Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Items Rec'd at Mtg.
zi/d2 s 1--eir Subject: Summary Vacation of a Public Equestrian Easement on Ridgeview Way To: City Council; Mayor Russom, Ms Secrest, Ms Loe, Ms Maraviglia, Mr Guthrie From: Joni Benakovich Date: 2/11/2025 Recommendation: I'm requesting the City Council take the Alternative Plan 2 and not adopt the Vacation of a Public Equestrian Easement on Ridgeview Way. I'm the homeowner at 290 Ridgeview Way. I've been a resident at this property since 1998. We purchased the property due to its rural residential zoning which allows up to three horses. I'm a horse owner and have used this equestrian easement over the 27 years I've lived here. We've ridden down Ridgeview Way to Tally Ho and up James Way. Going north along James Way on the east side of the street starting at the Rancho Grande housing development there is a maintained riding easement which continues to Oak Park Boulevard. We have also ridden over to Gularte Road and up Stagecoach Road. Prior homeowners on Ridgeview Way, Sally White (250) and Margie Askelaud (151), welcomed us to ride on their property. There remains several equestrians in the area. To name a few of the larger facilities; the Wagner Ranch on Noyes Road, Central Coast Equine on Printz Road, Clark Ranch on Carpenter Canyon Road. Even though these larger facilities are outside the City limits they all have Arroyo Grande addresses. There are numerous backyard horse owners on Tally Ho Road, Palmar Place, Alta Vista Way, Quebrada Lane, Printz Road as well as the Equestrian Way development and there are many more. Tally Ho received its name from a English horse ranch at the end of the street. He bred and trained Polo ponies. Part of his legacy is the Santa Barbara Polo Club and the Will Roger's Polo Ranch. The Equestrian Way development, less than a mile from my house, has a network of equine trails that are maintained and used. This planned equestrian trail network was to be linked to the easement on Ridgeview Way. There are equestrians in the neighborhood and I'm sure they would use such an easement if it were developed. Maintaining this easement will provide a safer route other than using the busy Hwy 227. In the 1970's and 1980's the City of Arroyo Grande had a vision for this community which was to provide a network of equestrian trails, in policy C/OS3-1. Over the years this vision has been chipped away at and not enforced. When 250 Ridgeview Way was purchased, split and developed by White Ct LLC, Robin Dickerson an Arroyo Grande City official, told me the new owner would need to develop the equestrian easement by laying decomposed granite. The City failed to enforce the recorded requirement. Young people today spend large amounts of time on social media, and working with horses is a healthy outdoor alternative. I hope the Council sees the value in leaving a trail system that supports healthy outside activities. I don't see that happening if bit by bit the City of Arroyo Grande chips away at a trail system that can benefit the whole community. There is a history of equestrians in this valley from the Tally Ho Ranch, the Varian Ranch, Wanda Snow Porter, the Sun King Ranch and more. Let's not be complacent. Let's hold on to our rural community for our grandchildren. It was what this community envisioned in the 1980's so they put it into the City Plan. You can leave that legacy for your grandkids. If we allow the City to continue to drop the ball and to continue to chip away at little pieces, such as, not following the zoning codes or original City plans, we lose precious resources forever. It's like building a swimming pool for kids but never put water in it. You can't swim in a pool without water. So, since no one used the empty pool you fill it with concrete. Yes, this easement section is small at 765 feet but it can be linked to an already established trail system. Lets develop and complete the original trail system so it can be used in the future. Leave that small town rural legacy for our grandchildren. Lets respect what the City previously put in the City plan. Please as the City Council you can prevent the overreach of the City. I'm asking the City Council to not adopt the Vacation of a Public Equestrian Easement on Ridgeview Way. Or, at the very least table it for further discussion. I wish to thank the City Council and the staff of Arroyo Grande City for all their continued effort and hard work. And, as you continue your work, I hope you will consider all the residents of our community, not just a few. z. 1n1 I�� I have a few items I would like to submit for the record 1. A map of the area showing the intersections schools and location of the hotel that we feel would all be impacted. 2. Several articles regarding the concerning situation of Lopez Lake and the endangered species. 3. Map of the surrounding five cities area and all of the hotels currently supporting the visitors to our area. 4. Information on story poles to show the impact of such a large project. Good evening... My name is Edwin Fichtner I reside at 332 Old Ranch Rd. Thank you for taking the time to consider the concerns of our neighborhood regarding the proposed application for a new hotel on the corner of Old Ranch Road and Branch Street. Several of the concerns that a lot of our neighbors have shared have been: - Walking traffic from the hotel to downtown Arroyo Grande especially on W. Branch St. where there are no sidewalks. - Automotive traffic and the impacts to the intersection of West branch and E. Grand Ave. where there are no stop lights or crosswalks. And the intersection of West Branch and the Brisco underpass. I don't believe there needs to be much explanation as to how traffic backs up going up the hill towards the Walmart Trader Joe's shopping center as well as when school gets out from St. Patrick's. - Increased pollution from the additional automotive traffic from people staying at the hotel. - Here is a map and list of 30+ hotels in the greater five cities area. I would be curious to see if there's a study done on how often these hotels are at capacity and whether an additional hotel is really necessary. — Water usage is by far my greatest concern. I've included several articles that have recently been published regarding the battle San Luis Obispo county is having with several environmental groups and the amount of water that they feel needs to be flowing from the dam in order to protect the habitat of the steelhead trout. We all know how the lake has been at quite low levels in the recent past, and we have been on water allocations in our communities. We have seen the wildfires throughout the state and are reminded that having ample water supply is important to our existing communities why would we want to increase the building footprint especially so close to a year that we've had with these issues before us. I would also like to know if there's been an implementation/initiation of CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) and an Environmental Impact Report on the location of the proposed hotel site? Lastly, the size of the hotel is 125 rooms at three stories, and we feel this is an extremely large project for this area and would be a blight to the neighborhood. This project is being proposed by a company from out of town with interests We do not feel are in line with our local concerns. • (-1,, .. 