Loading...
CC 2024-05-28_10a PH Denying Domestic Well Noyes Road MEMORANDUM TO: City Council FROM: Brian Pedrotti, Community Development Director BY: Patrick Holub, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Continued Public Hearing to Consider a Resolution Denying the Installation of One (1) Domestic Well on Property Zoned Planned Development (PD); Applicant Michael Harris; Representative Richard Burde, SLO Civil Design DATE: May 28, 2024 RECOMMENDATION: 1) Adopt a Resolution denying the request by Michael Harris to drill and install one (1) new domestic well on an unaddressed property on Noyes Road (APN: 007-781-055) northeast of the intersection of Noyes Road and Equestrian Way; and 2) Determine that the denial is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality because CEQA does not apply to projects which a public agency disapproves or rejects (Pub. Resources Code § 21080(b)(5); State CEQA Guidelines, § 15270(a)), and the denial will not have direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect environmental impacts (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (c)(2)-(3), 15378. IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES: As stated in the February 27, 2024 staff report, there is no direct impact financial or personnel resources anticipated as a result of denial. BACKGROUND: The project was originally scheduled on a public hearing for October 23, 2023, but was continued to November 28, 2023, January 9, 2024, and February 27, 2024. On February 27, 2024, the City Council held a continued public hearing to consider a resolution denying the installation of a domestic well on a vacant parcel on Noyes Road. Approximately two hours prior to the start of the hearing, the applicant submitted approximately 1,500-pages of relevant documentation to the City. Although staff provided a link to the document for the City Council prior to the hearing and printed a copy for review, the size of the document prevented staff from thoroughly reviewing the additional information in the limited time prior to the hearing. The City Council opened the public hearing, heard presentations, asked questions of staff and the applicant, opened and closed the public Item 10.a. City Council Continued Public Hearing to Consider a Resolution Denying the Installation of One (1) Domestic Well on Property Zoned Planned Development (PD); Applicant Michael Harris; Representative Richard Burde, SLO Civil Design May 28, 2024 Page 2 comment portion of the public hearing, and began deliberations, which were continued to March 26, 2024, to allow time for staff and the City Council to review the additional information submitted by the applicant. The City Council subsequently approved a continuance from March 26, 2024, to a date uncertain to allow the applicant and staff time to work on procedural matters associated with the application. ANALYSIS OF ISSUES: Below are responses and clarifications to the additional information provided by the applicant between the February 27, 2024, City Council hearing and the date of this staff . Temporary Well slide presentation (Attachment 8) submitted on February 26, 2024, the applicant notes that a well was previously approved on the subject site. The referenced well was a temporary irrigation well for agricultural purposes that was previously identified on page 6 of the staff report (December 12, 2017 Temporary Agricultural Irrigation Well Noyes Road). The subject well was not approved for domestic purposes, and subsequently expired. Additional Identified Previously Approved Agricultural Well The applicant identified one additional well approved by City Council on March 27, 2015, (Attachment 6) at 1189 Flora Road, which was not within the list provided by staff in the February 27, 2024, staff report, attached and incorporated herein. This specific approval was for a replacement agricultural well, and consistent with other replacement agricultural wells approved prior to 2017, the Flora Road well only considered cost to the applicant for connecting to the municipal water supply. For similar reasons as set forth in t February 27, 2024, staff report regarding other agricultural wells, the 1189 Flora Road resources and the water demands of an agricultural property are distinguishable from that of a residential property site. Additionally, it is important to note that Section 3.2 of the 2012 Water System Master Plan contemplates that no agricultural users are connected to the City system and agricultural water is instead provided by private on-site wells. Equity Concerns City Water vs. Well Water At the February 27, 2024, public hearing, the City Council inquired about the health and safety benefits associated with the hin city limits are required to connect to the public water system when practical and feasible. Some public benefits were identified in the February 27, 2024, staff report and articulated on the be managed to serve all residents, and there are equity concerns with having some City residents on wells within the City boundaries that are exempt from otherwise applicable Item 10.a. City Council Continued Public Hearing to Consider a Resolution Denying the Installation of One (1) Domestic Well on Property Zoned Planned Development (PD); Applicant Michael Harris; Representative Richard Burde, SLO Civil Design May 28, 2024 Page 3 water restriction and conservation measures otherwise applicable to other residents. Additionally, staff notes that the City has invested