 16
Finding: Mitigation Measure(s) Feasible and Required, Impact Reduced to Less-
than-Significant Level. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure HAZ-1(a) "Hazardous Materials Management
and Spill Prevention and Control" has been adopted to minimize impacts related to the
handling of hazardous materials in the vicinity of a school.
Support for Finding: Mitigation Measure HAZ-1(a) entails development and
implementation of a Hazardous Materials Management and Spill Prevention and Control
Plan for project construction that will include measures for minimizing risks associated
with accidental release of hazardous materials, including in proximity to existing or
proposed schools. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1(a) would address
potential release of hazardous materials into the environment and would reduce the
potential for adverse impacts to occur in the event of spills and/or accidental releases of
hazardous materials in the vicinity of a school. Therefore, impacts would be less than
significant with mitigation incorporated.
Reference: Final EIR, Pages 4.7-9 through 4.7-11
Impact HAZ-5 Project construction would have the potential to interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or evacuation plan. This impact
would be potentially significant.
Finding: Mitigation Measure(s) Feasible and Required, Impact Reduced to Less-
than-Significant Level. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
Mitigation Measure: Mitigation Measure T-1 "Transportation Management Plan" has
been adopted to minimize potential impacts to emergency response routes and
evacuation routes during project construction.
Support for Finding: Mitigation Measure T-1 would reduce the potential for project
construction to interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or evacuation plan by
outlining temporary detour routes and alternative emergency access routes. As a result,
implementation of Mitigation Measure T-1 would reduce impacts to emergency response
plans and evacuation plans to a less-than-significant level.
Reference: Final EIR, Pages 4.7-13 and 4.11-11 through 4.11-13
Hydrology and Water Quality
Impact HWQ-1 The project would potentially violate water quality standards.This impact
would be potentially significant.
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 17
Finding: Mitigation Measure(s) Feasible and Required, Impact Reduced to Less-
than-Significant Level. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
Mitigation Measure: Mitigation Measures HWQ-1 "Initial Quarterly Radioactivity Testing"
and BIO-3(c) "Drainages and Wetlands Best Management Practices During Construction"
have been adopted to reduce potential impacts on surface water and marine water
quality.
Support for Finding: Mitigation Measure HWQ-1 requires implementation of initial
quarterly radioactive monitoring to identify violations of radioactivity levels and resolution
of exceedances via additional treatment processes to achieve compliance with the City
of Pismo Beach's and SSSLOCSD's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
permit requirements for effluent discharge from the existing ocean outfall. Mitigation
Measure BIO-3(c) requires implementation of best management practices for grading and
construction within jurisdictional areas where impacts are authorized and where
construction occurs within 100 feet from jurisdictional areas or wetlands. As a result,
implementation of Mitigation Measures HWQ-1 and BIO-3(c) would reduce project
impacts on surface water and marine water quality to a less-than-significant level.
Reference: Final EIR, Pages 4.2-47 through 4.2-49 and 4.8-27 through 4.8-28
Noise
Impact N-2 Operation of the proposed project would potentially generate substantial
permanent increases in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project
in excess of local standards. This impact would be potentially
significant.
Finding: Mitigation Measure(s) Feasible and Required, Impact Reduced to Less-
than-Significant Level. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
Mitigation Measure: Mitigation Measure N-2 "Acoustical Analysis of ATF Complex
Operations" has been adopted to minimize operational noise impacts.
Support for Finding: Mitigation Measure N-2 requires preparation of an acoustical
analysis upon completion of the 30 percent design for the ATF complex and selection of
equipment. The acoustical analysis will determine specific operational noise impacts and
identify siting and/or design features that will be implemented to reduce operational noise
levels to below the operational exterior and interior noise level limits for stationary noise
sources during daytime and nighttime hours. As a result, operational noise impacts would
be less-than-significant with mitigation incorporated.
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 18
Reference: Final EIR, Pages 4.10-32 through 4.10-34
Cumulative Given the proximity of cumulative projects to project components with
known locations, cumulative daytime construction noise impacts would
be potentially significant. The project's contribution to the cumulative
daytime construction noise impact would be cumulatively
considerable.
Finding: Mitigation Measure(s) Feasible and Required, Impact Reduced to Less-
than-Significant Level. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
Mitigation Measure: Mitigation Measure N-1 "Construction Noise Reduction Measures"
has been adopted to minimize daytime construction noise impacts.
Support for Finding: Mitigation Measure N-1 requires implementation of construction
noise reduction measures that would reduce construction noise levels below the exterior
construction noise threshold of 80 dBA Leq.1 Furthermore, Mitigation Measure N-1
requires the City of Pismo Beach and/or its contractor(s) to schedule construction of IW-
5A, IW-5B, and MW-5A/5B/5C so that construction activities do not overlap with
construction of the SSLOCSD Wastewater Redundancy Project, which would minimize
the project's contribution to cumulative construction noise impacts at residences located
west and north of the SSLOCSD WWTP property. Therefore, with mitigation incorporated,
the project would not have a cumulatively considerable contribution to the significant
cumulative impact related to daytime construction noise.
Reference: Final EIR, Pages 4.10-24 through 4.10-27 and 4.10-38
Transportation
Impact T-1 Project construction would conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or
policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway,
bicycle and pedestrian facilities. This impact would be potentially
significant.
Finding: Mitigation Measure(s) Feasible and Required, Impact Reduced to Less-
than-Significant Level. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
Mitigation Measure: Mitigation Measure T-1 "Transportation Management Plan" has
been adopted to minimize conflicts with local programs, plans, and ordinances addressing
the circulation system.
1 dBA=A-weighted decibels; Leg =equivalent noise level
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 19
Support for Finding: Mitigation Measure T-1 requires implementation of designated
construction traffic routes, damage repair procedures, and traffic control measures to
minimize and mitigate potential impacts to the movement of vehicles, public transit,
bicycles, and/or pedestrians within the project area due to construction traffic and lane
and/or road closures during project construction. In addition, Mitigation Measure T-1
requires coordination with South County Transit and designation of alternative bicycle and
pedestrian routes during project construction to compensate for impacts to transit stops
and bicycle and pedestrian facilities. As a result, impacts would be less than significant
with mitigation incorporated.
Reference: Final EIR, Pages 4.11-11 through 4.11-13
Impact T-4 The project would potentially result in inadequate emergency access
during construction activities. This impact would be potentially
significant.
Finding: Mitigation Measure(s) Feasible and Required, Impact Reduced to Less-
than-Significant Level. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
Mitigation Measure: Mitigation Measure T-1 "Transportation Management Plan" has
been adopted to minimize impacts to emergency access in the project area.
Support for Finding: Mitigation Measure T-1 requires implementation of traffic control
measures and coordination with emergency response providers to minimize impacts to
emergency access in the project area due to lane and/or road closures during project
construction. As a result, implementation of Mitigation Measure T-1 would reduce
construction impacts related to emergency access to a less-than-significant level.
Reference: Final EIR, Pages 4.11-11 through 4.11-13 and 4.11-15
Cumulative Given the proximity of cumulative projects to project components with
known locations, cumulative construction traffic impacts would be
potentially significant. The project's contribution to the cumulative
construction traffic impact would be cumulatively considerable.
Finding: Mitigation Measure(s) Feasible and Required, Impact Reduced to Less-
than-Significant Level. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure T-1 "Transportation Management Plan" has
been adopted to minimize construction traffic conflicts in the project area.
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 20
Support for Finding: Mitigation Measure T-1 requires coordination with other active
construction projects within 0.25 mile of project construction sites to minimize
simultaneous lane and/or road closures, major deliveries, and haul truck trips. Mitigation
Measure T-1 also requires designating alternate detour routes and construction traffic
routes that avoid these projects to the maximum extent practicable. Therefore, with
mitigation incorporated, the project would not have a cumulatively considerable
contribution to the significant cumulative impact related to construction traffic.
Reference: Final EIR, Pages 4.11-11 through 4.11-13 and 4.11-15 through 4.11-16
Findings Associated with Significant Impacts that Cannot Feasibly Be Mitigated to
a Less-than-Significant Level
Land Use
Impact LU-2 The project would potentially result in significant environmental impacts
due to potential conflicts with land use plans, policies, and regulations
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental
effect. This impact would be potentially significant.
Finding: Mitigation Measures Required but Impact Not Reduced to Less than
Significant Level. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into,
the project that substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the
Final EIR, but a significant unavoidable impact remains even after mitigation. Avoidance
of the impact altogether is infeasible taking into account economic, legal, social,
technological and/or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of
employment for highly trained workers.
Mitigation Measure: Mitigation measures have been adopted to avoid and minimize the
project's potential conflicts with land use plans, policies, and regulations adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Mitigation measures include:
CR-2(a) "Worker's Environmental Awareness Program"; CR-2(b) "Archaeological and
Native American Monitoring"; CR-2(c) "Unanticipated Discovery of Cultural Resources";
CR-2(d) "Archaeological Resource Studies"; BIO-3(a) "Jurisdictional Delineation"; BIO-
3(b)"Drainages and Wetlands Impact Mitigation"; BIO-3(c)"Drainages and Wetlands Best
Management Practices During Construction"; HAZ-1(a) "Hazardous Materials
Management and Spill Prevention and Control"; HAZ-1(b) "Preparation of Hazardous
Materials Business Plan"; N-1 "Construction Noise Reduction Measures"; and N-2
"Acoustical Analysis of ATF Complex Operations".
Support for Finding: Mitigation Measures CR-2(a) through CR-2(d) would address
potential impacts to known and unknown archaeological resources through
implementation of a Worker's Environmental Awareness Program, monitoring of ground
disturbance by a qualified archaeologist and Native American monitor, evaluation of any
unanticipated cultural resources, and preparation of archaeological resource studies with
implementation of additional mitigation, as needed, for project components with unknown
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 21
locations. Mitigation Measures BIO-3(a) through BIO-3(c) would avoid, minimize, and
compensate for direct and indirect impacts to state or federally protected wetlands from
development of the project. Mitigation Measures HAZ-1(a) and HAZ-1(b) would address
the potential release of hazardous materials into the environment and would reduce the
potential for adverse impacts to adjacent land uses in the event of spills and/or accidental
releases of hazardous materials.
Mitigation Measures N-1 and N-2 would minimize noise conflicts with adjacent land uses.
Groundwater well construction requires 24-hour drilling activities, and implementation of
Mitigation Measure N-1 would reduce nighttime construction noise impacts to the extent
feasible. However, it is possible that the final well locations may shift within a 50-foot
radius of their current locations during final engineering and/or during installation to
account for subsurface conditions. As a result, the final well locations may be closer to
sensitive receivers than analyzed herein such that the specified mitigation measures
would not sufficiently reduce noise levels. Furthermore, residents in Grover Beach within
100 feet of well locations and residents in unincorporated San Luis Obispo County within
175 feet of well locations may voluntarily choose not to be temporarily relocated during
24-hour well drilling activities and would be exposed to a significant temporary increase
in ambient noise levels in excess of the specified thresholds, which are based on
compliance with the San Luis Obispo County Code and Grover Beach Municipal Code.
As a result, land use impacts related to the 24-hour well drilling activities would be
significant and unavoidable.
Reference: Final EIR, Pages 4.2-47 through 4.2-49, 4.3-19 through 4.3-21, 4.7-9 through
4.7-10, 4.9-5 through 4.9-12, 4.10-24 through 4.10-27, and 4.10-32 through 4.10-34
Noise
Impact N-1 Project construction would generate substantial temporary increases in
ambient noise levels in the vicinity of project components in excess of
local standards during project construction.
Finding: Mitigation Measure Required but Impact Not Reduced to Less than
Significant Level. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into,
the project that substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the
Final EIR, but a significant unavoidable impact remains even after mitigation. Avoidance
of the impact altogether is infeasible taking into account economic, legal, social,
technological and/or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of
employment for highly trained workers.
Mitigation Measure: Mitigation Measures N-1, BIO-1(a), BIO-1(b), BIO-1(e), and BIO-
1(j) have been adopted to minimize construction noise to the extent feasible. Mitigation
measures include: N-1 "Construction Noise Reduction Measures"; BIO-1(a) "California
Red-legged Frog Habitat Avoidance"; BIO-1(b) "California Red-legged Frog Avoidance
and Minimization Measures"; BIO-1(e) "Nesting Bird Avoidance and Minimization
Measures"; and BIO-1 (j) "Endangered/Threatened Species Avoidance and
Minimization".
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 22
Support for Finding: Mitigation Measures BIO-1(a), BIO-1(b), BIO-1(e), and BIO-1(j)
would require avoidance and minimization measures to reduce indirect construction noise
impacts to special status species. Implementation of Mitigation Measure N-1 would entail
the use of several noise reduction measures, including mufflers and temporary sound
barriers. Use of critical grade mufflers would reduce engine noise levels from mobile
construction equipment by at least 10 dBA in comparison to industrial grade mufflers, and
installation of portable sound enclosures for generators and air compressors would
reduce noise levels by at least 10 dBA. Temporary sound barriers would reduce noise
levels from well drilling activities by approximately 9 to 20 dBA, depending on the barrier
height specified for each well location. Implementation of Mitigation Measure N-1 would
reduce daytime construction noise levels during the site preparation, well drilling, and site
restoration phases of construction for MW-1C/1D and MW-2D/2E/2F at the sensitive
receivers nearest to the injection and monitoring wells below the daytime exterior noise
thresholds. Therefore, daytime construction noise impacts related to site preparation, well
drilling, and site restoration for the injection and monitoring wells would be reduced to a
less-than-significant level.
In addition to mufflers, enclosures, and barriers, Mitigation Measure N-1 would require
the closure of campsites within 200 feet of IW-1, IW-2A, IW-2B, IW-3, MW-1A/1B, MW-
2A/2B/2C, and MW-3A/3B as well as the temporary relocation of residents in the yGrover
Beach within 100 feet of construction activity in Grover Beach and residents in
unincorporated San Luis Obispo County within 175 feet of construction activity during 24-
hour well drilling activities to reduce daytime and nighttime noise impacts. Therefore, by
closing the nearest campsites and temporarily relocating nearby residents, the nearest
noise-sensitive receivers would be located at greater distances, which would reduce
noise impacts. As shown in Table 4.10-18 and Table 4.10-19 in Section 4.10, Noise, of
the Final EIR, for the injection wells and monitoring wells, respectively, implementation of
Mitigation Measure N-1 would reduce 24-hour well drilling noise levels at the nearest
noise-sensitive receivers below the daytime and nighttime exterior noise thresholds. In
addition, nighttime exterior noise levels for project components in unincorporated San
Luis Obispo County would be reduced below 55 dBA Leq and 75 dBA Lmax, which would
result in interior noise levels below the thresholds of 35 dBA Leq and 55 dBA Lmax.2
Nighttime exterior noise levels for project components in Grover Beach would be reduced
below 60 dBA Leq, which would result in interior noise levels below the threshold of 40
dBA Leq.