0,.. .f,. - - _ t ,0 }sem. t`:'" ;f' a -. - ' r�� ,. .. "�', �':�a - . . i Five Cities r�+ r Al; PQJ , r. t +. - n ‘.- Center, .. t '.. Iy[]PNO`s°' x r ';�. .. x' 3 : ,` { �. . . . rU 1 I lirTchase Bankri 1111 ,aY` . r C ; :1'i a is `C r • .. t ,< \I) LL i r�. .A.a ..f.Y� ,- gyp)) r �'�� .:f 4. .-. s ,,y,9:',..--.,:-7)' 4I European... , .>� / s:-.7 ofe 0 ` a ate, VVa,Center • -. `r ( Y j - —-t...;:7 "','- <Pi-..-tr,_ . .- .ir .. , . ,..,,.. . _. , , / ,..„.. ,,,,.. -. ,6.,.._. -44r-.: ir____. _-'s: _ . -- ' ' i . ",, Veiizon �`-- 'j • K . 4 •�. Q + 1 • :, ' _ i ! _ r 4,,` `.. _ 4 "United Alethod,st fogcam►: ! .s. 4 '^ , Conference Camp? Trader.Joe's /. • . . . , taiiiiiiii . .. • AF -> sq - , `C ,�� •a a� '� .r. of•.:ui �,+%, � `\ w \ . Arroyo Grande -.r. •11 . # s- f I .. . ` Library �� Ali ir.....,.,.„. . . ..J c, }. Brisco s "+. .. , . i ,r. _ - True Value&�'r - �` . Lumber Mil40e-7l .. 6� ��'. +; 'ter _ir • - 4,-. • r•�- „... ..v . 1 , ,for .4, _ . _,, ‘!..-?s, , - .,....„ _.... _ .1,, kms r' ! :. ( �,- •, - - HST _ - E . Jaizerciie "R., i_,, ..;. t .HM NT D.R�.z, s. 'F A . v 41•44-0,,,,‘,. o th-• ��,, !___.:, I�((\\ /� �.1 •_ , 1 %.";."••* s = a "' • Bank of America n ��f/a `��V WI �� t PJE + ��CAM \ �.s 'I y X ,FPE0 .4 �-„�O REAS . - -' w BaA1 .. 13`1 .2 s� / ` _ 40 Sin . ..., , 44,,„..,..---.,.. . , .,:- ..,- ..-1, ..., ...„.,--,• -•. . , • --...„. ..- . - er#. Re L.NVQs 1a I 1.. I'..}e.- c�f 1 - j „At , , . ='VCA!Animal...r+3 6}GaPN01 Extra -.•�� t n E- ;I *I ;1. Hospi alt,,. et.-: (/ �",c'" y, B r. s'.:`Ai. 6f I,�' x ,'i 2.x .5"-,1 _ •_ '%g,,, 1 �.r� �iI '�� S�V7 l O 1� '., 'o ♦ J .,..\ .. # Z A .✓ rt, r' l !�� .• 3 9<0 �a.F '"i. A .�,• • r- k.1�!' �"•! tit.,' ARCO -� Ti.,„,..,„...,•I44. `� • „. }Al ��`` McDonald c.'�► ` L ,.` .,✓'.. �. ;• 44° .1d<K C` ��'e s-,, ,�1•�.a is • , �}+� t g�}r '�,� ` •I .QI23 s. .' t 1 i• ~ _ - \ . �o ` • y • ' �� `'� -aCoast Motors 9:31 AM Tue Feb 13 ,a calcoastnews.com Cal Coast News SLO County battles order to release Lopez Lake water for fish 0 02/04/2025 vollp ‘751%1 ..1 Steelhead trout By KAREN VELIE San Luis Obispo County is appealing a court order to release more water from Lopez Lake to support fish migration because of the rulings impact on the county's water supply. U.S. District Judge Sherilyn Peace Garnett in December sided with environmental groups with a goal of protecting a threatened species. She ordered San Luis Obispo County to increase the amount of water it releases from the Lopez Lake Dam each year to support steelhead trout migration through Arroyo Grande Creek tor spawning in the watershed. The water then runs into the Pacific Ocean.. The county appealed the decision on Jan. 24 arguing the additional water releases could lead to shortages during drought years. Lopez Lake not only provides water for Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, Pismo Beach, Oceano and Avila Beach, it is also used to fight wild fires. Lopez lake has received only 31% of its average rainfall through Feb. 4. Climate scientists track rain from July 1 through June 31. "We are deeply concerned and support the county's appeal as a result of the potentially significant long-term impact to the water supply and storage that our residents, businesses and ecosystems rely upon," according to a joint statement from Arroyo Grande, Pismo Beach,Grover Beach and the Oceano Community Services District. The county filed its appeal with 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. —Q THE TRIBUN L Log In I Subscribe WELCOME $1.99 FOR 1 Gain unlimited access to our OFFER MONTH exclusive stories. SUBSCRIBE NOW ENVIRONMENT Steelhead trout ruling may force SLO County to release more water from Lopez Lake By Stephanie Zappelli December 04, 2024 4:28 PMI Q 1 \\ X r ar ..'#% Coroner identifies man killed when car crashed and burst into flames in rural SLO County ' Read More • 4' • 1,11111 0.0 • A steelhead trout, about 6 inches long, is collected at the John E.Skinner Delta Fish Protective Facility on April 18,2024, near Byron. Fish are captured at the facility, so they can be returned to the Delta, before they reach the huge Harvey 0. Banks Pumping Plant that feeds the California Aqueduct. Paul Kitagaki Jr.pkitagaki@sacbee.com San Luis Obispo County may soon need to release more water from Lopez Dam to support a silver, speckled fish living in Arroyo Grande Creek. U. S. District Judge Sherilyn Peace Garnett r dam prevented steelhead trout from access Arroyo Grande Creek and blocked the fish f threatening the local species with extinctio] Nov. 27. itt �iti 4lz;r� TOP VIDEOS She ordered the county to develop a water release plan for the dam that better supports steelhead trout and other threatened species in the creek, Environmental Advocates attorney Christopher Sproul said. Steelhead trout are designated as a threatened species by the Endangered Species Act. "This is a landmark ruling for the county of San Luis Obispo and protection of the steelhead," he told The Tribune on Wednesday. The judge ordered the county to develop an support the trout, including habitat consen document said. The National Marine Fisher the plans. The decision follows a lawsuit filed on Aug. California Coastkeeper Alliance, Los Padres Rights Foundation alleging that the county violated the U.S. Endangered Species Act by damaging steelhead trout habitat. "For far too long, county operations at Lopez Dam have jeopardized steelhead and other vital wildlife," Los Padres ForestWatch director of advocacy Benjamin Pitterle said in a news release. "This decision represents not only a win for this incredible species but also an opportunity for local leaders to ensure a sustainable balance between human and ecological needs." While the environmental groups celebrated the ruling, the county was "seriously considering" appealing the decision, assistant county counsel Jon Ansolabehere said in an email to The Tribune. "The decision is an oversimplification of a complex issue that the county and other resource agencies have been attempting to meaningfully address for many years," he wrote. "While the county shares the goal of protection of endangered and protected species within the Arroyo Grande Creek and watershed, it is unfortunate that the individuals who filed this lawsuit chose to use the judicial system as a means of hijacking the regulatory process that the county was already going through with the various resource agencies at the expense of the South County community." Read More :17414111"... . J 1 V : • ' lit 1 7. , . , •• 3ttt � , a , z :, .leer,} .� t: � S <4 �; ° .fir, � k � i ! p M J 1 ya !1 Lopez Lake was at 52%capacity in February 2017. David Middlecamp dmiddlecamp@thetribunenews.com Lopez Dam harms steelhead trout, judge said Steelhead trout are an adventurous species. Born in rivers and lakes, they live in freshIA to the ocean for up to three years to maturE spawn, according to the Center for Biologic as rainbow trout, the difference being rainl ir4 ;1(i m.,(• freshwater. The National Marine Fisheries Service designated Arroyo Grande Creek as "critical habitat" that supports spawning, growth and migration of steelhead trout, the ruling said. In her decision, Garnett ..id the environmental group. p esented compelling evidence to prove that the county's operations of the dam harmed steelhead trout habitat and migration. Lopez Dam blocks steelhead trout in the lower creek from accessing prime spawning habitat above the dam. Additionally, juvenile trout born above the dam can't migrate out to sea. Meanwhile, the county's water release schedule is not ideal for trout. A larger volume of water is released into Arroyo Grande Creek from July to November, but trout migrate between December and June — so they need water in the creek at that time, the ruling said. On multiple occasions, the National Marine Fisheries Service said water diversions from the dam reduced steelhead trout habitat and migration opportunities, causing the fish population to decline, the judge said. "The available record overwhelmingly displays the harmful effects from defendant's activity, such that the Arroyo Grande Creek steelhead nnnulatinn may be in peril," Garnett wrote in her decision. >< Garnett said the county did not present eno operations did not harm steelhead trout. "The record reflects that defendant's condu migrate, spawn and rear in their high-quali according to experts and agencies, stunt the species' recovery." i sem+ , "I , • i iii I I i ill EL..- . .. , _ . . .. Mark Hutchinson, deputy director of SLO County Public Works, leads tour of the Lopez Dam spillway. David Middlecamp dmiddlecamp@thetribunenews.corn Will county release more water from Lopez Dam? Lopez Dam blocked Arroyo Grande Creek to create Lopez Lake, a reservoir in Arroyo Grande that provides drinking water to about 48,000 county residents. Right now, the county releases water from 1 Interim Downstream Release Schedule. ThE at least 3 cubic feet of water per second during the wet season, and up to 7 cubic feet of water per second during the dry season —which is about 4.5 million gallons of water per day for the dry season, according to Ansolabehere. The amount of water rc.,..sed into the creek varies depending on "visual monitoring of the creek," he said in an email to The Tribune. "The complexity of water releases at the Lopez Dam cannot be overstated," he wrote. The judge ordered the county and environmental groups to meet and develop a new water release schedule for the dam. "The county does not believe that we will come to an agreement with the plaintiffs for a new release schedule," Ansolabehere wrote. "Instead, the county is proposing one taking into consideration the judge's ruling and based on known science and hydrology of the creek to date." Sproul, however, was confident the judge would select his client's water release plan. Their plan would require the county to release an amount of water "sufficient to create a minimum depth of 0.7 feet over 25% of all critical riffle cross-sections for at least 24 hours and such longer duration as shown by qualified experts retained by the county to be necessary to provide steelhead with a sufficient migratory timeframe," the court document said. Their proposed plan also offers an alternate releases based on the amount of water in ti document. The key is to release a consistent amount of water at a high enough volume to signal to steelhead trout in the ocean to return to the creek to spawn, Sproul said. During a dry year, his c it called for the release on 2v rabic feet of water per second on the first and second day of the managed release, and 10 cubic feet of water released per second on the third day. During a wet water year, the county would release 30 cubic feet of water per second on the first day, followed by 50, 40, 30, 20 and 10 cubic feet of water released per second on each subsequent day. "The critical thing is that the flow gets sustained long enough for them to make it," Sproul said. "But it can gradually decrease it because that's what would happen naturally." The county and the environmental groups must submit their water release plans to the judge by Wednesday, and she will select one for the county to implement. Want to see more content like this? dp AP. u Tribune Afternoon Headlines Stay updated with the latest SLO County news from The Tribune, sent to your inbox at 4 p.m. daily. SIGN UP By submitting,I agree to the Privacy Policy,and Terms of Service. RELATED STORIES FROM SAN LUIS OBIcnn TDTQI IMC ENVIRONMENT El 'Good fire is medicine.' ytt Northern l\ Chumash Tribe to lead cultural burn in d SLO h November 22, 2024 9:30 AM D Read More 40Stephanie Zappelli The Tribune se 805-781-7816 Stephanie Zappelli is the climat 3nge and environment reporter for Tf._ ..ibune. She grew up in San Diego, and graduated from Cal Poly with a journalism degree. When not writing, Stephanie enjoys reading and exploring the outdoors. Take Us With You Real-time updates and all local stories you want right in the palm of your hand. EN SAN LUIS OBISPO TRIBUNE APP VIEW NEWSLETTERS -* Read More SUBSCRIPTIONS LEARN MORE Start a Subscription About Us McClatchy Advertising Customer Service Contact Us Place an Ad Edition Newsletters Place a Classified Ad • About Us • What We Do • News • Resources • Donate Protecting Endangered Species in SLO September 17th,2024 #,. 'sem s: b. r •!