It is possible that the final well locations may shift within a 50-foot radius of their current
locations during final engineering and/or during installation to account for subsurface
conditions. As a result, the final well locations may be closer to sensitive receivers than
analyzed in the Final EIR such that the specified mitigation measures would not
sufficiently reduce noise levels. Furthermore, residents in Grover Beach within 100 feet
of well locations and residents in unincorporated San Luis Obispo County within 175 feet
of well locations may voluntarily choose not to be temporarily relocated during 24-hour
2 Lmax = maximum instantaneous noise level
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 23
well drilling activities and would be exposed to a significant temporary increase in ambient
noise levels in excess of the specified thresholds. Therefore, construction noise impacts
would be minimized but not completely mitigated through implementation of Mitigation
Measure N-1. As a result, construction noise impacts related to the 24-hour well drilling
activities for the injection and monitoring wells would be significant and unavoidable.
Furthermore, implementation of Mitigation Measure N-1 would require preparation of an
acoustical analysis for the new production well once its location is known to determine
the specifications for noise reduction measures that would reduce construction noise
levels for this project component to below the daytime and nighttime thresholds. However,
if new production well is sited within 100 feet of residences such that temporary relocation
of residents would be required to fully mitigate construction noise impacts, residents may
voluntarily choose not to be temporarily relocated during 24-hour well drilling activities
and would be exposed to a significant temporary increase in ambient noise levels in
excess of the specified thresholds. Therefore, construction noise impacts would be
minimized but not eliminated through implementation of Mitigation Measure N-1. As a
result, construction noise impacts related to the production well would be significant and
unavoidable.
Reference: Final EIR, Pages 4.10-17 through 4.10-31
VI. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
In addition to proposing mitigation measures to reduce the impacts associated with the
proposed Central Coast Blue Project, the Certified Final EIR presented several
alternatives to project development. The alternatives presented included the statutorily-
mandated "No Project" alternative, a "No Agricultural Irrigation Pipelines" alternative, an
"ATF Complex at SSLOCSD WWTP" alternative, a "Modified Locations of Injection and
Monitoring Wells" alternative, an "Increased State Water Project Allocation" alternative,
and an "Increased Storage of Lopez Reservoir' alternative. The second alternative was
specifically formulated to provide an alternative that furthered at least some of the project
objectives while lessening (though not necessarily eliminating) one or more of the
Project's significant but mitigable impacts. No Project alternatives that would both meet
Project objectives and avoid the Project's significant and unavoidable construction noise
and land use impacts were identified because hydrogeologic limitations and regulatory
requirements constrain the feasible locations of the infrastructure necessary to meet
Project objectives (i.e., injection, monitoring, and production wells). As such, it is not
feasible to site all injection and monitoring wells at a sufficient distance from residential
and hotel/motel land uses to avoid these impacts while also accounting for optimal
hydrogeologic conditions and compliance with regulatory requirements for groundwater
injection and indirect potable reuse. The Certified Final EIR presents a reasonable range
of alternatives that also allows the City Council to consider (by extrapolation) the
possibility of variations of the alternatives presented.
Each of the alternatives presented in the Certified Final EIR are rejected as infeasible.
The City Council makes this determination after taking into account economic, legal,
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 24
social, technological and/or other considerations, including the provision of employment
opportunities for highly trained workers. The justifications for rejecting the Certified Final
EIR alternatives as infeasible are explained below for each separate alternative.
Alternative 1: No Project Alternative
The "No Project" alternative is mandated by CEQA. It allows for an assessment of what
the environmental consequences are of not moving forward with a proposed Project. The
No Project Alternative assumes that the proposed ATF complex, water distribution
pipelines, injection wells, monitoring wells, new production well, and agricultural irrigation
pipelines are not constructed. The full volume of secondary treated effluent from the
Pismo Beach and SSLOCSD WWTPs continues to be discharged to the ocean via the
outfall pipeline. No seawater intrusion barrier is developed, and no additional recharge of
the SMGB occurs. In addition, no recycled water is provided for agricultural irrigation.
No change in environmental conditions would occur under this alternative because no
development would occur and site conditions would not change. This alternative would
avoid the proposed project's significant and unavoidable construction noise and land use
impacts related to 24-hour well drilling activities and significant but mitigable impacts in
the areas of air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, environmental justice,
GHG emissions, hazards, hydrology and water quality, operational noise, and
transportation. No significant impacts would occur under this alternative, and none of the
mitigation measures recommended for the proposed Project would apply.
Alternative 1 is considered the environmentally superior alternative because it would
eliminate all of the anticipated adverse environmental effects of the Project, including the
Project's significant and unavoidable construction noise and land use impacts related to
24-hour well drilling activities. However, this alternative is rejected as infeasible because
it would not achieve the stated Project objectives and would not result in the Project's
important beneficial impacts of improving water supply reliability; creating a sustainable,
drought-resistant local water supply for southern San Luis Obispo County; providing a
new source of recharge to the SMGB to protect the basin from degradation via seawater
intrusion; and potentially providing a new source of water for agricultural irrigation. The
City Council wishes instead to approve a project that would further longstanding State,
regional, and local objectives for water supply, reliability, and resiliency rather than
maintaining the current water supply portfolio as is.
Alternative 2: No Agricultural Irrigation Pipelines
Similar to the proposed Project, this alternative consists of an ATF complex (including an
advanced purified water storage tank, an equalization tank, and a pump station), water
distribution pipelines, injection wells, monitoring wells, and one new production well.
However, under this alternative, agricultural irrigation pipelines would not be constructed
as part of Phase II of the project, and water produced by the ATF complex would not be
used to irrigate agricultural lands south of Oceano. Instead, either all advanced purified
water produced from the ATF complex under Phases I and II (approximately 3.9 million
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 25
gallons per day) would be used for groundwater injection, or the ATF complex would be
constructed with less capacity than under the proposed Project, thereby processing less
secondary treated effluent from the Pismo Beach and SSLOCSD WWTPs.3 The purpose
of this alternative is to avoid Project impacts associated with the construction of
agricultural irrigation pipelines across Arroyo Grande Creek. Potential impacts associated
with the remaining Project components (i.e., injection wells, monitoring wells, water
distribution pipelines, ATF complex, and new production well) would occur as described
for the proposed Project.
Of the alternatives that would meet Project objectives, Alternative 2 would be the
environmentally superior alternative because it would not include construction of
agricultural irrigation pipelines and would therefore avoid all impacts associated with that
project component, including those related to air quality, biological resources, cultural
resources, energy, GHG emissions, noise, and transportation/traffic. However,
Alternative 2 would not avoid the project's significant and unavoidable construction noise
and land use impacts associated with 24-hour well drilling activities for the injection,
monitoring, and production wells because construction of the injection, monitoring, and
production wells in close proximity to residential land uses would still be required. As a
result, construction noise and land use impacts under Alternative 2 would remain
significant and unavoidable.
Although Alternative 2 would attain the basic Project objectives, it is rejected as infeasible
because the reduction in environmental impacts under this alternative would involve an
undesirable trade-off in that it would preclude the potential for the beneficial use of excess
recycled water for agricultural irrigation purposes. Furthermore, all of the Project's
environmental impacts that would be lessened by Alternative 2 would already be
minimized and reduced to a less-than-significant level for the proposed Project through
implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the Certified Final EIR.
Alternative 3: ATF Complex at SSLOCSD WWTP
Similar to the proposed Project, Alternative 3 consists of an ATF complex (including an
advanced purified water storage tank, an equalization tank, and a pump station), water
distribution pipelines, injection wells, monitoring wells, and one new production well.
Alternative 3 would include injection of advanced purified water into the SMGB to develop
a seawater intrusion barrier. In addition, a portion of the water from the ATF may be used
for agricultural irrigation. However, under Alternative 3, the ATF complex would be
constructed at the existing SSLOCSD WWTP facility at 1600 Aloha Place in Oceano. The
purpose of this alternative is to provide an alternative siting option for the ATF complex.
Alternative 3 would result in generally similar environmental impacts as the proposed
Project because the nature of project components would remain the same and most
project components would be constructed in the same or similar locations. However,
3 The determination of whether to construct an ATF complex with less capacity rather than use all
advanced purified water for groundwater injection would be dependent on if additional groundwater
recharge is necessary for protection and augmentation of groundwater supplies.
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 26
Alternative 3 would result in potentially greater environmental impacts than the proposed
Project related to energy and hydrology and water quality, which would require additional
mitigation measures to reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level. Furthermore,
Alternative 3 would not avoid the Project's significant and unavoidable construction noise
and land use impacts associated with 24-hour well drilling activities for the injection,
monitoring, and production wells because construction of the injection, monitoring, and
production wells in close proximity to residential land uses would still be required. As a
result, construction noise and land use impacts under Alternative 3 would remain
significant and unavoidable.
Although Alternative 3 would attain the basic Project objectives, it is rejected as infeasible
because this alternative would result in similar or greater environmental impacts than the
proposed project and would require additional flood protection design considerations to
account for the location of the ATF complex in a FEMA-designated 100-year Special
Flood Hazard Area.
Alternative 4: Modified Locations of Injection and Monitoring Wells
Similar to the proposed Project, Alternative 4 consists of an ATF complex (including an
advanced purified water storage tank, an equalization tank, and a pump station), water
distribution pipelines, injection wells, monitoring wells, one new production well, and
agricultural irrigation pipelines. Alternative 4 would include injection of advanced purified
water into the SMGB to develop a seawater intrusion barrier. In addition, a portion of the
water from the ATF complex may be used for agricultural irrigation. However, under
Alternative 4, the locations of some injection and monitoring wells and water distribution
pipeline alignments would be modified to avoid recreational impacts to the Coastal Dunes
RV Park and Campground. Under this alternative, IW-1, IW-2A, IW-2B, IW-3, and MW-
2A/2B/2C would be sited outside the Coastal Dunes RV Park and Campground, and the
locations of all remaining monitoring wells would shift to be located in accordance with
regulatory requirements for travel times. To accommodate the modified locations of 1W-
1, IW-2A, IW-2B, and IW-3, minor modifications to the alignments of water distribution
pipelines would be needed to connect these injection wells to the ATF complex. However,
similar to the proposed Project, water distribution pipeline alignments would generally be
located in the Coastal Dunes RV Park and Campground, SR 1, public roadway rights-of-
way, Oceano County Airport, the SSLOCSD WWTP property, and the properties that
contain the injection wells.
Alternative 4 would result in generally similar environmental impacts as the proposed
Project because the nature of the project components would remain the same and project
components would be constructed in the same or similar locations. However, Alternative
4 would result in potentially greater impacts than the proposed Project related to biological
resources and cultural resources due to proximity to potential special status species
habitat associated with Meadow Creek and several known archaeological resources in
the vicinity of Pismo State Beach Corp Yard, which may require additional mitigation
measures to reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level. Furthermore, Alternative 4
would not avoid the Project's significant and unavoidable construction noise and land use
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 27
impacts associated with 24-hour well drilling activities for the injection, monitoring, and
production wells because construction of the injection, monitoring, and production wells
in close proximity to residential land uses would still be required. As a result, construction
noise and land use impacts under Alternative 4 would remain significant and unavoidable.
Although Alternative 4 would attain the basic project objectives, it is rejected as infeasible
because this alternative would result in similar or greater environmental impacts than the
proposed Project.
Alternative 5: Increased State Water Project Allocation
Under this alternative, the Northern Cities Management Area (NCMA) agencies would
seek increased State Water Project (SWP) allocations rather than implementing the
proposed Project. The purpose of this alternative is to address, in part, comments
received during the scoping period requesting analysis of alternative water supply
options. To achieve an equivalent amount of water supply as the proposed Project, an
additional 3,566 acre-feet per year of SWP allocations would need to be secured. The full
volume of secondary treated effluent from the Pismo Beach and SSLOCSD WWTPs
would continue to be discharged to the ocean via the outfall pipeline. No seawater
intrusion barrier would be developed, and no additional recharge of the SMGB would
occur. In addition, no recycled water would be provided for agricultural irrigation. To
secure new or additional entitlements, NCMA agencies would need to negotiate with San
Luis Obispo Flood Control and Water Conservation District, the County of Santa Barbara,
and the Central Coast Water Authority. Furthermore, additional capacity would need to
be available at the Polonio Pass Water Treatment Plant and in the Central Coast Water
Authority Coastal Branch and Lopez pipelines for treatment and delivery of the additional
SWP water.
Of the alternatives that are not the No Project alternative, Alternative 5 is the
environmentally superior alternative, primarily because this alternative does not require
the physical construction of any new infrastructure. This alternative would avoid the
Project's significant and unavoidable construction noise and land use impacts and lessen
the significant but mitigable impacts of the proposed Project on air quality, biological
resources, cultural resources, environmental justice, hazards and hazardous materials,
hydrology and water quality, operational noise, and transportation/traffic. However, this
alternative may increase impacts related to energy and GHG emissions as compared to
the proposed Project because the energy intensity of SWP water is potentially greater
than that of recycled water and use of additional SWP water is not consistent with the
goals of the State's 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan.
In addition, Alternative 5 is rejected as infeasible because it would not achieve the stated
Project objectives and would not result in the Project's important beneficial impacts of
augmenting groundwater supply; creating a sustainable, drought-resistant local water
supply for southern San Luis Obispo County; providing a new source of recharge to the
SMGB to protect the basin from degradation via seawater intrusion; and reducing
wastewater discharges to the ocean. Furthermore, this alternative would be dependent
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 28
on the completion of successful negotiations with San Luis Obispo County Flood Control
and Water Conservation District, Central Coast Water Authority, and the County of Santa
Barbara, which are not guaranteed to result in increased SWP allocations for NCMA
agencies. As discussed later in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City finds
the Project's significant and unavoidable impacts to be acceptable and preferable to
Alternative 5 because Alternative 5 would not achieve the City's stated Project objectives
or local, regional, and State water supply, reliability, and resiliency objectives to the same
extent as the proposed Project.
Alternative 6: Increased Storage of Lopez Reservoir
Under this alternative, the spillway elevation of the Lopez Dam would be raised to
increase the yield of the Lopez Reservoir rather than implementing the proposed Project.
The purpose of this alternative is to address, in part, comments received during the
scoping period requesting analysis of alternative water supply options. Raising the
spillway of Lopez Dam by twelve feet would increase additional long-term yield, which
would correlate to a greater entitlement of the water supply that can be distributed to
NCMA agencies. However, the estimated water supply yield from this alternative would
not be sufficient to provide an equivalent amount of water supply (i.e., 3,566 AFY) as the
proposed Project; therefore, this alternative would need to be implemented in conjunction
with additional water supply alternatives, such as Alternative 5 or water conservation
measures, in order to provide an equivalent amount of water supply as the proposed
Project. The feasibility of this alternative would be limited by precipitation and drought
conditions, which constrain the amount of water captured by the Lopez Reservoir each
year. The existing spillway has not been used since 1998 due to low precipitation and
extended drought conditions;therefore, although this alternative could provide up to 1,005
acre-feet of water, the actual amount would vary based on year-to-year conditions. Under
this alternative, the full volume of secondary treated effluent from the Pismo Beach and
SSLOCSD WWTPs would continue to be discharged to the ocean via the outfall pipeline.