• rtc , •� * . s ,. • � a � y �_��' 'fit ]�,��' ��: '. Ni • For three decades,the County of San Luis Obispo has harmed endangered species in Arroyo Grande Creek through its operation of Lopez Dam.Despite warnings from state agencies,the County has repeatedly failed to release enough water from Lopez Dam to sustain fish and wildlife in the Creek,which once served as historic spawning grounds for steelhead.Thirty years of putting endangered species at risk of extinction is far too long. Now,California Coastkeeper Alliance and local environmental groups have filed a lawsuit in federal court against the County for violations of the Endangered Species Act.The goal of the lawsuit is to ensure that the County releases sufficient flows of water from Lopez Dam to support endangered wildlife.The lawsuit also asks that the County secure fish passage past Lopez Dam so that steelhead can access spawning grounds in the headwaters of Arroyo Grande Creek in Los Padres National Forest,and commit to other essential habitat restoration for endangered species. Steelhead are a keystone species for the San Luis Obispo region.In the 19th Century,the San Luis Obispo and Santa Ynez regions supported the largest runs of Southern steelhead throughout their range,likely between 20,000 to 30,000 adults per year.Today,their populations are estimated at fewer than 500 adults Arroyo Grande Creek has only about 20 percent of historical estuarine habitat remaining.Despite these losses,Arroyo Grande Creek and its tributaries have been identified by federal and state resource agencies as essential habitat for the survival and recovery of South-Central California Coast steelhead If our government will not step up and enforce the County's egregious violations of the Endangered Species Act,we will.This is a unique opportunity for local leaders to commit to sensible measures that balance the needs of people with the needs of a waterway,and ensure that the region does not drive these ecologically and culturally valuable species to extinction. • Our next step is a court hearing on October 2nd where we will argue for a preliminary injunction to prevent the imminent extinction risk to steelhead.Our motion requests injunctive measures tailored after recommendations by the County's own experts As one federal resource agency put it:"SLO County has been blowing us off for decades."It is time the County be forced to act. Sean Bothwell Executive Director Sean Bothwell leads CCKA's initiatives to fight for swimmable,fishable,and drinkable waters for all Californians. Categories:Enforcement Huns for fish,i[apyening Non A Landmark Victory for California Waters Governor Newsom Signs CCKA Legislation into Law» About Us California Coastkeeper Alliance fights for swimmable,fishable,and drinkable waters for Californians today-and for future generations Learn more... Subscribe to Our Newsletter email address Subscribe Media Contact Sean Bothwell:sbothwell[at]cacoastkeeper.org For recent press releases,visit our Resources nage. Join the Conversation Tweets by_@CA_Waterkeepers Search Enter search term Search Categories • Agriculture • Blue Business Council • Clean Water Accountability Project • Climate Change • Climate Change Impacts to Rivers • Coastal Power Plants • Coastal Water Ouali • Dams • Desalination • Drinking Watet • 12rnught&Water Conservation • Enforcement • Flows for Fish • napp_ening Now • Tides • Legislation • Marine Hopp pots • News Story. • Ocean Acidification • Offshore Oji • Press Releases • $ea Level Rise • $tormwater • Stormwater Citpture • Trash • Water Recycling • Waterkeeper Alliance • Waterkeepers at Work • About Us • What We Do • News • Resources • Donate ® ©® enter your email address Subscribe California Coastkeeper Alliance 1100 11th Street,3rd Floor,Sacramento,CA 95814 California Coastkeeper Alliance(CCKA)is a tax-exempt 501(c)3 organization. Contributions to CCKA are tax-deductible to the fullest extent of the law. LV V 1/ VROV , 46° • MENU Environment & Energy ( FOLLOW 3 Followers SLO County fighting court order it says would have 'catastrophic impact' on water supply at Lopez Lake 000 / o:oo By Dave Alley FOLLOW �1;Luyu_l/uAou 46° MENU I LOPEZ LAKE, Calif. - San Luis Obispo County recently filed an appeal on a decision by a federal judge who ruled late last year the county must release more water from Lopez Lake in order to help protect the endangered steelhead trout. The ruling followed a lawsuit filed in August 2024 by a coalition of four environmental groups - San Luis Obispo Coastkeeper, Los Padres ForestWatch, California Coastkeeper Alliance and Ecological Rights Foundation - who allege the county, which operates Lopez Lake, has been in violation of the Endangered Species Act. "We filed the lawsuit because this has been going on, quite frankly, for 30 years," said Sean Bothwell, California Coastkeeper Alliance Executive Director. "The county has been aware that they've been endangering steelhead trout in the region since 1994, and they have been working with the wildlife agencies for 20 years now. They've quite frankly have been dragging their feet to come up with a strategy to protect steelhead. My organization and the coalition just felt like enough was enough, that we weren't getting anywhere. The county's plan has consistently been rejected by the wildlife agencies as insufficient and we really felt like 30 years has gone by. Steelhead are endangered and they need protection and it was time for a court to step in and and make the county start taking this more seriously." According to the plaintiffs, San Luis Obispo County is failing to release enough water from Lopez Dam to help ensure the natural life cycle of endangered fish in Arroyo Grande Creek, which runs below the dam. The plaintiffs argue there needs to be an increased release of water flows from Lopez Dam at specific times of the year to support the complex life cycle needs of steelhead trout and other wildlife. • MENU • Have your say. Leave a comment below and let us know what you think. Be the First Comment The coalition also said the county needs to provide safe passage for fish past Lopez Dam, "so that steelhead can access historic spawning grounds in the headwaters of Arroyo Grande Creek and commit to other essential upstream and downstream habitat enhancement needs for endangered species." "Biodiversity overall is important," said Bothwell. "That's why we have the Endangered Species Act. The steelhead that reside and spawn in this area and in the Arroyo Grande Creek are a very special part of that species. They are distinct from other steelhead in the area. Wildlife agencies have said that they need extra protection above and beyond just other Steelhead in California and so it's important that we we protect those species. They've been harmed for years and decades due to the lack of flow coming out of Lopez Reservoir." In December 2024, U.S. District Judge, Sherilyn Peace Garnett, ruled in favor of the plantiffs and ordered a • . ��LUyU_1/UAOU 'Q- 46° MENU I "The county has chosen to appeal this particular lawsuit because it would be detrimental to our South County water supply," said San Luis Obispo County Fourth District Supervisor Jimmy Paulding. "The cities of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, Pismo Beach, the Oceano Community Services District, and the Avila Community Services District all rely on Lopez Reservoir for South County water. The judge should have balanced interest. That means, any potential impacts to endangered species like the steelhead trout against the need