No seawater intrusion barrier would be developed, and no additional recharge of the
SMGB would occur. In addition, no recycled water would be provided for agricultural
irrigation.
Alternative 6 would eliminate the Project's significant and unavoidable construction noise
and land use impacts and also lessen the Project's significant but mitigable impacts
related to environmental justice, hydrology and water quality, and noise. However, this
alternative would potentially result in greater environmental impacts to air quality, cultural
resources, and GHG emissions than the proposed Project due to a greater intensity of
construction activities, the potential submersion and/or destruction of historical and
archaeological resources, and inconsistency with the State's 2017 Climate Change
Scoping Plan.
Alternative 6 is rejected as infeasible because it would not achieve the Project objectives
and would not result in the Project's important beneficial impacts of augmenting
groundwater supply; creating a sustainable, drought-resistant local water supply for
southern San Luis Obispo County; providing a new source of recharge to the SMGB to
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 29
protect the basin from degradation via seawater intrusion; and reducing wastewater
discharges to the ocean. Furthermore, this alternative would present significantly greater
regulatory and permitting challenges associated with modifications to the Lopez Dam as
compared to the proposed Project. As discussed later in the Statement of Overriding
Considerations, the City finds the Project's significant and unavoidable impacts to be
acceptable and preferable to Alternative 6 because Alternative 6 would not achieve the
City's Project objectives or local, regional, and State water supply, reliability, and
resiliency objectives to the same extent as the proposed Project.
VII. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR SIGNIFICANT AND
UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
In approving the Central Coast Blue Project, which is evaluated in the Certified Final EIR,
the City Council makes the following Statement of Overriding Considerations in support
of its findings on the Certified Final EIR. After review of the entire administrative record,
the City Council finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, and other
anticipated benefits of the Project outweigh its significant and unavoidable adverse
environmental impacts and therefore justify the approval of the Project (i.e., the full
execution of the Operating Agreement by the City of Pismo Beach, acting as the Lead
Agency, the City of Arroyo Grande, acting as a Responsible Agency, along with the
Investor, Member, or Partner Agencies, to undertake the Central Coast Blue Project). The
City Council finds that the Project has eliminated or substantially lessened all significant
effects on the environment where feasible, and finds that, on balance, the remaining
significant and unavoidable impacts of the project are acceptable because the benefits of
the project outweigh them. The City Council finds that each of the overriding
considerations set forth below constitutes a separate and independent ground for such a
finding.
Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Effects
The Project will result in significant and unavoidable impacts to noise and land use, as
set forth under Findings Associated with Significant Impacts that Cannot Feasibly Be
Mitigated to a Less-than-Significant Level. The City Council has balanced these
significant unavoidable impacts of the Project against the Project's benefits and, based
on the entire record before it, hereby determines that the identified impacts are
acceptable.
Significant Irreversible Environmental Effects
CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(d) requires a discussion of any significant irreversible
environmental changes that would be caused by the Project should it be implemented.
Such significant irreversible environmental changes may include the following:
• Use of non-renewable resources during the initial and continued phases of the
project that would be irreversible because a large commitment of such resources
makes removal or non-use unlikely.
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 30
• Primary impacts and, particularly secondary impacts (such as highway
improvements that provide access to a previously inaccessible area)that generally
commit future generations to similar uses.
• Irreversible damage which may result from environmental accidents associated
with the project.
As discussed in Section 6, Other CEQA Required Discussions, of the Certified Final EIR,
construction of the Project would require the use of building materials and energy, some
of which are non-renewable resources. Consumption of these resources would occur with
any development projects in the region and are not unique to the Project. Operation of
the Project would irreversibly increase local demand for non-renewable energy resources
such as petroleum and natural gas for vehicle fuels, space heating, and generation of
electricity. Increasingly efficient building fixtures and automobile engines as well as
implementation of the State Renewable Portfolio Standard are expected to offset the
demand to some degree. It is not anticipated that the Project would significantly affect
local or regional energy supplies. Section 4.4, Energy, of the Certified Final EIR includes
a full analysis of potential impacts related to energy resources by construction and
operation of the proposed project.
The Project would incrementally contribute local traffic, increase ambient noise levels,
and generate regional air pollutant and GHG emissions throughout the duration of Project
operation. These topics are discussed in Section 4.1, Air Quality, Section 4.6,
Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Section 4.10, Noise, and Section 4.11,
Transportation/Traffic, of the Certified Final EIR. However, these impacts would be less
than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measures GHG-2 and N-2.
As discussed in Section 4.6, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of the Certified Final EIR,
the Project may result in reasonably foreseeable accidental spills and/or releases of
hazardous materials at the ATF complex location, and implementation of Mitigation
Measure HAZ-1(b) would be required to reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level.
However, given the limited quantities and nature of hazardous materials to be used during
Project operation, these accidental spills and/or releases would not result in irreversible
environmental damage.
The impacts described above are further articulated under Findings Associated with
Significant, Potentially Significant, and Cumulative Significant Impacts that Can Be
Mitigated to a Less-than-Significant Level and Findings Associated with Significant
Impacts that Cannot Feasibly Be Mitigated to a Less-than-Significant Level. The City
Council has balanced these significant but mitigable irreversible impacts of the Project
against the Project's benefits and, based on the entire record before it, hereby determines
that the identified impacts are acceptable.
Specific Findings
Project Benefits Outweigh Unavoidable Impacts
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 31
The City Council hereby finds that the remaining significant and unavoidable impacts of
the Project are acceptable in light of the following substantial benefits of the Project, which
constitute the specific economic, legal, social, technological and other considerations that
justify the approval of the Project.
1. Improves Local Water Supply Reliability and Resiliency for NCMA Agencies
The Project is a water infrastructure project that would significantly improve water
supply reliability; create a sustainable, drought-resistant local water supply for
southern San Luis Obispo County; and provide a new source of recharge to the
SMGB to protect the basin from degradation via seawater intrusion.
Implementation of the Project would allow the NCMA agencies to increase
groundwater pumping levels (within their respective pumping limitations
established in the SMGB Adjudication Judgment) as compared to recent years
during which they have voluntarily decreased groundwater pumping below their
respective allocations in response to the 2009 groundwater monitoring event that
indicated incipient seawater intrusion.4 Because the Project would develop a
seawater intrusion barrier, the Project would improve local water supply reliability
and resiliency by protecting the existing groundwater supply for continued use by
NCMA agencies as a reliable source of potable water. In doing so, the Project
would have a beneficial impact on groundwater levels and supplies and would
further the City's goal to develop a reliable source of clean water that is available
and protected at all times (Principle P-5 of the Conservation/Open Space Element
of the General Plan). The Project would also further the goals of the State's 2017
Climate Change Scoping Plan to 1) develop more reliable water supplies through
a more resilient, diversified, sustainably managed water sources system and 2)
reuse water more efficiently through water recycling and reuse to help meet future
water demands and adapt to climate change.5
2. Supports Planned Population Growth
The Urban Water Management Plans for the Cities of Pismo Beach, Grover Beach,
and Arroyo Grande all anticipate full use of each city's groundwater allocation in
calculating the supply sources available to meet projected water demand in normal
year, single dry year, and multiple dry year scenarios. However, in recent years,
the NCMA agencies have voluntarily decreased groundwater pumping below their
respective allocations in response to the 2009 groundwater monitoring event that
indicated incipient seawater intrusion.6 As discussed above, implementation of the
Project would allow the NCMA agencies to increase groundwater pumping levels
(within their respective pumping limitations established in the SMGB Adjudication
Judgment). As a result, the Project would support NCMA agencies in meeting
4 GSI Water Solutions. 2020. Northern Cities Management Area 2019 Annual Monitoring Report. April 23,
2020.Available at: https://oceanocsd.orq/wp-contenUuploads/bsk-pdf-manager/2020/05/NCMA-2019-
Annual-Report Final.pdf
5 California Air Resources Board. 2017. California's 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. November 2017.
Available at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic//cc/scopingplan/scoping plan 2017.pdf
6 GSI Water Solutions. 2020. Northern Cities Management Area 2019 Annual Monitoring Report. April 23,
2020.
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 32
demand generated by the existing population, activities, and land uses in the
Project area and would be consistent with water planning policies and projections
for the NCMA, particularly in light of California's ongoing challenges with cyclical
drought conditions. The Project would also be consistent with the City's policies to
investigate and pursue additional alternative water sources to increase existing
supply and support development envisioned by the General Plan (Policies F-36
and F-41 of the Facilities Element of the General Plan).
3. Reduces Wastewater Discharges to the Pacific Ocean
Under existing conditions, the City of Pismo Beach and SSLOCSD WWTPs
discharge all secondary treated effluent to the Pacific Ocean via the existing ocean
outfall pipeline. Under the Project, this secondary treated effluent would be
conveyed to the ATF complex, where it would be further treated for beneficial reuse
via indirect potable reuse through groundwater injection as well as potentially
agricultural irrigation. Although approximately 10 to 30 percent of water treated by
the ATF complex would be discharged via the existing ocean outfall as reverse
osmosis concentrate, the Project would beneficially reuse approximately 70 to 90
percent of the secondary treated effluent from the WWTPs, which would greatly
reduce the amount of secondary treated effluent discharged to the ocean. As such,
the Project would beneficially utilize locally-produced secondary treated effluent,
which would otherwise be lost to the ocean, to augment local potable water
supplies.
The Project would include developing a reliable source of clean water that is
available and protected at all times. In addition, the Project would advance the
goals of the State Water Resources Control Board's Water Quality Control Policy
for Recycled Water to 1) increase the use of recycled water to 2.5 million acre-feet
per year by 2030; 2) reuse all dry weather direct discharges of treated wastewater
to enclosed bays, estuaries and coastal lagoons, and ocean waters that can be
viably put to a beneficial use;7 and 3) maximize the use of recycled water in areas
where groundwater supplies are in a state of overdraft.8
4. Project is Funded by Grants and Low Interest Financing
The current cost estimate for Phase 1 of the Project is $43.5 million. The Project
has applied for and/or received both state and federal grant funds and could
receive approximately$35.4 million in grant funding. As of spring 2020, the Project
has received $2 million from the State's Proposition 1 Groundwater Grant Program
and $796,094 from the United States Bureau of Reclamation's WaterSMART
program. The Project also plans to apply for the next round of funding through both
programs. In total, the Project could receive grants for up to 50 percent of the
For the purpose of this goal, treated wastewater does not include discharges necessary to maintain
beneficial uses and brine discharges from recycled water facilities or desalination facilities (State Water
Resources Control Board 2018).
8 State Water Resources Control Board. 2018. Water Quality Control Policy for Recycled Water.
December 11, 2018. Available at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water issues/programs/water recvcl inq policy/policy.html
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 33
implementation costs through the Prop 1 Groundwater Grant Program
(approximately $21,730,950 based on current cost estimates) and 25 percent of
total program costs through the WaterSMART program (approximately
$10,865,475 based on current cost estimates). The remaining $8,069,381 would
be eligible for low interest financing through the State Water Resources Control
Board Clean Water State Revolving Fund.
Based on economic analysis done for the Project's Title XVI WaterSMART
application, the Project benefits include $142 million of benefits to the local
agricultural and tourism industries plus the numerous qualitative benefits to the
local communities discussed earlier, including improved water supply reliability,
reduced reliance on imported water, improved groundwater quality, reduced
wastewater discharges to the Pacific Ocean, and efficient utilization of local water
resources.
Balance of Competing Goals
The City Council hereby finds it is imperative to balance competing goals in approving the
Project and the environmental documentation of the Project. Not every environmental
concern has been fully satisfied because of the need to satisfy competing concerns to a
certain extent. The City Council has chosen to accept certain environmental impacts
because of the many benefits inherent in the attainment of City, regional, and State goals
as described above, as well as the implementation of required mitigation measures,would
balance the potential for environmental impacts to occur.
The City Council hereby finds and determines that the Project and the supporting
environmental documentation provide for a positive balance of the competing goals and
that the economic, social and other benefits to be obtained by the Project outweigh any
remaining environmental and related potential detriment of the Project.
Overriding Considerations
Based upon the objectives identified for the Project, the City Council has determined that
the Project should be approved and that any remaining unmitigated environmental
impacts attributable to the Project are outweighed by the specific economic, social and
other overriding considerations as described above.
The City Council has determined that any environmental detriment caused by the Project
has been minimized to the extent feasible through mitigation measures identified herein,
and, where not feasible, has been outweighed and counterbalanced by the significant
social benefits to be generated to the City, its residents, and the region.
VIII. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
The City Council recognizes that any approval of the Project would require concurrent
approval of a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), which ensures
performance of identified mitigation measures. Such an MMRP would identify the entity
responsible for monitoring and implementation, and the timing of such activities. The City
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 34
will use the MMRP to track compliance with proposed Project mitigation measures. The
MMRP will remain available for public review during the compliance period. The MMRP
is included as part of the Certified Final EIR, and is hereby incorporated by reference,
and included as Exhibit B to this Resolution.
IX. ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
The environmental analysis provided in the Draft EIR, Certified Final EIR, and the findings
provided herein are based on and are supported by the following documents, materials,
and other evidence, which constitute the Administrative Record for the Central Coast Blue
Project:
1. The December 2019 NOP, April 2020 NOP, comments received on the NOPs, and
all other public notices issued by the City in relation to the Certified Final EIR (i.e.,
Notice of Availability);
2. All associated references, appendices, and technical materials cited in the Draft
EIR;
3. The December 2020 Final EIR, including comment letters, oral testimony, and
technical materials cited in the document;
4. Minutes, transcripts, and recordings of the discussions regarding the project and
hearings held by the City of Pismo Beach for the project; and
5. Staff reports associated with City Council meetings on the project and written and
oral testimony submitted at these meetings.
X. LOCATION AND CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS
The City Clerk is the custodian of the Administrative Record. Due to the closure of City
Hall as a result of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, the documents and materials that
constitute the administrative record are available for review online at
https://centralcoastblue.com/recent-updates/.
XI. FILING NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
The City Council hereby directs the City Clerk to file a Notice of Determination regarding
the approval of the Project within five business days of adoption of this Resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 5066
PAGE 35
EXHIBIT B
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
CEQA requires that a reporting or monitoring program be adopted for the conditions of project
approval that are necessary to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment (Public
Resources Code 21081.6).This mitigation monitoring and reporting program is intended to track and
ensure compliance with adopted mitigation measures during the project implementation phase. For
each mitigation measure recommended in the Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR),
specifications are made herein that identify the action required,the monitoring that must occur,and
the agency or department responsible for oversight.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program A-1
City of Arroyo Grande
Central Coast Blue Project
Mitigation Measure/ Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
Air Quality
y, rfr 3.