to protect our South County water supply and have that sustainable source of water. In this particular case, there is no proof, in my opinion, that the steelhead trout are being affected in their ability to spawn. That's something that would actually be determined based on a trial and experts rendering their opinion and other evidence, studies, etc." "Not only is Lopez Lake relied on as a source of water for drinking water supply, it absolutely is critical for our fire suppression needs in the event of significant wildfire," said Paulding. "Right now, what I'm told is that we are releasing about 15-acre feet of water per day and that is an incredibly concerning number to consider. The most frustrating and alarming aspect of this particular order is that based on the data. If we had been forced to release this amount of water for the last five-to-ten year period, if we look at when we had previous drought, we would have drained the lake twice, which is obviously incredibly frustrating." Bothwell disputes the notion the Lopez Lake water supply is at risk from the court's decision and accused the county of using scare tactics in its messaging to the public. "Quite frankly, the press release was deliberately misleading and was really leveraging sadly, the LA fires and the tragedy there, and the political climate we have nationwide," said Bothwell. "They're leveraging that to fear monger the community, quite frankly. Their own consultants have said that the reservoir has, if we are in drought for the next four • ' . �t,Luyu_i/uAOu 'Q• 46° MENU • i • water loss or any any lack of water to fight fire fires." Paulding pointed out San Luis Obispo County has been working towards a plan that would help protect the steelhead and other endangered species that inhabit the lake and creek areas. In its press release last week, the county also indicated specifically it "has been working with National Marine Fisheries Service and US Fish and Wildlife Service to develop a Habitat Conservation Plan. The Habitat Conservation Plan is intended to authorize a variety of County activities in Arroyo Grande Creek, including continued operation of Lopez Dam or the benefit of local wildlife and San Luis Obispo County residents." Paulding also shared the county is not alone in its battle against the lawsuit and indicated it is being backed in its effort from several local and statewide agencies. "We have a lot of support from the agricultural community, from the recreational community that actually uses uses Lopez Lake for recreation purposes," said Paulding. "California State Association of Counties has signed on, the California Farm Bureau, the San Luis Obispo Farm Bureau, the Pacific Legal Foundation, all of our zone three partners, City of Arroyo Grande, City of Grover Beach, Oceano Community Services District, City of Pismo Beach. These are just a short list of different organizations that are supporting the county's appeal and are working with us to seek resolution through a settlement with the plaintiffs." Both Paulding and Bothwell each indicated they are hopeful the two sides can come together and reach a mutually agreeable solution at some point in the near future. "This is just preliminary," said Bothwell. "We're hoping to resolve that as soon as possible to save everyone money. Quite frankly, we don't want a protracted and prolonged appeal decision and court battles that only cost the taxpayers I 46° • MENU fish. the last thing we want to do is have this tied up in court for years and years and have the preliminary injunction go on forever. We're still hopeful that the county will come to the table with a reasonable proposal that helps all parties out and we think we can get there." "At this point in time, we are in compliance with the judge's order," said Paulding. "Having appealed that order, we working in earnest to try to settle this litigation with the plaintiffs. It would be very costly for the county, for the taxpayers, for the ratepayers. We would love to avoid that whole costly process and work toward an agreed agreeable settlement." Article Topic Follows: Environment & Energy FOLLOW 3 Followers Jimmy Paulding ( FOLLOW Lopez Lake FOLLOW San Luis Obispo County FOLLOW ) Slo County FOLLOW Steelhead Trout [ FOLLOW Jump to comments Dave Alley Author Dave Alley is a reporter and anchor at Profile News Channel 3-12. To learn more Photo about Dave, click here. MORE NEWS s. KEYT News App Breaking News Alerts DOWNLOAD &Video On Demand NEVIS CHANNEL • 1 5mm 530 -` MENU norm.tem own. PROGRAM NOTE: The Latest Coverage of the Santa 1 of 2 Barbara International Film Festival D Seniors Born 1941-1979 Receive 55 Benefits This Month if They Ask WalletJump Environment & Energy FOLLOW SLO County fighting court order it says would have 'catastrophic impact' on water supply at Lopez Lake �I Own your energy. �` � %'' ogr# — - - - ef - -- - - - - 1.7.0 - Lam' $i Ii h Sol .• + Battery. G `' 411= By Dave Alley FOLLOW February 6, 2025 7:05 pm Published February 6, 2025 6:52 pm f X in P.rA 4 6 LOPEZ LAKE, Calif. - San Luis Obispo County recently filed an appeal on a decision by a federal judge who ruled late last year the county must release more water from Lopez Lake in order to help protect the endangered steelhead trout. The ruling followed a lawsuit filed in August 2024 by a coalition of four environmental groups - San Luis Obispo Coastkeeper, Los Padres ForestWatch, California Coastkeeper Alliance and Ecological Rights Foundation - who allege the county, which operates Lopez Lake, has been in violation of the Endangered Species Act. ADVERTISING ADVERTISING II Now Streaming Sign Up "We filed the lawsuit because this has been going on, quite frankly, for 30 years," said Sean Bothwell, California Coastkeeper Alliance Executive Director. "The county has been aware that they've been endangering steelhead trout in the region since 1994, and they have been working with the wildlife agencies for 20 years now. They've quite frankly have been dragging their feet to come up with a strategy to protect steelhead. My organization and the coalition just felt like enough was enough, that we weren't getting anywhere. The county's plan has consistently been rejected by the wildlife agencies as insufficient and we really felt like 30 years has gone by. Steelhead are endangered and they need protection and it was time for a court to step in and and make the county start taking this more seriously." According to the plaintiffs, San Luis Obispo County is failing to release enough water from Lopez Dam to help ensure the natural life cycle of endangered fish in Arroyo Grande Creek, which runs below the dam. The plaintiffs argue there needs to be an increased release of water flows from Lopez Dam at specific times of the year to support the complex life cycle needs of steelhead