Q'`� .rJtBt ldYa"f it jo>'If IL lffii11 5`1 IStn1 t } a x' `t 7 a#a
The following mitigation measures
1 Include standard 1. Prior to start
of 1. Oncefor each City of Pismo
shall be implemented duringPhaes I and II of measures construction construction setof Beach
construction activities to reduce construction- contractor specifications contractor
related emissions of nitrogen oxides and specifications
reactive organic gases: 2. Field verify compliance with 2. During all 2. Periodically
• Maintain all construction equipment in standard control measures construction
proper tune according to manufacturer's activities
specifications;
• Fuel all off-road and portable diesel-
powered equipment with California Air
Resources Board (CARB)-certified motor
vehicle diesel fuel (non-taxed version
suitable for use off-road);
• Use diesel construction equipment
meeting the CARB's Tier 2 certified engines
or cleaner off-road heavy-duty diesel
engines, and comply with the State Off-
Road Regulation;
• Use on-road heavy-duty trucks that meet
the CARB's 2007 or cleaner certification
standard for on-road heavy-duty diesel
engines, and comply with the State On-
Road Regulation;
• Construction or trucking companies with
fleets that do not have engines in their
fleet that meet the engine standards
identified in the above two measures(e.g.,
captive or NOX exempt area fleets)may be
eligible by proving alternative compliance;
• All on-and off-road diesel equipment shall
not idle for more than five minutes in
accordance with California Code of
Regulations Title 13, Section 2485 and
Section 2449(d)(3) of the CARB's In-Use
Off-Road Diesel Regulation. Signs shall be
posted in the designated queuing areas
A-2
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure/ Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval ' . Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
and on job sites to remind drivers and
operators of the five-minute idling limit;
" Electric-powered equipment shall be used
when feasible;
^ Gasoline-powered equipment shall be
substituted in place of diesel-powered
equipment,where feasible;and
o Alternatively fueled construction
equipment shall be used on site where
feasible, such as compressed natural gas,
liquefied natural gas, propane, or
biodiesel.
AQ-2(b):Best Available Control'Technology fet Construction Equipe;tent "
The following Best Available Control 1. Include requirements for Best 1. Prior to the start 1. Once for each City of Pismo
Technology for diesel-fueled construction Available Control Tecnology in of construction of set of Beach
equipment shall be implemented during construction contractor each project contractor
Phases I and II of construction activities to specifications component specifications
reduce construction-related emissions of 2Field verify use x[Best Available Z. During all Z. Periodically
nitrogen oxides and reactive organic gases: Control Technology construction
" All equipment used during the building activities
construction phase of the ATF complex
shall be equipped with minimum Tier 3
certified engines,and air compressors,drill
rigs, and generators used during
injection/monitoring/production well
construction shall be equipped with
minimum Tier 4 Final certified engines;
• Repower older off-road equipment with
Tier 3 and Tier 4 engines where feasible;
• Utilize heavy-duty trucks meeting the
standards of the CARB's Truck and Bus
Regulation for on-road heavy-duty diesel
engines,which requires nearly all trucks to
have 2010 or newer model year engines;
and
• Install California Verified Diesel Emission
Control Strategies on construction
equipment. Examples include, but are not
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program A-3
City of Arroyo Grande
Central Coast Blue Project
Mitigation Measure/ Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Y Agency Initial Date Comments
limited to,diesel particulate filter systems,
Purifilter Engine Control Systems, diesel
retrofit systems,and Sootfilter systems.
Biological Resources
r}„
ita
' ..` vo a' ' X 5" k ''
81O�1(�)c California Rid Irigg+ett Pigg iiait�Yvdi�ar�te, ,.
J,
x
Injection well, monitoring well and water 1. Review engineering plans for 1. Prior to 1. Once for each City of Pismo
distribution pipeline locations and associated compliance construction of project Beach
construction work areas (including staging, each project component
access,and laydown)shall be sited outside of component
native vegetation communities,such as arroyo 2. Include avoidance 2. Prior to 2. Once for each
willow riparian.Prior to construction,the limits requirements in construction construction of set of
of construction shall be clearly demarcated by contractor specifications each project contractor
bright orange fencing. Areas outside of the component specifications
limits of construction shall be considered 3. Field verification of fencing 3. Prior to 3. Once for
environmentally sensitive, and access and installation construction of each project
construction shall be restricted. each project component
component
810-1(b)California ted-legged Frog'Avoidance a '
fid iViinimizatioit asr�res w
The following avoidance and minimization 1. Retain a qualified biologist to 1. Within 48 hours 1. Once for City of* Pismo
measures shall be implemented during project conduct a pre-construction prior to construction Beach
construction and maintenance activities survey for IW-5A, IW-SB, and construction and of each
requiring ground disturbance at the IW-5A,IW- MW-5A/5B/SC and water ground- project
5B, and MW-5A/5B/5C locations and water distribution pipeline locations disturbing component
distribution pipeline locations within 50 feet of within 50 feet of Arroyo Grande maintenance and once for
Arroyo Grande Creek: Creek and review survey results activities for IW- each instance
• A qualified biologist shall survey the 5A,IW-5B,and of ground-
project site no more than 48 hours before MW-SA/5B/5C disturbing
the start of construction and ground- and water maintenance
disturbing maintenance activities, distribution activity
including but not limited to grading, pipeline locations
excavation, and trenching. If a California within 50 feet of
red-legged frog(CRLF)is found within the Arroyo Grande
project footprint,no work shall begin,and Creek
consultation with the United States Fish 2. Retain a qualified biologist to 2. During ground- 2. Daily prior to
and Wildlife Service (USFWS) shall be conduct daily surveys for 1W- disturbing the start of
initiated. Work shall not begin until SA, IW-5B, and MW-SA/5B/5C construction and ground-
authorization is provided by the USFWS to and water distribution pipeline maintenance disturbing
continue or applicable measures from a locations within 50 feet of activities for IW- construction
A-4
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure/ Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
Biological Opinion/Incidental Take Permit Arroyo Grande Creek and 5A,IW-5B,and and
issued by the USFWS for the project are review survey results MW-5A/58/5C maintenance
successfully implemented. and water activities
■ For construction activities occurring during distribution
the wet season(October 15 and April 15), pipeline locations
daily surveys shall be conducted by a within 50 feet of
qualified biologist prior to the start of Arroyo Grande
construction activities. If a CRLF is found Creek during the
within the project footprint, work shall wet season
halt,and consultation with the USFWS shall (October 15 to
be initiated. Work shall not re-commence April 15)
until authorization is provided by the 3. Consult with USFWS,as needed 3. As needed 3. As needed
USFWS to continue or applicable measures 4. Retain a qualified biologist to 4. Prior to the start 4. Once for each
from a Biological Opinion/Incidental Take conduct a training session on of construction project
Permit issued by the USFWS for the project CRLF for IW-SA, IW-5B, and and ground- component
are successfully implemented. MW-SA/SB/5C and water disturbing
■ Before any construction or ground- distribution pipeline locations maintenance
disturbing maintenance activities begin, a within 50 feet of Arroyo Grande activities for IW-
biologist shall conduct a training session Creek 5A,IW-5B,and
for all construction personnel. At a MW-5A/SB/5C
minimum, the training shall include a and water
description of CRLF and its habitat, the distribution
specific measures that are being pipeline locations
implemented to avoid dispersing CRLF,and within 50 feet of
the boundaries within which the project Arroyo Grande
may be accomplished. Brochures, books, Creek
and briefings may be used in the training 5. Include avoidance and 5. Prior to the start 5. Once for each
session,provided that a qualified person is minimization measures in of ground- set of
on hand to answer any questions. construction contractor disturbing contractor
• All vehicles and equipment shall be in good specifications for IW-5A,IW-5B, construction and specifications
working condition and free of leaks.A spill and MW-5A/5B/5C and water maintenance
prevention plan shall be established in the distribution pipeline locations activities for IW-
event of a leak or spill. within 50 feet of Arroyo Grande 5A,IW-5B,and
■ Work shall be restricted to daylight hours Creek, as applicable MW-5A/5B/5C
to the extent feasible. If construction and water
activities occur at night, a biological distribution
monitor shall be present.If a CRLF is found pipeline locations
within the project footprint during active within 50 feet of
construction, all work shall stop, and the Arroyo Grande
Creek
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program A-5
City of Arroyo Grande
Central Coast Blue Project
Mitigation Measure/ Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
USFWS shall be notified. Work shall not 6. Field verify compliance with 6. During ground- 6. Periodically
recommence until authorization is avoidance and minimization disturbing
provided by the USFWS to continue or measures construction and
applicable measures from a Biological maintenance
Opinion and Incidental Take Statement or activities for IW-
other authorization issued by the USFWS 5A,IW-5B,and
for the project are successfully MW-5A/5B/5C
implemented. and water
• Water shall not be impounded in a manner distribution
that may attract CRLF. pipeline locations
• All excavations or trenches shall be within 50 feet of
covered when not actively under Arroyo Grande
construction or shall contain earthen Creek
ramps sufficient for CRLF to escape to 7. Retain a biological monitor for 7. During 7. Daily
avoid entrapment of CRLF or other wildlife monitoring for IW-5A, IW-5B, construction and
species. and MW-5A/5B/5C and water ground-
■ Herbicides shall not be used on site during distribution pipeline locations disturbing
construction. within 50 feet of Arroyo Grande maintenance
Creek activities for IW-
■ No pets shall be permitted on site. 5A,IW-5B,and
• A biological monitor shall be present MW-SA/5B/5C
during all initial ground-disturbing
and water
activities for construction and distribution
maintenance activities, including but not pipeline locations
limited to grading, excavation, and within 50 feet of
trenching. If a CRLF is found within the Arroyo Grande
project footprint during active Creek
construction, all work shall stop, and the
USFWS shall be notified. Work shall not
recommence until authorization is
provided by the USFWS to continue or
applicable measures from a Biological
Opinion and Incidental Take Statement or
other authorization issued by the USFWS
for the project are successfully
implemented.
• All construction and ground-disturbing
maintenance activities (e.g., grading,
excavation, and trenching) conducted at
injection well, monitoring well,and water
A-6
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure/ Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
distribution pipeline locations within 50
feet of Arroyo Grande Creek shall be
conducted during dry conditions(i.e.,days
with less than 0.1 inch of predicted
rainfall), outside of the wet season
(October 15 through April 30), unless
authorization is provided by the USFWS or
a Biological Opinion/Incidental Take
Statement issued by the USFWS for the
project authorizes work during such
conditions.
BIO-1(c):Southwestern Pond Turde Avoidaniet;and.Minimiiatton Measures
The following avoidance and minimization 1. Retain a qualified biologist to 1. Within 48 hours 1. Once for each City of Pismo
measures shall be implemented during project conduct a pre-construction prior to initial instance of Beach
construction and maintenance activities survey and review survey ground- ground-
requiring ground disturbance at the IW-5A,IW- results disturbing disturbing
5B, and MW-5A/5B/5C locations and water construction and activities for
distribution pipeline locations within 50 feet of maintenance each project
Arroyo Grande Creek: activities for IW- component
• A qualified biologist shall conduct a visual 5A,IW-5B,and
survey of work areas within 50 feet of MW-5A/5B/SC
Arroyo Grande Creek within 48 hours of and water
initial ground-disturbing activities, distribution
including but not limited to grading, pipeline locations
excavation,and trenching,associated with within 50 feet of
construction of injection wells.The survey Arroyo Grande
area shall include the proposed Creek
disturbance area plus a 100-foot buffer. 2. Retain a qualified biologist to 2. During ground- 2. Daily during
Prior to the survey,suitable receptor sites conduct daily surveys, relocate disturbing ground-
shall be identified within Arroyo Grande turtles as needed,and flag egg construction and disturbing
Creek. A biologist authorized to relocate clutches as needed and review maintenance construction
turtles shall be present for activities that survey results activities for IW- and
require the removal of riparian habitat to SA,IW-SB,and maintenance
monitor for turtles.If a turtle is observed in MW-5A/5B/5C activities
the work area,the biologist shall relocate it and water
out of the work area to the respective distribution
receptor site. pipeline locations
• For the duration of project construction within 50 feet of
activities at the IW-5A, IW-5B, and MW-
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program A-7
City of Arroyo Grande
Central Coast Blue Project
Mitigation Measure! Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
s
5A/513/5C locations and water distribution Arroyo Grande
pipeline locations within 50 feet of Arroyo Creek
Grande Creek, daily surveys shall be 3. Include avoidance and 3. Prior to the start 3. Once for each
conducted by a qualified biologist prior to minimization measures in of ground- set of
the start of construction activities. If a construction contractor disturbing contractor
turtle is observed in the work area, a specifications for IW-5A,IW-5B, construction and specifications
biologist authorized to relocate turtles and MW-5A/5B/5C and water maintenance
shall relocate it out of the work area to the distribution pipeline locations activities for IW-
respective receptor site. within 50 feet of Arroyo Grande 5A,IW-5B,and
• All excavations or trenches shall be Creek, as applicable MW-5A/5B/5C
covered when not actively under and water
construction or shall contain earthen distribution
ramps sufficient for southwestern pond pipeline locations
turtle to escape to avoid entrapment of within 50 feet of
southwestern pond turtle or other wildlife Arroyo Grande
species. Creek
• In the event that a southwestern pond 4. Field verify compliance with 4. During ground- 4. Periodically
turtle egg clutch is discovered during pre- avoidance and minimization disturbing
construction surveys,the location shall be measures construction and
surrounded with high visibility fencing maintenance
under the guidance of a qualified biologist. activities for IW-
The nest shall be avoided by construction 5A,IW-5B,and
activities until a qualified biologist MW-5A/5B/SC
determines that the clutch has hatched. and water
The California Department of Fish and distribution
Wildlife(CDFW)shall also be contacted to pipeline locations
provide additional guidance in the event within 50 feet of
that a southwestern pond turtle nest is Arroyo Grande
discovered. If, during construction, a Creek
southwestern pond turtle nest is
discovered, construction shall cease
immediately upon the discovery, and
CDFW shall be notified.
• To the extent feasible, construction
activities shall be scheduled outside of the
typical nesting season for southwestern
pond turtle,which is April through August
(Stebbins 2003).
A-8
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure/ Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
BlO-1(d):Monarch Butterfly Avoidance
The ATF complex and associated construction 1. Retain a qualified biologist to 1. Prior to the start 1. Once City of Pismo
work areas shall be sited outside of monarch conduct a monarch butterfly of construction of Beach
butterfly overwintering habitat. Prior to survey and review survey the ATF complex
construction and during the overwintering results
period for monarchs in the region (i.e., 2. Review site plans for 2. Prior to issuance
October through February), a survey shall be compliance with setback of a building 2 Once
conducted at the eucalyptus grove adjacent to requirements, as applicable permit for the
the ATF complex to determine if monarch ATF complex,as
butterflies are utilizing the habitat for needed
overwintering. If monarch butterflies are 3. Include avoidance measures in 3. Prior to the start
confirmed to overwinter within the eucalyptus construction contractor of construction of 3. Once
grove,the grove shall be considered ESHA,and specifications for the ATF the ATF complex,
design of the ATF complex shall be modified to complex,as applicable as needed
incorporate the appropriate setbacks included 4. Field verify compliance with 4. During 4. Periodically
in the City of Grover Beach LCP and GBMC.The avoidance measures,as needed construction of
limits of construction shall be clearly
demarcated by bright orange fencing in order the ATF complex,
as needed
to avoid work within designated setback areas.
Areas outside of the limits of construction shall
be considered environmentally sensitive, and
access and construction shall be restricted. If
butterflies are present, all construction
adjacent to overwintering habitat shall be
conducted outside the overwintering season
(i.e., October to February), if feasible.
However, if construction must occur during
this time period, construction may only
commence if a City-approved monarch
butterfly expert determines that the
construction activities would not adversely
impact foraging, roosting, or other behaviors
of the species.
BIO 1(e):Nesting Bird Avoidance and Minimization Measures
The following avoidance and minimization 1. Retain a qualified biologist to 1. Within 14 days 1. Once for each City of Pismo
measures shall be implemented during project conduct a preconstruction prior to initial project Beach
construction activities: nesting bird survey and review disturbances in component
survey results the construction
work area for
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program A-9
City of Arroyo Grande
Central Coast Blue Project
Mitigation Measure/ Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
■ Initial site disturbance shall occur outside each project
the general avian nesting season(February component
1 through August 31),if feasible. 2. Field verify compliance with 2. During initial site 2. Weekly,as
• If initial site disturbance occurs in a work any avoidance requirements,as disturbance needed
area within the general avian nesting needed activities,as
season indicated above, a qualified needed,until
biologist shall conduct a preconstruction nests are inactive
nesting bird survey no more than 14 days
prior to initial disturbances in the work
area.The survey shall include the entire
area of disturbance area plus a 50-foot
buffer (relevant to non-raptor species)
and 300-foot buffer(relevant to raptors)
around the site. If active nests are
located, all construction work should be
conducted outside a buffer zone from the
nest to be determined by the qualified
biologist. The buffer should be a
minimum of 50 feet for non-raptor bird
species and at least 300 feet for raptor
species. Larger buffers may be required
and/or smaller buffers may be
established depending upon the species,
status of the nest, and construction
activities occurring in the vicinity of the
nest.The buffer area(s)should be closed
to all construction personnel and
equipment until the adults and young are
no longer reliant on the nest site. A
qualified biologist should confirm that
breeding/nesting is completed and young
have fledged the nest prior to removal of
the buffer. If a white-tailed kite nest is
detected during the nesting bird survey
no work shall begin until the CDFW is
consulted to confirm that
implementation of the project and
avoidance buffers are sufficient to avoid
"take".
A-10
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure/ Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
■ If construction activities in a given work
area cease for more than 14 days,
additional surveys shall be conducted for
the work area. If active nests are located,
the aforementioned buffer zone measures
shall be implemented.
B10-1(f):Biological Resources Assessment
Once locations are determined for the project 1. Retain a qualified biologist to 1. Upon selection of 1. Once for each City of Pismo
components with unknown locations(i.e.,new conduct a BRA or similar type locations of new project Beach
production well and agricultural irrigation study and review the study production well component
pipelines),a qualified biologist shall conduct a and agricultural
biological resources assessment (BRA) or irrigation
similar type of study to document the existing pipelines
biological resources within the project 2. Conduct further technical 2. Upon completion 2. Once for each
footprint of these components plus a buffer studies and/or consultations of the BRA project
and to determine the potential impacts to and incorporate Mitigation component
those resources. The BRA shall evaluate the Measures BIO-1(g) through
potential for impacts to all biological resources BIO-1(k) in the design and
including, but not limited to special status construction of the new
species, nesting birds, wildlife movement, production well and
sensitive plant communities/critical habitat, agricultural irrigation pipelines,
potentially jurisdictional features, and other as applicable
resources judged to be sensitive by local,state,
and/or federal agencies.Pending the results of
the BRA, design alterations,further technical
studies (i.e. protocol surveys) and/or
consultations with the USFWS, CDFW and/or
other local,state,and federal agencies may be
required. Mitigation Measures BIO-1(g)
through BIO-1(k)shall be incorporated,only as
applicable, into the BRA for projects where
specific resources are present or may be
present and impacted by the project.Note that
specific surveys described in the mitigation
measures below may be completed as part of
the BRA where suitable habitat is present.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program A-11
City of Arroyo Grande
Central Coast Blue Project
Mitigation Measure) Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
BI0- jg)e Speelat Status'ptarit Spect
p project-specific BRA Retain a qualified biologist to Seasonally timed Once for
If completion of the each City of Pismo
(Mitigation Measure BIO-1[f])determines that conduct special status plant within two years project component Beach
special status plant species may occur on site, surveys and review results prior to vegetation
surveys for special status plants shall be removal,grubbing,or
completed prior to any vegetation removal, other construction
grubbing, or other construction activity activity associated
(including staging and mobilization). The with the new
surveys shall be floristic in nature and shall be production well and
seasonally timed to coincide with the target agricultural irrigation
species identified in the project-specific BRA. pipelines
All plant surveys shall be conducted by a
qualified biologist approved by the City no
more than two years before initial ground
disturbance. All special status plant species
identified on site shall be mapped onto a site-
specific aerial photograph and topographic
map.Surveys shall be conducted in accordance
with the most current protocols established by
the CDFW,USFWS,and the local jurisdictions if
said protocols exist. A report of the survey
results shall be submitted to the City for review
and approval.
81O-101):Special Status Plant Species Avoidance,Mirilat zation Mitigation
If federally listed,State listed or California Rare 1. Re-design plans for new 1. Prior to final 1. Once for each City of Pismo
Plant Rank 1B species are found during special production well and/or design for new project Beach
status plant surveys (pursuant to Mitigation agricultural irrigation pipelines production well component
Measure BIO-1[f]),then the project shall be re- to avoid impacts to special and/or
designed to avoid impacting these plant status plant species, as agricultural
species,if feasible.Rare plant occurrences that necessary and feasible irrigation
are not within the immediate disturbance pipelines that
footprint but are located within 50 feet of result in impacts
disturbance limits shall have bright orange to special status
protective fencing installed at least 30 feet plant species
beyond their extent, or other distance as
approved by a qualified biologist, to protect
them from harm.If avoidance of state listed or 2. Consult with CDFW and/or 2. Prior to final 2. Once for each
federally listed plants species is not feasible, USFWS,as necessary design for new project
impacts shall be fully offset through production well component
A-12
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure/ Compliance Verification
Monitoring Responsible
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
implementation of a restoration plan that and/or
results in no net loss(see Mitigation Measure agricultural
BIO-1(i]).Prior to the start of construction and irrigation
maintenance activities that result in impacts to pipelines that
listed plants, consultation with CDFW and/or result in impacts
USFWS and acquisition of any required permits to special status
and/or authorizations shall also be completed. plant species
13104(i):Restoration Plan for Special Status Plant Species
If avoidance of state listed, federally listed, 1. Retain a qualified 1. Prior to start of 1. Once for each City of Pismo
and/or non-listed CRPR 1B.1 species is not biologist/restoration ecologist construction project Beach
feasible, all impacts shall be mitigated at a to prepare an HMMP activities for new component
minimum ratio of 2:1 (number of production well
acres/individuals restored to number of and/or
acres/individuals impacted)for each species as agricultural
a component of habitat restoration. The irrigation
restoration plan shall include, at a minimum, pipelines that
the following components: would impact
■ Description of the project/impact site(i.e., special status
location, responsible parties, areas to be plant species
impacted by habitat type) 2. Review HMMP for compliance 2. Prior to start of 2. Once for each
• Goal(s) of the compensatory mitigation with mitigation requirements construction project
project(type[s]and area[s]of habitat to be and approve HMMP activities for new component
established, restored, enhanced, and/or production well
preserved;specific functions and values of and/or
habitat type[s]to be established,restored, agricultural
enhanced,and/or preserved) irrigation
• Description of the proposed compensatory pipelines that
mitigation site (location and size, would impact
ownership status, existing functions and special status
values) plant species
• Implementation plan for the compensatory 3. Review quarterly and annual 3. After completion 3. Quarterly for
mitigation site (rationale for expecting monitoring reports of restoration the first year of
installation monitoring and
implementation success, responsible annually for
parties, schedule, site preparation,
planting plan[including species to be used, the next four
container sizes,seeding rates,etc.]) years
• Maintenance activities during the
monitoring period,including weed removal
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program A-13
City of Arroyo Grande
Central Coast Blue Project
Mitigation Measure/ Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
and irrigation as appropriate (activities,
responsible parties,schedule)
• Monitoring plan for the compensatory
mitigation site, including no less than
quarterly monitoring for the first year,
along with performance standards,target
functions and values,target acreages to be
established, restored, enhanced, and/or
preserved,and annual monitoring reports
for a minimum of five years at which time
the City shall demonstrate that
performance standards/success criteria
have been met
• Success criteria shall be,at a minimum,at
least 80 percent survival of container
plants and 70 percent absolute cover by
vegetation type. Absolute cover will be
determined in comparison to a reference
plot for native species
• An adaptive management program and
remedial measures to address any
shortcomings in meeting success criteria
• Notification of completion of
compensatory mitigation
• Contingency measures (e.g., initiating
procedures, alternative locations for
contingency compensatory mitigation,
funding mechanism)
B10.10):Endangered/Threatened Species Avoidance acid Mini nation '
The habitat requirements of endangered and 1. Include avoidance and 1. Prior to the start 1. Once for each City of Pismo
threatened species that have the potential to minimization measures in of ground- set of Beach
occur are variable throughout the project area construction contractor disturbing contractor
where project components with unknown specifications for project activities for the specifications
locations may be sited. However, several components within or adjacent new production
avoidance and minimization measures can be to sensitive habitat that may well and/or
applied for a variety of species to reduce the support threatened or agricultural
potential for impacts such that no net loss of endangered species irrigation
the species occurs. The following measures pipelines
shall be applied to aquatic and/or terrestrial
A-14
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure/ Compliance Verification
Monitoring Responsible
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
species, as determined to be appropriate by 2. Retain a qualified biologist for 2. During ground- 2. Daily and
the BRA prepared under Mitigation Measure monitoring initial ground- disturbing weekly
BI0-1(f): disturbance activities and construction and
• Ground disturbance shall be limited to the conducting daily or weekly pre- maintenance
minimum necessary to complete project activity clearance surveys for activities for the
construction and maintenance.The project project activities within or new production
limits of disturbance shall be flagged.Areas adjacent to sensitive habitats well and/or
of special biological concern within or that may support threatened or agricultural
adjacent to the limits of disturbance shall endangered species and review irrigation
have highly visible orange construction survey results pipelines
fencing installed between said area and the 3. Conduct water quality sampling 3. During 3. Periodically to
limits of disturbance. and monitoring,as needed,and construction and establish the
• All ground-disturbing construction and review results maintenance pre-project
maintenance activities (e.g., grading, activities for the baseline and
excavation, and trenching) occurring new production for monitoring
within/adjacent to aquatic habitats well and/or during
(including riparian habitats and wetlands) agricultural construction
shall be completed between April 1 and irrigation
October 31,if feasible,to avoid impacts to pipelines,as
sensitive aquatic species. needed
■ All project activities occurring within or 4. Prepare,review,and approve a 4. Prior to the start 4. Once for each
adjacent to sensitive habitats that may diversion plan, as needed, and of and during project
support federal- and/or State-listed field verify compliance construction and component
endangered/threatened species shall have maintenance
a City-approved biologist present during all activities for the
initial ground disturbing/vegetation new production
clearing activities. Once initial ground well and/or
disturbing/vegetation clearing activities agricultural
have been completed, the biologist shall irrigation
conduct daily pre-activity clearance pipelines,as
surveys for endangered/threatened needed
species. Alternatively, once initial ground 5. Notify CDFW and/or USFWS of 5. During 5. As needed
disturbing/vegetation clearing activities occurrence of construction and
are completed the biologist may conduct endangered/threatened maintenance
site inspections at a minimum of once per species and of any accidental activities for the
week to ensure all prescribed avoidance harm to such species, as new production
and minimization measures are being fully needed well and/or
implemented. agricultural
irrigation
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program A-15
City of Arroyo Grande
Central Coast Blue Project
Mitigation Measure/ Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
■ No endangered/threatened species shall pipelines,as
be captured and relocated without express needed
permission from the CDFW and/or USFWS.
■ If at any time during construction or
maintenance of the project an
endangered/threatened species enters the
construction or maintenance site(s) or
otherwise may be impacted by the project,
all project activities shall cease. A City-
approved biologist shall document the
occurrence and the City shall notify the
CDFW and/or USFWS as appropriate.
■ All vehicle maintenance/fueling/staging
shall occur not less than 100 feet from any
riparian habitat or water body. Suitable
containment procedures shall be
implemented to prevent spills.A minimum
of one spill kit shall be available at each
work location near riparian habitat or
water bodies.
• No equipment shall be permitted to enter
wetted portions of any affected drainage
channel, unless authorized by the USACE,
RWQCB, and CDFW through issuance of
permits authorizing such activities.
• All equipment operating within streams
shall be in good conditions and free of
leaks. Spill containment shall be installed
under all equipment staged within stream
areas, and extra spill containment and
clean up materials shall be located in close
proximity for easy access.
• If construction or maintenance activities
could degrade water quality,water quality
sampling shall be implemented to identify
the pre-project baseline and to monitor
during construction for comparison to the
baseline.
A-16
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure) Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
• If water is to be diverted around work sites,
a diversion plan shall be prepared for
review and approval by the City prior to the
start of any construction or maintenance
activities (including staging and
mobilization).If pumps are used,all intakes
shall be completely screened with wire
mesh not larger than five millimeters to
prevent animals from entering the pump
system. It should be noted that diversion
and dewatering of creeks,rivers,lakes and
ponds may require permits to be issued by
the CDFW,RWQCB,USFWS and/or NMFS.
• At the end of each workday, excavations
shall be secured with cover or a ramp
provided to prevent wildlife entrapment.
• All trenches, pipes, culverts or similar
structures shall be inspected for animals
prior to burying,capping,moving,or filling.
• The City-approved biologist shall remove
invasive aquatic species such as bullfrogs
and crayfish from suitable aquatic habitat
whenever observed and shall dispatch
them in a humane manner and dispose of
properly.
• If any federally and/or State protected
species are harmed, the City-approved
biologist shall document the circumstances
that led to harm and shall determine if
project construction should cease or be
altered in an effort to avoid additional
harm to these species. Dead or injured
special status species shall be disposed of
at the discretion of the CDFW and USFWS.