trout and other wildlife. ADVERTISEMENT R Start the con, tion Have your say. Leave a comment below and let us know what you think. Be the First to Comment The coalition also said the county needs to provide safe passage for fish past Lopez Dam, "so that steelhead can access historic spawning grounds in the headwaters of Arroyo Grande Creek and commit to other essential upstream and downstream habitat enhancement needs for endangered species." "Biodiversity overall is important," said Bothwell. "That's why we have the Endangered Species Act. The steelhead that reside and spawn in this area and in the Arroyo Grande Creek are a very special part of that species. They are distinct from other steelhead in the area. Wildlife agencies have said that they need extra protection above and beyond just other Steelhead in California and so it's important that we we protect those species. They've been harmed for years and decades due to the lack of flow coming out of Lopez Reservoir." In December 2024, U.S. District Judge, Sherilyn Peace Garnett, ruled in favor of the plantiffs and ordered a preliminary injunction that forces San Luis Obispo County to increase the volume of water released into Arroyo Grande Creek. "The county has chosen to appeal this particular lawsuit because it would be detrimental to our South unty water supply," said Sal ais Obispo County Fourth District Supervisor Jimml ]ulding. "The cities of Arroyt _ rande, Grover Beach, Pismo Beach, the Oceano Community Services District, and the Avila Community Services District all rely on Lopez Reservoir for South County water. The judge should have balanced interest. That means, any potential impacts to endangered species like the steelhead trout against the need to protect our South County water supply and have that sustainable source of water. In this particular case, there is no proof, in my opinion, that the steelhead trout are being affected in their ability to spawn. That's something that would actually be determined based on a trial and experts rendering their opinion and other evidence, studies, etc." "Not only is Lopez Lake relied on as a source of water for drinking water supply, it absolutely is critical for our fire suppression needs in the event of significant wildfire," said Paulding. "Right now, what I'm told is that we are releasing about 15- acre feet of water per day and that is an incredibly concerning number to consider. The most frustrating and alarming aspect of this particular order is that based on the data. If we had been forced to release this amount of water for the last five-to-ten year period, if we look at when we had previous drought, we would have drained the lake twice, which is obviously incredibly frustrating." Bothwell disputes the notion the Lopez Lake water supply is at risk from the court's decision and accused the county of using scare tactics in its messaging to the public. "Quite frankly, the press release was deliberately misleading and was really leveraging sadly, the LA fires and the tragedy there, and the political climate we have nationwide," said Bothwell. "They're leveraging that to fear monger the community, quite frankly. Their own consultants have said that the reservoir has, if we are in drought for the next four years, the region would be fine with the existing amount levels in the reservoir. I mean, it's at 91% capacity full. It's raining today. There is no immediate fE - of any drinking water loss c ny any lack of water to fight fire fires." Paulding pointed out San Luis Obispo County has been working towards a plan that would help protect the steelhead and other endangered species that inhabit the lake and creek areas. In its press release last week, the county also indicated specifically it "has been working with National Marine Fisheries Service and US Fish and Wildlife Service to develop a Habitat Conservation Plan. The Habitat Conservation Plan is intended to authorize a variety of County activities in Arroyo Grande Creek, including continued operation of Lopez Dam or the benefit of local wildlife and San Luis Obispo County residents." Paulding also shared the county is not alone in its battle against the lawsuit and indicated it is being backed in its effort from several local and statewide agencies. "We have a lot of support from the agricultural community, from the recreational community that actually uses uses Lopez Lake for recreation purposes," said Paulding. "California State Association of Counties has signed on, the California Farm Bureau, the San Luis Obispo Farm Bureau, the Pacific Legal Foundation, all of our zone three partners, City of Arroyo Grande, City of Grover Beach, Oceano Community Services District, City of Pismo Beach. These are just a short list of different organizations that are supporting the county's appeal and are working with us to seek resolution through a settlement with the plaintiffs." Both Paulding and Bothwell each indicated they are hopeful the two sides can come together and reach a mutually agreeable solution at some point in the near future. "This is just preliminary," said Bothwell. "We're hoping to resolve that as soon as possible to save everyone money. Quite frankly, we don't want a protracted and prolonged appeal decisio nd court battles that only cc the taxpayers more money. We really would i au ier that money go to restorauun projects and helping both improve drinking water supplies and improve the amount of water available for fish. the last thing we want to do is have this tied up in court for years and years and have the preliminary injunction go on forever. We're still hopeful that the county will come to the table with a reasonable proposal that helps all parties out and we think we can get there." "At this point in time, we are in compliance with the judge's order," said Paulding. "Having appealed that order, we working in earnest to try to settle this litigation with the plaintiffs. It would be very costly for the county, for the taxpayers, for the ratepayers. We would love to avoid that whole costly process and work toward an agreed agreeable settlement." Article Topic Follows: Environment & Energy : FOLLOW Jimmy Paulding FOLLOW ) Lopez Lake ( FOLLOW San Luis Obispo County FOLLOW ' Slo County FOLLOW Steelhead Trout FOLLOW Jump to comments 1 ,fes d� af " ,�; i� SPONSORED CONTFNT �;, I.. � _.a ,,,wid„ c P A t.r .r! yam, ., .4..;,,,,a,:,..??,-,..A.,,.- - 1 ' Yt t ., Experience the magic of Cook ''--'*-4.t �e =*- County this winter ,, a- _ _ f'< _ ,• � ;, er _: By Visit Cook County Dave Alley �.,;v ' Dave Alley is a reporter and anchor at News Channel 3-12. To learn more about Dave, click here. ) - e damF Y li n a cr �J < +tip 0' `i ,. , <: -r raj" n' ' i. ,$`r "y .'a �. ", __ F '14 ''''''''.4''.. . ..0' kip. , \it 0'{� .. 4 . y4Y r .s ' d • R' " ' • • t'r: ' .. � !