All incidences of harm shall be reported by
the City to the CDFW and USFWS within 48
hours.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program A-17
City of Arroyo Grande
Central Coast Blue Project
Mitigation Measure/ Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
810=1(k):N ori-llsiieei t BOOCIat Status filrtiaSOittisl" iiiri�r iii Mki alt i ej ,x 1
Several State Species of Special Concern may 1. Retain a qualified biologist to 1. Within 14 days 1. Once for each City of Pismo
be impacted by project components with conduct pre-construction prior to the start project Beach
unknown locations. The ecological clearance surveys and review of construction component
requirements and potential for impacts is survey results activities for the
highly variable among these species. new production
Depending on the species identified in the BRA well and/or
[Mitigation Measure BIO-1(f)1, several of the agricultural
measures identified under Mitigation Measure irrigation
BIO-1(j) shall be applicable to the project. In pipelines
addition, measures shall be selected from 2. Retain a qualified biologist to 2. During 2. Daily for each
among the following to reduce the potential monitor initial ground construction project
for impacts to non-listed special status animal disturbing activities activities for the component
species, as determined to be appropriate by new production
the BRA prepared under Mitigation Measure well and/or
BIO-1(f):
agricultural
■ Pre-construction clearance surveys shall be irrigation
conducted within 14 days prior to the start pipelines
of construction (including staging and 3. Retain a qualified biologist to 3. Within 30 days 3. Once for each
mobilization) in a work area.The surveys conduct presence/absence prior to the start project
shall cover the entire disturbance footprint surveys for special status bats of construction component
of the work area plus a minimum 200-foot and review survey results activities for the
buffer, if feasible, and shall identify all new production
special status animal species that may well and/or
occur on site. All non-listed special status agricultural
species shall be relocated from the site.A irrigation
report of the pre-construction survey shall pipelines
be submitted to the local jurisdiction for 4. Install exclusion devices and bat 4. Prior to the start 4. Once for each
their review and approval prior to the start boxes,as needed of construction project
of construction.If construction activities in activities for the component
a given work area cease for more than 14 new production
days,additional surveys shall be conducted well and/or
for the work area,and additional reports of agricultural
special status animal species shall be irrigation
prepared. pipelines
• A qualified biologist shall be present during
all initial ground disturbing activities,
including vegetation removal, to recover
A-18
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure/ Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
non-listed special status animal species
unearthed by construction activities.
s If special status bat species may be present
and impacted by the project, a qualified
biologist shall conduct presence/absence
surveys for special status bats where
suitable roosting habitat is present within
30 days prior to the start of construction.
Surveys shall be conducted using acoustic
detectors and by visually searching suitable
roost trees and other areas where bats
may roost. If active roosts are located,
exclusion devices such as netting shall be
installed to discourage bats from
occupying the site.If a roost is determined
by a qualified biologist to be used by a large
number of bats (large hibernaculum), bat
boxes shall be installed near the project
site.The number of bat boxes installed will
depend on the size of the hibernaculum
and shall be determined through
coordination with the CDFW.If a maternity
colony has become established, all
construction activities shall be postponed
within a 500-foot buffer around the
maternity colony until it is determined by a
qualified biologist that the young have
dispersed. Once it has been determined
that the roost is clear of bats, the roost
shall be removed immediately.
BIO-2:Sensitive Plant and Community and Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area Avoidance andMinimization Measures:
The following avoidance and minimization 1. Retain a qualified 1. Prior to start of 1. Once for each City of Pismo
measures shall be implemented during project biologist/restoration ecologist construction and project Beach
construction and maintenance activities to prepare the HMMP maintenance component
requiring vegetation disturbance within arroyo activities within
willow habitat. arroyo willow
• Temporary impact areas to arroyo willow habitat
habitat shall be restored at a one to one 2. Review HMMP for compliance 2. Once for each
(1:1)ratio(one acre of restoration for each with mitigation requirements project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program A-19
City of Arroyo Grande
Central Coast Blue Project
Mitigation Measure/ Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
acre of impact)to offset temporary losses and approve HMMP 2. Prior to start of component
in wetland, stream, or riparian function. construction and
Permanent impacts shall be offset through maintenance
creation,restoration,and/or enhancement activities within
of in-kind habitats at a minimum ratio of arroyo willow
2:1 to mitigate unavoidable permanent habitat
impacts to arroyo willow habitat.A Habitat 3. Review quarterly and annual 3. After completion 3. Quarterly for
Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) monitoring reports of restoration the first year of
shall be prepared by a biologist familiar installation monitoring and
with restoration and mitigation annually for
techniques.The plan shall include,but not the next four
be limited to the following components: years
o Description of the project/impact site 4. Include avoidance and 4. Prior to start of 4. Once for each '..
(i.e.location,responsible parties,areas minimization measures in construction and set of
to be impacted by habitat type); construction contractor maintenance contractor
• Goal(s)of the compensatory mitigation specifications for project activities within specifications
project(type[s] and area[s] of habitat components within arroyo arroyo willow
to be established,restored,enhanced, willow habitat habitat
and/or preserved; 5. Field verify compliance with 5. During 5. Periodically
Specific functions and values of habitat avoidance and minimization construction and
type(s) to be established, restored, measures maintenance
enhanced,and/or preserved); activities within
arroyo willow
Description of the proposed habitat
compensatory mitigation site(location
and size, ownership status, existing
functions and values of the
compensatory mitigation site);
• Implementation plan for the
compensatory mitigation site
(rationale for expecting
implementation success, responsible
parties, schedule, site preparation,
planting plan[including plant species to
be used,container sizes,seeding rates,
etc.]);
a Maintenance activities during the '..
monitoring period, including weed
removal and irrigation as appropriate
A-20
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure/ Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
(activities, responsible parties,
schedule);
• Monitoring plan for the compensatory
mitigation site, including no less than
five years of monitoring with quarterly
monitoring for the first year
(performance standards, target
functions and values, target acreages
to be established,restored,enhanced,
and/or preserved, annual monitoring
reports);
Success criteria based on the goals and
measurable objectives; said criteria to
be, at a minimum,at least 80 percent
survival of container plants and 30
percent relative cover by vegetation
type;
• An adaptive management program and
remedial measures to address negative
impacts to restoration efforts;
• Notification of completion of
compensatory mitigation and agency
confirmation;and
• Contingency measures (initiating
procedures, alternative locations for
contingency compensatory mitigation,
funding mechanism).During
construction,the project shall make all
reasonable efforts to limit the use of
imported soils for fill. Soils currently
existing on site should be used for fill
material. If the use of imported fill
material is necessary, the imported
material shall be obtained from a
source that is known to be free of
invasive plant species.
• During construction,the project shall make
all reasonable efforts to limit the use of
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program A-21
City of Arroyo Grande
Central Coast Blue Project
Mitigation Measure) Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
imported soils for fill. Soils currently
existing on site should be used for fill
material.If the use of imported fill material
is necessary,the imported material shall be
obtained from a source that is known to be
free of invasive plant species.
• All equipment and vehicles must be free of
weed seeds/propagules before accessing
and leaving the work areas.
810 3(a):Jurisdictional Delineation
Prior to final determination of the water Retain a qualified biologist to Prior to final Once City of Pismo
distribution pipeline locations and associated complete a jurisdictional determination of Beach
construction work areas within the Oceano delineation and review results of water distribution
County Airport property, a qualified biologist jurisdictional delineation for pipeline locations
shall complete a jurisdictional delineation of compliance with agency within Oceano
the project site to aid in the siting of the water requirements County Airport
distribution pipeline alignments as well as property
other project areas. The jurisdictional
delineation shall determine the extent of the
jurisdiction(s)for local agencies(i.e.,the City of
Grover Beach and County of San Luis Obispo),
CDFW, USACE, and/or RWQCB and shall be
conducted in accordance with the
requirements set forth by each agency.
810-3(b):Drainages and Wetlands
Drainages impact Ihlitigati�rr � - -
Impacts to drainages and wetlands identified 1. Retain a qualified 1. Prior to start of 1. Once City of Pismo
by the Jurisdictional Delineation (Mitigation biologist/restoration ecologist construction of Beach
Measure 3(a))shall be mitigated at a minimum to prepare the HMMP water
of 1:1(acre impacted:acre restored/created). distribution
Restoration on the project site is preferable. pipelines in
However, the City may approve off-site Oceano County
restoration at a location in the same watershed Airport property
as where the project impacts occur that results 2. Review HMMP for compliance 2. Prior to start of 2. Once
in equal compensatory value.An HMMP shall with mitigation requirements construction of
be prepared which identifies the approach for and approve HMMP water
implementing the compensatory mitigation. distribution
The HMMP shall be prepared by a qualified pipelines in
biologist/restoration ecologist and shall
outline the compensatory mitigation. As part
A-22
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure/ Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
of the HMMP, a final mitigation Oceano County
implementation plan shall be submitted to and Airport property
approved by the City prior to project 3. Review quarterly and annual 3. After completion 3. Quarterly for
implementation.Specifically,the HMMP shall monitoring reports of restoration the first year of
include the following: installation monitoring and
• Description of the project/impact site(i.e. annual for the
location, responsible parties, areas to be next four years
impacted by habitat type);
■ Goal(s) of the compensatory mitigation
project(type[s]and area[s]of habitat to be
established, restored, enhanced, and/or
preserved;specific functions and values of
habitat type[s]to be established,restored,
enhanced,and/or preserved);
■ Description of the proposed compensatory
mitigation site (location and size,
ownership status, existing functions and
values of the compensatory mitigation
site);
• Implementation plan for the compensatory
mitigation site (rationale for expecting
implementation success, responsible
parties, schedule, site preparation,
planting plan[including plant species to be
used,container sizes,seeding rates,etc.]);
■ Maintenance activities during the
monitoring period,including weed removal
and irrigation as appropriate (activities,
responsible parties,schedule);
• Monitoring plan for the compensatory
mitigation site, including no less than five
years of monitoring with quarterly
monitoring for the first year(performance
standards, target functions and values,
target acreages to be established,
restored, enhanced, and/or preserved,
annual monitoring reports);
• Success criteria based on the goals and
measurable objectives;said criteria to be,
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program A-23
City of Arroyo Grande
Central Coast Blue Project
Mitigation Measure/ Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
at a minimum,at least 80 percent survival
of container plants and 30 percent relative
cover by vegetation type;
• An adaptive management program and
remedial measures to address negative
impacts to restoration efforts;
• Notification of completion of
compensatory mitigation and agency
confirmation;and
• Contingency measures (initiating
procedures, alternative locations for
contingency compensatory mitigation,
funding mechanism).
B10-3(c):Drainages and Wetlands Best Management Practices During Construction
For all project components the following best 1. Include best management 1. Prior to the start 1. Once for each City of Pismo
management practices shall be required for practices in construction of construction of set of Beach
permitted grading and construction within contractor specifications for each project contractor
drainages or wetlands. In addition, the project components within 100 component specifications
measures shall be required at locations where feet of drainage or wetlands
construction occurs within 100 feet from 2. Field verify compliance with 2. During 2. Periodically
drainages or wetlands. best management practices construction
• Access routes, staging, and construction
areas shall be limited to the minimum area
necessary to achieve the project goal and
minimize impacts to other federal and
State waters, including locating access
routes and ancillary construction areas
outside of jurisdictional areas.
• To control erosion and sediment runoff
during and after project implementation,
appropriate erosion control materials shall
be deployed, including but not limited to
straw wattles, and maintained in the
vicinity of the project footprint.
• Project activities within the drainages or
wetlands shall occur during the dry season
in any given year to the extent practicable.
The dry season is typically between May 1
A-24
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure/ Compliance Verification
Monitoring Responsible
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
and September 30; however, this
timeframe may be extended depending on
year-to-year precipitation and drought
conditions.
• During construction, no litter or
construction debris shall be placed within
drainages or wetlands.All such debris and
waste shall be picked up daily and properly
disposed of at an appropriate site.
■ All project-generated debris, building
materials, and rubbish shall be removed
daily from jurisdictional areas and from
areas where such materials could be
washed into them.
• Raw cement, concrete or washings
thereof, asphalt, paint or other coating
material,oil or other petroleum products,
or any other substances which could be
hazardous to aquatic species resulting
from project-related activities, shall be
prevented from contaminating the soil
and/or entering drainages or wetlands.
• All refueling, maintenance, and staging of
equipment and vehicles shall occur at least
100 feet from drainages and wetlands and
in a location where a potential spill would
not drain directly toward aquatic habitat
(e.g.,on a slope that drains away from the
water source). Prior to the onset of work
activities, a plan must be in place for
prompt and effective response to any
accidental spills. All workers shall be
informed of the importance of preventing
spills and of the appropriate measures to
take should an accidental spill occur.
■ If installation of the agricultural irrigation
pipelines requires the crossing of Arroyo
Grande Creek,a Frac-Out Contingency Plan
shall be prepared and,and in the event of
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program A-25
City of Arroyo Grande
Central Coast Blue Project
Mitigation Measure/ Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
frac-out,it shall be implemented.The Frac
Out Contingency Plan shall include the
following:
n The purpose of the contingency plan;
n Preventative measures to minimize the
likelihood of a frac-out;
• The planning and design of the augur
boring or horizontal directional drilling;
c Pre-construction requirements;and
c Contingency response to contain and
remove drilling fluids and closeout
procedures.The contingency response
shall include general guidelines with all
equipment required, guidelines for
terrestrial frac-outs along the banks
and riparian corridor of Arroyo Grande
Creek,guidelines for aquatic frac-outs
within Arroyo Grande Creek,and bore
abandonment.
BIO-S: Tree inventory,Protection,andReplacement
A Tree Preservation Plan shall be prepared by 1. Retain certified arborist to 1. Prior to the start 1. Once for each City of Pismo
a certified arborist to inventory native trees prepare Tree Preservation Plan of construction of project Beach
that would be trimmed or removed by each project component
construction. Native trees shall be avoided to component
the maximum extent feasible. The plan shall 2. Review Tree Preservation Plan 2. Prior to the start 2. Once for each
include, but would not be limited to, an of construction of project
inventory of trees within the construction site each project component
plus a 50-foot buffer zone, requirements for component
setbacks from trees and protective fencing, 3. Include tree protection and 3. Prior to the start 3. Once for each
restrictions regarding grading and paving near replacement measures in of construction of set of
trees, and direction regarding pruning and construction contractor each project contractor
digging within root zone of trees.If removal of specifications,as applicable component specifications
native trees is required, the trees shall be 4. Field verify compliance with 4. During 4. Periodically
replaced consistent with the requirements of tree protection and construction of and at the end
the local agency which has jurisdiction as well replacement measures each project of construction
as the associated tree removal permit that may component of each project
be issued.
component
A-26
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure/ Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
Prior to the onset of construction activities,
highly visible orange construction fencing shall
be installed around existing stands and
individuals identified in the Tree Preservation
Plan to be retained at a buffer/extent radius of
six feet beyond the canopy dripline,wherever
feasible, or otherwise marked in the field to
protect them from harm during
implementation of the proposed project.
Cultural Resoles 'r
CR-2(a):Worker's Environmental Awareness Program
A qualified archaeologist shall be retained to Retain a qualified archaeologist to Prior to ground- Once for each City of Pismo
conduct a Worker's Environmental Awareness conduct a Worker's Environmental disturbing activities project component Beach
Program training on archaeological sensitivity Awareness Program training for for each project
for all construction personnel prior to the each project component and component
commencement of any ground-disturbing review documentation of training
activities.The training should be conducted by
an archaeologist who meets or exceeds the
Secretary of Interior's Professional
Qualification Standards for archaeology
(National Park Service 1983). Archaeological
sensitivity training should include a description
of the types of cultural material that may be
encountered, cultural sensitivity issues, the
regulatory environment, and the proper
protocol for treatment of the materials in the
event of a find.
CR-2(b):Archaeological and Native American Monitoring
During initial ground disturbance for the 1. Retain qualified archaeologist 1. Prior to ground- 1. Daily for initial City of Pismo
project, a qualified archaeologist and locally and Native American monitor disturbing ground Beach
affiliated Native American monitor shall to conduct daily construction activities for each disturbance for
monitor construction activities within the monitoring project each project
project area. Initial ground disturbance is component component
defined as disturbance within previously
undisturbed native soils. A cultural resources 2. Review and approve cultural 2. Prior to ground- 2. Once for each
monitoring plan shall be completed prior to resources monitoring plan disturbing project
the commencement of monitoring, which activities for each component
outlines monitoring procedures, stop work
authorities,and procedures to be taken in the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program A-27
City of Arroyo Grande
Central Coast Blue Project
Mitigation Measure) Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
event of a find.The monitoring plan shall also project
provide a monitoring form template to be component
completed by the monitors for each 3. Review monitoring forms 3. During initial 3. Weekly
monitoring day. If, during initial ground ground
disturbance, the qualified archaeologist
disturbance for
determines that the construction activities each project
have little or no potential to impact cultural component
resources (e.g., excavations are within
previously disturbed, non-native soils, or
within a soil formation not expected to yield
cultural resources deposits), the qualified
archaeologist may recommend that
monitoring be reduced or eliminated. If
cultural resources are identified during initial
monitoring, work in the immediate vicinity
shall halt until the resource has been evaluated
for significance.
CR=2(t):Unanticipated Discovery of Cultural Resoi*ces
If cultural resources are encountered during 1. Retain an archaeologist 1. During ground- 1. As needed City of Pismo
ground-disturbing activities, work in the meeting the Secretary of disturbing Beach
immediate area must halt and an archaeologist Interior's Professional activities for each
meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Qualifications Standards, if project
Professional Qualification Standards for needed component,as
archaeology(National Park Service 1983)shall needed
be contacted immediately to evaluate the find. 2. Field verify required evaluation 2. During ground- 2. As needed
Should cultural resources be discovered during of the identified resource disturbing
excavation, additional studies including data activities for each
recovery efforts may be needed to reduce project
project impacts and/or consultation with local component,if
tribes and the City,acting as lead agency,may cultural resource
be necessary to mitigate any significant is identified
impacts/adverse effects. 3. If avoidance is infeasible, 3. During ground- 3. As needed
prepare plan to reduce impacts disturbing
to less than significant and activities for each
conduct required consultation, project
if needed component,if
cultural resource
is identified
A-28
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure/ Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
CR-2(d):Archaeological Resource Studies
Prior to initial construction activities for the 1. Retain qualified archaeologist 1. Prior to issuance 1. Once for new City of Pismo
new production well and agricultural irrigation to prepare Phase I Cultural of construction production well Beach
pipelines, a Phase I Cultural Resources Study Resources Study permit for new and agricultural
shall be conducted for each project component production well irrigation
by a qualified archaeologist meeting the and agricultural pipelines
Secretary of the Interior's standards in irrigation
archaeology.The Phase I study shall include a pipelines
pedestrian survey of the project site to identify 2. Incorporate all feasible 2. Prior to issuance 2. During
potential surficial archaeological resources and recommendations for of construction construction,
sufficient background archival research and mitigation of any identified permit for new as needed,for
field sampling to determine whether impacts production well new
subsurface prehistoric or historic remains may and agricultural production well
be present. Archival research should include, irrigation and agricultural
at minimum,a records search conducted at the pipelines irrigation
Central Coast Information Center and a Sacred pipelines
Lands File search conducted with the Native
American Heritage Commission.
Any cultural resources so identified shall be
avoided and preserved in place, if feasible.
Where preservation in place is not feasible,
each resource shall be evaluated for
significance and eligibility for listing in the
CRHR through the implementation of a Phase
II evaluation program.Phase II evaluation shall
include any necessary archival research to
identify significant historical associations as
well as mapping of surface artifacts,collection
of functionally or temporally diagnostic tools
and debris,and excavation of a sample of the
cultural deposit to characterize the nature of
the sites, define the artifact and feature
contents, determine horizontal boundaries
and depth below surface, and retrieve
representative samples of artifacts and other
remains. If the resource is found eligible for
listing on the NRHP,CRHR,or local register,a
Phase III data recovery program shall be
conducted to mitigate the impacts to the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program A-29
City of Arroyo Grande
Central Coast Blue Project
Mitigation Measure/ Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
resource if avoidance remains infeasible. A
data recovery program shall include the
development of a site-specific research design,
testing program, laboratory analysis, and
reporting with the intention of extracting data
from the resource to the point of redundancy.
Any excavation at Native American sites shall
be monitored by a local tribal representative.
Cultural materials collected from the sites shall
be processed and analyzed in the laboratory
according to standard archaeological
procedures. The age of archaeological
resources shall be determined using
radiocarbon dating or other appropriate
procedures;lithic artifacts,faunal remains,and
other cultural materials shall be identified and
analyzed according to current professional
standards.The significance of the sites shall be
evaluated according to the criteria of the
California Register of Historic Resources. The
results of the investigations shall be presented
in a technical report following the standards of
the California Office of Historical Preservation
publication "Archaeological Resource
Management Reports:Recommended Content
and Format(1990 or latest edition)."
Upon completion of the work, all artifacts,
other cultural remains, records, photographs,
and other documentation shall be curated an
appropriate curation facility to be determined
on a case-by-case basis in consultation with the
City and interested parties (e.g., tribal
organizations).
If any of the resources meet CRHR significance
standards,the City shall ensure that all feasible
recommendations for mitigation of impacts
are incorporated into the final project design.
Any necessary archaeological data recovery
excavation shall be carried out by a Registered
Professional Archaeologist according to a
A-30
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure/ Compliance Verification
Monitoring Responsible
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
research design reviewed and approved by the
City, as the lead agency, and prepared in
advance of fieldwork and using appropriate
archaeological field and laboratory methods
consistent with the California Office of Historic
Preservation Planning Bulletin 5 (1991),
Guidelines for Archaeological Research Design,
or the latest edition thereof.
As applicable, the final Phase I Inventory,
Phase II Testing and Evaluation, and Phase III
Data Recovery reports shall be submitted to
the City and the applicable land use permitting
agency prior to final inspection of a
construction permit. Recommendations
contained therein, including, at minimum,
requirements to follow for unanticipated
archaeological discoveries during construction,
shall be implemented throughout all ground
disturbance activities.
E=1:Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Measures
The proposed project shall implement the Review site plans for the ATF Prior to the issuance Once City of Pismo
following energy efficiency and renewable complex to verify compliance of a building permit Beach
energy measures:
■ The advanced treatment facility (ATF)
building shall incorporate LEED Silver
design standards, such as outdoor and
indoor water-efficiency features, energy-
efficiency and conservation features,
energy metering, demand response
technologies and programs, and
renewable energy systems,where feasible.
■ The orientation of the ATF building shall be
designed to accomplish the following to
the maximum extent practicable:
• Maximize passive solar heating during
cool seasons
• Avoid solar heat gain in warm seasons
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program A-31
City of Arroyo Grande
Central Coast Blue Project
Mitigation Measure/ Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
• Enhance natural ventilation and
effective use of daylight
• Maximize opportunities for the
installation of solar panels
• Facilitate the use of sunlight for direct
heating and illumination whenever
possible
• Take advantage of natural ventilation
and shading to cool a building.
■ The ATF building shall use exterior
shading devices, skylights, daylighting
controls, high performance glazing that
allows the transmission of light with
minimal heat gain,and high thermal mass
building components to the extent
feasible.
r nhouse'Gas Ernisst ons
GHG 2:GHG'Emission ttedui ion Measures `'
proposed
g project
shall implement the Review site pns for the ATF Prior to the issuance Once City of P
The ro osed Pismo
followinggreenhouse as emission reduction complex to verifycompliance
of a buildingpermit Beach
measures, as identified in the City's Climate for the ATF complex
Action Plan:
• The ATF complex shall include a solar
photovoltaic system.
• The ATF complex shall include recycling
receptacles.
Haze'd and Hazardous Materials
.,, .. ?a` ... ,a cheri
,ti•, 'X or+t.^s'fa�ka�C SSC d , v'� p v a
Hartardousilll�tnriais�lAan�geml�nt� ���tt�r�r��r�tl��r,� �►t�o� ir� � `
Prior to the start of construction, the 1. Include requirements for 1. Prior to the start 1. Once for each City of Pismo
construction contractor(s)
shall prepare a HMMSPCP in construction of construction of set of Beach
Hazardous Materials Management and Spill contractor specifications each project contractor
Prevention and Control Plan(HMMSPCP)that component specifications
includes a project-specific contingency plan for 2. Review HMMSPCP to verify 2. Prior to the start 2. Once for each
hazardous materials and waste operations. compliance of construction of project
The HMMSPCP shall be applicable to each project component
construction activities and shall establish component
policies and procedures according to
A-32
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure/ Compliance Verification
Monitoring Responsible
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
applicable codes and regulations,including but 3. Field verify implementation of 3. During 3. Periodically
not limited to the California Building and Fire HMMSPCP construction of during
Codes and federal and California Division of each project construction of
Occupational Safety and Health regulations,to component each project
minimize risks associated with hazardous component
materials spills. Elements of the HMMSPCP
shall include, but would not be limited to the
following:
• A discussion of hazardous materials
management, including delineation of
hazardous material storage areas, access
and egress routes,waterways,emergency
assembly areas,and temporary hazardous
waste storage areas;
■ Notification and documentation of
procedures;and
• Spill control and countermeasures,
including employee spill
prevention/response training.
HAZ-1(b).Preparation of Hazardous Materials Business Plan ��•
A Hazardous Materials Business Plan (HMBP) Prepare and review HMBP to verify Prior to the issuance Once City of Pismo
shall be prepared for the ATF complex. The compliance of a certificate of Beach
HMBP shall include, at a minimum, a occupancy for the
hazardous materials inventory, site plan, ATF complex
emergency response plan, and requirements
for employee training. The HMBP shall be
prepared prior to issuance of a certificate of
occupancy for the ATF complex. The HMBP
shall inform staff and contractors of the
chemicals that may be used at the site and how
to respond to potential hazardous material
emergencies or exposure.Signage specified in
the HMBP shall be posted at the ATF complex
and at associated chemical storage areas,and
a copy of the hazardous materials inventory,
site plan, and emergency response plan shall
be kept at each chemical storage area. The
hazardous materials inventory shall be
consistent with chemicals ordered during
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program A-33
City of Arroyo Grande
Central Coast Blue Project
Mitigation Measure) Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
operation and maintenance of the ATF
complex.
Hydrology and Water Civality
H NQ 1:Init ell Qua tel y tte lloactleitf 1'eeiing,,: ° `"
Initial quarterly monitoring will be conducted 1. Review results of initial 1. At the end of the 1. Once City of Pismo
at the full-scale facility for the first year of quarterly monitoring first year of Beach
operation to establish future monitoring operation
requirements and possible additional analysis 2. If needed, field verify 2. After installation 2. Once
of beta/photon emitters.If monitoring detects installation of additional of additional
violations of the maximum contaminant level treatment process(es) and treatment
for radioactivity specified by California Code of results of follow-up monitoring process(es),if
Regulations Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15, needed
Article 5, Section 64443 occur, these
exceedances shall be resolved. Potential
treatment process to resolve identified
exceedances would include,but would not be
limited to, ion exchange, lime softening, and
coagulation filtration.
pNoise
N-1.Consttuction Noise*eduction Meagures N `r,
The following construction noise reduction 1. Include construction noise 1. Prior to the start 1. Once for each City of Pismo
measures shall be implemented during project measures in construction of construction of set of Beach
construction activities: contractor specifications, as each project contractor
■ Well drilling activities for IW-1,IW-2A,IW- applicable component specifications
2B, IW-3, MW-1A/1B, MW-2A/2B/2C,and 2. Coordinate with the County of 2. Prior to the start 2. Once
MW-3A/38,shall be scheduled during the San Luis Obispo for temporary of construction
non-peak season for the Coastal Dunes RV campsite closures
Park and Campground to the extent 3. Provide non-automated 3. Prior to the start 3. Once for each
practicable, as defined by the County of telephone number for local of construction project
San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation residents to submit complaints component
Department. 4. Field verify compliance with 4. During 4. Periodically
• Construction of individual injection, construction noise reduction construction
monitoring, and production wells located measures
within 0.25 mile of each other shall be 5. Prepare and review acoustical 5. Upon selection of 5. Once
scheduled so as not to overlap to the analysis for new production location of new
extent practicable. well production well
• Construction of the water 6. Implement recommended 6. Prior to the start 6. Once
distribution/agricultural irrigation construction noise reduction of construction
A-34
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure/ Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
pipelines and ATF complex shall be measures for new production
scheduled so as not to overlap with well,as needed
construction of the injection, monitoring,
and production wells.
• Noise-generating construction activities
associated with IW-5A, IW-5B, and MW-
5A/5B/5C shall not occur on the same days
as noise-generating construction activities
for the South San Luis Obispo County
Sanitation District Wastewater
Redundancy Project to the extent
practicable.
• Whenever possible,construction activities
shall be scheduled so as to avoid operating
several pieces of equipment
simultaneously, which causes high noise
levels.
• The City shall coordinate with the County
of San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation
Department to temporarily close all
campsites within 200 feet of IW-1,IW-2A,
IW-2B, IW-3, MW-1A/1B, MW-2A/2B/2C,
and MW-3A/3B for the duration of 24-hour
well drilling activities.
• The City shall provide temporary housing
accommodation via hotel or other
comparable accommodation for the
duration of 24-hour well drilling activities
for residents and hotel/motel guests in
Grover Beach within 100 feet of
construction activity and for residents and
hotel/motel guests in unincorporated San
Luis Obispo County within 175 feet of
construction activity.