_rfy rijri . G08 ! ' i'-',',A,'.- ;. r o .4 •. f _ ^. , : = - G. 's .. ',.,..4.,.; '.. - ';‘ - A *,.f. .. ... -.-$4*r...ri ,c.-;>. if 7r.--- ,..,E- ,, i i.;, 2 cam, v '4 .. -o asoma. ` .* ----:1'.f;.;:* 1f :•l, : cvi a +. . NOYES �C Thum� ✓ , RD L. mow/.. ' 4 '14. 11 4�' • '�, L tT ..,,ti ='r;z. ,w� it Y • r•v ','•;.': ' &E%- o "'A"O Oii Z. ° �F . OTU, j c. _J - 1� . di 1 ., �.�.�.. .*e'1 3 e gK:6LVU.�� PF '3 L ��a OPT. - +� , -o'5N e . E `° r` ,. C7 c?p 'a d= c m.at -,2.6 QU t'y� -=T W: oamr c:. ; �.fi.1"2' .,+ tea[ , 2 COm = ar . i . _ - l �9 ' sri► ` (( w 9m • . -9l t13v-' „° A- ' - � I I M • A _ e `! �`--- U s. r7 C3 '5,140.e r i a a � �.�. ye ` ;1).1'787� t,., O0 ..• O > Ira N P'CA3 i. d! t° ' • U tE, 1/ : r C co yt a) ,..r '• co ' o W U rf. �' a) L 4— s LL a) tn 4:• �I ' / , I o - 10 18AM Sat Feb 8 +«• 7 is S'.. 48% 1.--1 ' idle Q Hotels in the five cities area X r r (Q)(Top Rated)CAD Amenities �� ( S - , J Imo} P I {' The Pismo Beach Ho... , a.Y Hotel • 16 mi Z� *4.1 Booking.com `. C' ~ Q American Inn 1 is Hotel • 15 mi „� '. -r': *3.8 Booking.com • • Pismo Beach Club ' • c. � 4. ; Hotel 16 mi •�; all100% S r,' o t ;.S a ,� © Kon Tiki inn „rr, Ocean Palms Motel ' �' • . Gcean Palms • , 8 Motel *4.2 Booking.com . I i . r' „. I,, k Hilton Garden © Days Inn by '\X iti %Inn San Luis ' � 'Wyndham Arroyo" " •• t«yt itik , s „oblspoqPismo'1 . '.,,,5 •GrandePtsnio� *•. . seine Beach; eat :� Beach.. : ' ,�: • Shore Cliff Hotel rnow +i more Holiday Innt_ _+1 more lyiy i •'' 4,,,fiTY ' Express Grover • +. 4 # \ Hotel • 17 ml • $$$ 0- ,ti 52 A 4iy Beach Pismo fig„ 4`i* lust. Re mh`Area an i The Agrarian t *4.5 Tripadvisor ,{$; "'M'ga IHG Hotel c Aloha Inn° HotelBW�� ., American Inn „may r;� ,r c,j,yy��,, r I Signature s ssnrrriiyn ` 'It. ▪�. Collection et �M `�rd% I • 71�iii'' ,fir ♦7r - ' aiiiiti,_^,, --, . .,.- Kon Tiki Innilli . • ' k' .t0til _ Resort • 17 mi 4 � it1 ,,* - ▪ .` "'' *4.5 Tripadvisor -= .r Paoiflo btu u �k ' Oceano r r r� PlazaResortt:. a �y« 5 ° r" t t'iAC Ab tI 9C �• , I if›, t,„,-. • ,h `i.f t. • • y,'S SeaCrest OceanFron... ,,I «` l M1 .rl. ( *� �ld° ;�C 0 Hotel • 17 mi • $$$ II *4.5 Tripadvisorti y;' ,r --*e'� ,� p- 4� '� �' "' '�«� 'ms' m ' f Sandcastle Hotel On... s:- • t — a i :1,,,...„...,' y ` : , , Hotel • 16 mi • $$$ <. R �` «: 9* *4.5 Tripadvisor '"� w.n < .� SeaVenture Beach H... 111. '1' v , �, ' Resort • 16 mi • $$$ ,� „w i4A. *4.5 Tripadvisor �� . Edgewater Inn & Suit... ......4. ; % `'' y -;.« . i _ Hotel • 16 mi $p_ i0 -4�} Callender .4i *4.0 Booking.com t ., , 'e-, 1 AIN v 't log :•jJ° The Agrarian Hotel,... y- s; 10:18 AM Sat Feb 8 ..... 1 ,r 48% NI ':' vili Hotels in the five cities area `< V (Q) (Top Rated( All Amenities(S is3D Hilton Garden Inn Sa... 3. Hotel • 16 mi • $$ t''.4,3.. ,r k.` ai '. *4.0 Tripadvisor Z `: . ,)oy+, ,• .. ' Oxford Suites i ' • v r Y Hotel • 15 mi • $$ r ;S *4.5 Tripadvisor . The Grove at Pismo... iii V Beach Resort • 16 mi • $ ice.r •* * 3.5 Tripadvisor t I(a k ri Tiki Inn • Vespera Resort On P... N - Hotel • 16 mi • $$$$ 7, if, r .sl011114„,Ocean Palms *4.5 Tripadvisor � ;�� Motel - i-- a � • Hilton Garden ;'A Days Inn by x.tV V w. l T Inn_SanLuis' k Wyndham Arroyo e }-' Inn at the Pier Pismo... .11,_Obispo/Pigmo ©,,,,. ffGrandePismo s, rpr -`,:-.Bleach, , ..3 ba c more,. Holiday Innxr• ;1.!1":01::(;:c•.: •*. .y V t ' f r tk4• �. Hotel • 16 mi . lii4`i=.',!s ExpreestiGrover .k„ . f it�H 2a-Beach P,ismo,,'e x:' :17:4,4%,: � ,�' .. •-t *4.1 Booking.com -;'�*- 1 TheA rarian �' ,,,, Beacti Areaan t g. ur» IHG Hotel Aloh`alnn .Hotel,}B. American Inn ..♦ w,. + j" k s Signature r ` sarrMo `�itn ` 7s 4i i� .Collection's Holiday Inn Express... 1, ,. . 7;11111.41;i: r 5 t :.r„ k : ,, , • Hotel • 15 mi • $$ 4 - . .., t ! ,I', �r4 r ;. * 3.5 Tripadvisor - E��'► rrr +r,, ft, *..4---, r Pacifics. ee Oceano 4 r• ' Plaza Resort 41.129.19;•44* Best Western Casa... t t ,x.. • I } tN.. Hotel • 15 mi • $$ 11. - ,,` I�-'X m -s a � .. p .1 � 4 . * 4.0 Tripadvisor I P"" c�i , 5.4Air Days Inn by Wyndha... �� • �" lit. \ Hotel • 15 mi s >;' • * 3.8 Booking.conI 4 t=; , "� 1! r*4,. *. -,-.? , tf '.....';',,:,',,s1', Hampton Inn & Suite... t`; 4:4 ` .; Hotel • 15 mi • $:,. MI i " *4.0 Tripadvisor ,, .:, ' �l 11, . 446 ",tom,- . Inn at the Cove �` � ,..4-1•:,,,r,-.,..,-. . &I..- it Hotel • 17 mi • $$$ ilii. ..I"I� H� # * �` � ,:rr :, *4.5 Tripadvisor 1 " L Callender T Z I,sk55° `6% 'f •-+`a AGI 31 Beach House Inn ft. . ,' -+t- F .. -,, Hotel • 16 mi • t '7t 4 \` ""., .I, 4 $ f 4,1 `'���,q Japualleo , 4 ,i • ,. a a.: Z6uissilnl6uR.I/OWOs pet ° , 444 lr ,t :- • " :.t �� �3}ltA. • %.. WOO.6uljoog 9•E T"- , •, , � , alnueaap sap!!81,11 40, !ul g� • ezeld a!Ignd � ,�+ Id aa!d yoeag owsld • 4 I } C' ,owriy�r t I •; rfla1T`" zl saw ezeld 111 ; _ L .' i n� i OUeBpQ y: �ol�loed %001. V '� ,r 't� •`; I 1rlw ..•H yoeas a.lnlua/eaS Jitt f .k �R ' jaall O' -'44 nviMi M;Ss� erM '1"11•4:ti ' r einieu-BIS j� ri, UUIN,••ueauewy WOO'6UI 00 Y �•B um eyOly _'"� _ alp � .4 .� 8 Z b T M8.18lOHy k> i H.'JHI, • .;.^. �^'' _ ueuei6 a "' '•ue�eaiy:4oeag `r:n...,..i � IlU Li � tJUI 4r,., d,41 i►jl ou,Fr stiwasrag i+ 4 . • Ja ouOssesdx3pEKiEEiIC� It eas au}/(q uu! a6elloo v ,. , a, 4V� ," e43e09 a' uul�IepiloHl� .,4, _, +'ia ter( .g : , .' peowsldapuei0� owsld/odsuq r i w, 'w.:z" a• •;OxoJiyiwelipuAM�. i�.'"*,apj70 ni S:uu1�".£ p y- .« ,+�: ^ Aq uul sAea • y uap�e0 uoil!H l' h I z Joslnpedpi s•b • r ro .y '" wiled ueaop!t� IliCH $$$ • !w LI • liosed . 'S asnoLfLl6Il OWSId !til VI. • IaIOH ` uul 'Wold �r ,��+ '_"IP woo•6ui>oo8 3 V ~t I bl • TJosed s 1posa8 ezeid o!i!Oed a . ., 2_ , , 4j dlal.0b +a�Z 0° iW gL - u >j MEI . ,• % .to y K: a i,losaa sauna owsld 4E _ ”1411 . :,. ' .. . S ^ saliivawb II d Pe/e2:1 doi 0 r X ewe sei !o eAI4 aql u! slalOH G1 ♦ ": r II %8b ��A.• ••• 8 qaj les 110/61.:Oi eLaws I eCases l California Laws , 'forma Code of Regulations I Illinois Court Thunties & Cities of California l Code of $amu$ Sign In Sign Up m San Luis Obispo County . County Code • Title 23. COASTAL ZONE LAND USE . Chapter 23.04. SITE DESIGN STANDARDS § 23.04.210. Visual Resources. Latest version. The following standards apply within Critical Viewsheds, Scenic Corridors and Sensitive Resource Area (SRA) Combining Designations that are intended to protect visual resources, as identified in this title, the Official Maps, Part III of the Land Use Element, or the area plans of the Local Coastal Plan. a. Applicability of standards. The following standards apply to new development required by the Coastal Zone Land Use Ordinance to have a land use permit, except that the following are exempt from some or all of the standards (a)-(d): (1) Agricultural accessory structures that are 600 square feet or less in area, or other minor agriculturally-related development (e.g., fencing, wells). (2) Project not visible. An exemption from the standards