• All heavy-duty stationary construction
equipment shall be placed so that emitted
noise is directed away from the nearest
sensitive receivers.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program A-35
City of Arroyo Grande
Central Coast Blue Project
Mitigation Measure/ Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
• During injection and monitoring well
construction, all equipment, fixed or
mobile, shall be operated with closed
engine doors and shall be equipped with
properly operating and maintained critical
grade mufflers consistent with
manufacturers'standards.
• During injection and monitoring well
construction,the City's contractor(s)shall
use portable sound enclosures for all
generators and air compressors that
provide at least a 10-dBA reduction in noise
levels.
• During injection and monitoring well
construction,the City's contractor(s)shall
install temporary sound barriers of
sufficient height and length to break the
line-of-sight between the engines of heavy-
duty equipment and nearby sensitive
receivers. All temporary barriers shall be
constructed of material with a minimum
weight of two pounds per square foot and
shall be continuous with no gaps or holes
between panels or the ground. Sound
blankets on individual pieces of
construction equipment may also be used
in place of temporary sound barriers and
shall be of sufficient length to overlap each
other and the ground surface.Temporary
sound barriers and/or blankets shall be
installed for the entire duration of the well
drilling phase for each injection and
monitoring well.Temporary sound barriers
shall meet the following specifications for
each location:
• IW-1 (Well Drilling). The barrier shall
be at least 13 feet in height and shall be
installed along the southern and
eastern edges of the construction site.
The barrier shall be at least 50 feet in
A-36
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure/ Compliance Verification
Monitoring Responsible
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
length along the southern edge and at
least 100 feet in length along the
eastern edge. If sound blankets are
used, they shall be a minimum Sound
Transmission Class(STC)rating of 9.
• IW-2A and IW-28 (Well Drilling). The
barrier shall be at least 13 feet in height
and shall surround all active heavy-
duty equipment at the construction
sites. The barrier shall be at least 50
feet in length along the southern and
northern edges and at least 100 feet in
length along the eastern edge.If sound
blankets are used, they shall be a
minimum STC rating of 9.
• IW-3 (Well Drilling). The barrier shall
be at least 22 feet in height,surround
all active heavy-duty equipment at the
construction sites,and be at least 100
feet in length along the northern and
southern sides and at least 50 feet in
length along the western and eastern
sides. If sound blankets are used,they
shall be a minimum STC rating of 18.
• IW-SA, IW-5B, and MW-5A/5B/5C
(Well Drilling). The barrier shall be at
least 13 feet in height and shall be
installed along the western and
northern edges of the construction
sites. The barrier shall be at least 50
feet in length along the western edge
and at least 100 feet in length along the
northern edge. If sound blankets are
used, they shall be a minimum STC
rating of 8.
• MW-1A/13 and MW-3A/3B (Well
Drilling).The barrier shall be at least 13
feet in height, surround all active
heavy-duty equipment at the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program A-37
City of Arroyo Grande
Central Coast Blue Project
Mitigation Measure) Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Y Agency - Initial Date Comments
construction sites,and be at least 100
feet in length along the southern and
northern edges and at least 50 feet in
length along the eastern and western
edges.If sound blankets are used,they
shall be a minimum STC rating of 9.
• MW-1C/1D and MW-2D/2E/2F (Well
Drilling).The barrier shall be at least 15
feet in height, surround all active
heavy-duty equipment at the
construction sites,and be at least 100
feet in length along the southern and
northern edges and at least 50 feet in
length along the eastern and western
edges.If sound blankets are used,they
shall be a minimum STC rating of 15.
• MW-2A/2B/2C (Well Drilling). The
barrier shall be at least 13 feet in
height, surround all active heavy-duty
equipment at the construction sites,
and be at least 100 feet in length along
the northern and southern sides and at
least 50 feet in length along the
western and eastern sides. If sound
blankets are used, they shall be a
minimum STC rating of 9.
• MW-3D/3E(Well Drilling).The barrier
shall be at least 12 feet in height,
surround all active heavy-duty
equipment at the construction sites,
and be at least 50 feet in length along
the southern and northern edges and
at least 100 feet in length along the
eastern and western edges. If sound
blankets are used, they shall be a
minimum STC rating of 7.
▪ MW-4C/4D(Well Drilling).The barrier
shall be at least 14 feet in height,
surround all active heavy-duty
A-38
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure/ Compliance Verification
Monitoring Responsible
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
equipment at the construction sites,
and be at least 100 feet in length along
the northern and southern sides and at
least 50 feet in length along the
western and eastern sides. If sound
blankets are used, they shall be a
minimum STC rating of 11.
MW-5D/5E/SF (Well Drilling). The
barrier shall be at least 24 feet in
height, surround all active heavy-duty
equipment at the construction sites,
and be at least 100 feet in length along
the northern and southern sides and at
least 50 feet in length along the
western side. If sound blankets are
used, they shall be a minimum STC
rating of 20.
• The City shall provide a non-automated
telephone number for local residents to
call to submit complaints associated with
construction noise during all phases of
construction.The City shall maintain a log
of complaints and shall address complaints
to minimize noise issues for neighbors.
• Upon selection of the location of the new
production well,an acoustical analysis shall
be prepared by a qualified professional to
determine the construction noise
reduction measures necessary to reduce
daytime exterior construction noise levels
to at or below 80 dBA Leg at the nearest
sensitive receivers and nighttime exterior
construction noise levels to at or below 55
dBA Leq at the nearest sensitive receivers.
The acoustical analysis shall only evaluate
the construction noise impacts of the new
production well if proposed construction
activities are located within 1,620 feet of
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program A-39
City of Arroyo Grande
Central Coast Blue Project
Mitigation Measure/
Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
sensitive receivers,as measured from the
center of the construction site.
The acoustical analysis shall include the
following components:
• Identification of the nearest noise-
sensitive receivers to the location of
the new production well;
• Quantitative analysis of construction
noise levels for the production well at
the nearest noise-sensitive receivers;
and
• Identification of noise reduction
measures that would achieve
compliance with the aforementioned
exterior daytime and nighttime noise
standards. These measures may
include, but would not be limited to,
use of mufflers, portable sound
enclosures, and temporary sound
barriers and/or blankets.
The City or its contractor(s) shall
implement all noise reduction measures
identified in the acoustical analysis.
N-2:Acoustical Analysis of ATF Complex Operations
Upon completion of the 30 percent design for 1. Prepare and review acoustical 1. Upon completion 1. Once City of Pismo
the ATF complex and selection of equipment, analysis for the ATF complex of 30 percent Beach
an acoustical analysis shall be prepared to design of ATF
determine whether combined operational complex
noise levels from stationary noise-generating 2. Implement recommended 2. Prior to the issue 2. Once
equipment, including but not limited to the noise attenuation measures for of a building
pump station, heating, ventilation, and air the ATF complex,as needed permit for the
conditioning equipment, and treatment ATF complex
equipment, will exceed the following noise
standards:
• Exterior noise level limits,measured at the
property line of residential land use
(Grover Beach Municipal Code Section
3120.8,Table 1):
A-40
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure/ Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
a 60 dBA Lea from 7:00 a.m.to 10:00 p.m
• 55 dBA Lea from 10:00 p.m.to 7:00 a.m.
• Stationary equipment noise standards,
measured at the property line of the
receiving land use(Grover Beach Municipal
Code Section 3120.10[B)(6)):1
• 60 dBA Lea from 7:00 a.m.to 10:00 p.m.
at single-family residential land uses
• 65 dBA Lea from 7:00 a.m.to 10:00 p.m.
at multi-family residential land uses
a 70 dBA Lea from 7:00 a.m.to 10:00 p.m.
at mixed use residential/commercial
land uses
• Interior noise limits, measured at the
interior of habitable rooms(i.e.,bedrooms,
kitchens,living rooms,dining rooms)of the
affected residential use (Grover Beach
Municipal Code Section 3120.9):
• 45 dBA Lea from 7:00 a.m.to 10:00 p.m.
• 40 dBA Lea from 10:00 p.m.to 7:00 a.m.
If operational noise levels would exceed any of
the noise level limits, the acoustical analysis
shall provide recommended attenuation
measures to reduce operational noise levels
below the standards.The City shall implement
these measures at the ATF complex.Measures
may include,but would not be limited to:
• Siting the pump station and/or HVAC
equipment away from noise-sensitive land
uses
• Orienting the pump station and/or ATF
building such that louvers face away from
noise-sensitive land uses
• Installing a sound barrier (e.g., a wall,
berm,or combination or both)of sufficient
1 Per GBMC Section 3120.10(B)(6),any stationary noise source that operates between the hours of 10:00 p.m.and 7:00 a.m.is required to obtain an Exception Permit.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program A-41
City of Arroyo Grande
Central Coast Blue Project
Mitigation Measure/ Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
height and length to break the line of sight
between noise-sensitive land uses and
noise sources at the ATF complex
• Screening HVAC equipment
• Installing HVAC equipment on the rooftop
rather than at ground-level
T-1:Transportation Management Piet '
A Transportation Management Plan (TMP) 1. Prepare TMP and submit for 1. Prior to the start 1. Once for each City of Pismo
shall be developed and implemented by the approval to the County of San of construction of project Beach
City,South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation Luis Obispo Department of each project component
District, and/or their construction Planning and Building and the component
contractor(s) during construction of the City of Grover Beach
proposed project. The TMP shall conform to Community Development
California Department of Transportation's 2. Review preliminary report of 2. Prior to the start 2. Once for each
(Caltrans) Transportation Management Plan existing roadway conditions of construction of project
Guidelines and shall include but is not limited water component
to:
distribution
■ Construction Traffic Routes and Staging pipelines
Locations: The TMP shall identify 3. Review reports of any damage 3. During 3. Once for each
construction staging site locations and and associated repairs to the construction of project
potential road closures, alternate routes roadway network water component
for detours, and planned truck routes for distribution
construction-related vehicle traffic, pipelines
including but not limited to haul trucks, 4. Review documentation of 4. Prior to the start 4. Once for each
material delivery trucks, and equipment coordination with emergency of construction project
delivery trucks. It shall also identify services, recreation facilities, each project component
alternative safe routes and policies to South County Transit, schools, component
maintain safety along bicycle and Caltrans, and nearby
pedestrian routes during construction. construction sites
Construction traffic routes shall avoid local 5. Review documentation of 5. Prior to the start 5. Once
residential streets to the maximum extent public notification of construction
practicable. Staging locations, alternate each project
detour routes, and construction traffic
component
routes shall avoid other active construction
projects within 0.25 mile of the project 6. Field verify implementation of 6. During 6. Periodically
construction sites to the maximum extent TMP measures construction of during
practicable. each project construction of
component
A-42
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure/ Compliance Verification
Monitoring Responsible
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
• Damage Repair:The TMP shall include the each project
following requirements to minimize component
damage to the existing roadway network:
• A list of precautionary measures to
protect the existing roadway network,
including but not limited to pavements,
curbs,gutters,sidewalks,and drainage
structures, shall be outlined. The
construction contractor(s) shall be
required to implement these measures
throughout the duration of
construction of the water distribution
pipelines.
• The roadway network along the
proposed water distribution
alignment(s)shall be surveyed prior to
the start of project construction
activities, and existing roadway
conditions shall be summarized in a
brief report.
• Any damage to the roadway network
that occurs as a result of project
construction activities shall be noted,
and the project sponsors shall repair all
damage.
• Coordination with Emergency Services:
The TMP shall include requirements to
notify local emergency response providers,
including Five Cities Fire Authority,the San
Luis Obispo Sheriff Department,
ambulance services, and paramedic
services at least one week prior to the start
of work within public rights-of-way if lane
and/or road closures are required.To the
extent possible,the City shall minimize the
duration of disruptions/closures to
roadways and critical access points for
emergency services.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program A-43
City of Arroyo Grande
Central Coast Blue Project
Mitigation Measure/ Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
• Coordination with Recreation Facilities:
The TMP shall require coordination with
owners/operators of any affected
recreational facilities to minimize the
duration of disruptions/closures to
recreational facilities, trails, and adjacent
access points.
• Coordination with South County Transit:If
the proposed project will affect access to
existing South County Transit bus stops,
the TMP shall also include temporary,
alternative bus stops and directional
signage, as determined in coordination
with South County Transit.
• Coordination with Schools:The TMP shall
require coordination with the Lucia Mar
Unified School District in the study area to
minimize construction impacts during the
regular school year.
• Coordinate with Caltrans:If the proposed
project requires lane and/or road closures
of SR 1,the TMP shall require coordination
with Caltrans to ensure the TMP conforms
with Caltrans' Transportation
Management Plan Guidelines.
• Coordination with Nearby Construction
Sites: The TMP shall identify all active
construction projects within 0.25 mile of
project construction sites and require
coordination with the applicants and/or
contractors of these projects during all
phases of construction regarding the
following:
c All temporary lane and/or roadway '...
closures shall be coordinated to limit
overlap of roadway closures
a All major deliveries and haul truck trips
shall be coordinated to limit the
A-44
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure/ Compliance Verification
Monitoring Responsible
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
occurrence of simultaneous deliveries
and haul truck trips
The City, its contractor(s), or its
representative(s) shall meet on a
regular basis with the applicant(s),
contractor(s)or their representative(s)
of active construction projects within
0.25 mile of the project construction
sites during construction to address
any outstanding issues related to
construction traffic.
■ Transportation Control and Safety: The
TMP shall provide for traffic control
measures including flag persons, warning
signs, lights, barricades, cones, and/or
detour routes to provide safe passage of
vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian traffic
and access by emergency responders.
■ Plan Approval:The TMP shall be submitted
to County of San Luis Obispo Department
of Planning and Building and the City of
Grover Beach Community Development
Department for review and approval.
• Public Notification: Prior to the start of
construction, written notice shall be
provided regarding potential land and/or
road closures as described in the TMP.
Notice shall be delivered to potentially
affected properties within a 500-foot
radius of the project construction sites.The
notice shall contain a brief description of
the work, work dates, and contact
information of the City's Planning Division.
The notice shall be delivered ten calendar
days prior to beginning the work and again
at two working days prior to beginning the
work.The notice shall be in the form of a
door hanger made of index paper with a
size of 14 inches by 4.5 inches.The notice
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program A-45
City of Arroyo Grande
Central Coast Blue Project
Mitigation Measure/ Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Frequency Agency Initial Date Comments
shall be printed in both in English and
Spanish.A revised notice shall be delivered
in the event of delays in schedule as soon
as reasonably possible after a delay is
identified and the revised schedule is
known.
IW=injection well;MW=monitoring well;dBA=A-weighted decibel;Lq=equivalent noise level
A-46
OFFICIAL CERTIFICATION
I, JESSICA MATSON, City Clerk of the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis
Obispo, State of California, do hereby certify under penalty of perjury, that the attached
Resolution No. 5066 was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council
of the City of Arroyo Grande on the 23rd day of March, 2021.
WITNESS my hand and the Seal of the City of Arroyo Grande affixed this 30th day of
March, 2021.
•
SSICA MATSON, CITY CLERK