in the following subsections c(1), (2), (4), and (5) may be granted if documentation is provided demonstrating that the development will not be visible from the shoreline, public beaches, the Morro Bay estuary, any of the roads specified in the applicable area plan planning area standards for Critical Viewsheds, Scenic Corridors or SRA's that are intended to protect visual resources. Such documentation shall be prepared by a qualified professional acceptable to the Planning Director and at a minimum shall provide scaled topographic and building elevations with preliminary grading, drainage, and building plans. An exemption from the standard in subsection c(6) may be granted if the preceding documentation is provided, and if it is determined by the Planning Director that open space preservation within the Critical Viewshed or SRA is not otherwise needed to protect the scenic and visual resource, sensitive habitat or watershed, as identified in the area plans. b. Permit requirement. Minor Use Permit approval, unless Development Plan approval is otherwise required by this title or planning area standards of the area plans. The land use permit or land division application shall include the following: (1) A landscaping plan, grading and drainage plan, lighting plan fencing plan, and visu<' —alysis, including the use of story-pol-- -s required, that is prepared .,, licensed architect, a licensed lands ) architect or other qualified professional acceptable to the Director of Planning and Building. The plans and visual analysis shall be used to determine compliance with the following standards. c. Standards for Critical Viewsheds and SRAs for protection of visual resources. The following standards apply within areas identified as Critical Viewsheds or SRAs in the area plans for protection of visual resources. (1) Location of development. Locate development, including, but not limited to primary and secondary structures, accessory structures, fences, utilities, water tanks, and access roads, in the least visible portion of the site, consistent with protection of other resources. Emphasis shall be given to locations not visible from major public view corridors. Visible or partially visible development locations shall only be considered if no feasible non- visible development locations are identified, or if such locations would be more environmentally damaging. New development shall be designed (e.g., height, bulk, style, materials, color) to be subordinate to, and blend with, the character of the area. Use naturally occurring topographic features and slope-created "pockets" first and native vegetation and berming second, to screen development from public view and minimize visual intrusion. (2) Structure visibility. Minimize structural height and mass by using low-profile design where feasible, including sinking structures below grade. Minimize the visibility of structures by using design techniques to harmonize with the surrounding environment. (3) Ridgetop development. Locate structures so that they are not silhouetted against the skyline or ridgeline as viewed from the shoreline, public beaches, the Morro Bay estuary, and applicable roads or highways described in the applicable planning area standards in the area plans, unless compliance with this standard is infeasible or results in more environmental damage than an alternative. (4) Landscaping for hillside and ridgetop development. Provide screening of development at plant maturity using native vegetation of local stock, non- invasive, or drought-tolerant vegetation without obstructing major public views (e.g., screening should occur at the building site rather than along a public road). The use of vegetation appropriate to the site shall be similar to existing native vegetation. Alternatives to such screening may be approved if visual impacts are avoided through use of natural topographic features and the design of structures. Provisions shall be made to maintain visual screening for the life of the development. (5) Land divisions and lot-line adjustments - cluster requirement. New land divisions lot-line adjustments where the only .:'ling site would be on a highly vis slope or ridgetop shall be prohibited. . ..id divisions and their building sites that are found consistent with this provision shall be clustered in accordance with Chapter 23.04 or otherwise concentrated in order to protect the visual resources. (6) Open space preservation. Pursuant to the purpose of the Critical Viewshed or SRA to protect significant visual resources, sensitive habitat or watershed, open space preservation is a compatible measure. Approval of an application for new development in these scenic coastal areas is contingent upon the applicant executing an agreement with the county to maintain in open space use appropriate portions of the site within the Critical Viewshed or SRA(for visual protection). Guarantee of open space preservation may be in the form of public purchase, agreements, easement controls or other appropriate instrument approved by the Planning Director, provided that such guarantee agreements are not to provide for public access unless acceptable to the property owner or unless required to provide public access in accordance with the LCP.. d. Standards for scenic corridors. The following standards apply within areas identified as Scenic Corridors in the area plans for protection of visual resources. (1) Setback. Where possible, new development shall be set back a minimum of 100 feet from the edge of the right-of-way of the road along which the Scenic Corridor is established in the area plans, or a distance as otherwise specified in the area plan planning area standards. If there is no feasible development area outside of this setback, the project shall be located on the rear half of the property as long as the location is not more environmentally damaging. New development allowed in visible areas shall provide a landscaping screen consistent with the requirements of c(4) above. A landscaping plan in accordance with these requirements and the requirements of Chapter 23.04 shall be provided at the time of building permit application submittal. (2) Signs. Signs that are required to have a land use permit, especially freestanding signs, shall be located so as to not interfere with unique and attractive features of the landscape, including but not limited to unusual landforms, sensitive habitats, and scenic vistas from the road along which the Scenic Corridor is established. [Amended 2004, Ord. 3048] e. General Visual Standards for Coastal Development. Notwithstanding subsections (a)-(d) above, all development requiring a coastal development permit must be consistent with the requirements of Coastal Plan Visual and Scenic Resource Policies 1-11 as applicable. [Amended 2004, Ord. 3] I I I I