significantly in a public water system that maintains stringent state and federal health and safety standards. Allowing residential homeowners to opt- based primarily on the private cost to that individual homeowner must be weighed against the larger cost to all residential rate- payers. Staff Requests for Costs and Studies At the February 27, 2024 hearing, the applicant indicated that there were 25 requests for information from staff regarding the cost to the applicant. Staff does not believe the number is accurate. s costs is not an application requirement, rather, this information was requested by staff as part of discussions with the applicant about the cost of a well versus the cost of a public water connection. Staff does request information related to costs ancillary to the feasibility criteria in the ordinance, such as the request for a hydrogeology study, and other information the applicant may want to submit as part of the hearing before the City Council. Environmental Impacts Including Tree Removal Arguments were made during the February 27, 2024, public hearing that focused on submitted to the City must include a map identifying and locating all existing trees upon the property, including those that will be impacted by the proposed development, in order to determine whether a tree removal permit will be issued and what type of environmental impacts may occur. Although the applicant has stated that their intended proposed development is a single-family residence, they have not submitted a development proposal or the information necessary to determine whether a tree removal permit is necessary, and staff believes there are several options that minimize the damage to trees on-site that are available to applicant should a hook- Following the February 27, 2024, public hearing, an arborist report and a memorandum by The Oakley Group, hired by the applicant, claimed potential environmental impacts will (Attachment 9). First, the e-mail from The Oakley Group states alternative waterline that is not . the waterline will be connected to the proposed location of the single-family residence, single-family residence, including the location of the building and the path of the waterline. Item 10.a. City Council Continued Public Hearing to Consider a Resolution Denying the Installation of One (1) Domestic Well on Property Zoned Planned Development (PD); Applicant Michael Harris; Representative Richard Burde, SLO Civil Design May 28, 2024 Page 4 However, the City has not received any proposed site plans, construction methods, or applications regarding this anticipated development. While it is likely that some trees on th nearby City well, without being provided a project description with this type of information, the City would be speculating on potential environmental impacts outside of the well subject of this hearing. E-mail Regarding Well Impact Concerns Public comment was received on March 12, 2024, that identified concerns with the proposed well and impacts on residents of Pismo Beach. The proposed well is not located near residents of Pismo Beach, but rather is located above a geologic formation called ,hydrogeological study, which may have led to confusion about impacts to Pismo Beach. As part of applications for new wells, County Environmental Health would review impacts of the well on adjacent properties, including distance from water bodies, other wells, and existing septic systems. Resolution in the Alternative for Well Approval For ation is that the City Council deny the proposed domestic well. However, materials, discussions with staff characteristics (i.e., slope, oak trees, rock outcroppings), an alternative resolution (Attachment 2) has been included that would approve the proposed well, with conditions that would meet the stated intent of the applicant to build a single-family residence, while protected. This alternative is also in response to an e-mail to staff on May 15, 2023 (included on page 1,348 of -page submittal), in which stated that his client had no plans for subdividing the property and intended to build one single-family residence with no subdivision or lot split. The email proposed that staff consider revising their recommendation to be in support of the well application with the of approval with any future project that would subdivide the property. The alternative resolution to conditionally approve the well includes standard well entitlement conditions. It also includes project-specific conditions, including a Condition of Approval that the planned development associated with a well approval is for a single- family residence that may include an ADU or JADU consistent with State law and local ADU ordinance. Should the residential use on the site be intensified (e.g. a subdivision or additional housing units), the applicant would need to process a new well application under Arroyo Grande Municipal Code (AGMC) Chapter 13.08. This condition is consistent with the AGMC and how local agencies often limit major amendments to a Item 10.a. City Council Continued Public Hearing to Consider a Resolution Denying the Installation of One (1) Domestic Well on Property Zoned Planned Development (PD); Applicant Michael Harris; Representative Richard Burde, SLO Civil Design May 28, 2024 Page 5 project. Here, the condition wrepresentative based on the planned future development at the site. Ultimately, the City Council has discretion to consider all the evidence and testimony presented, and make a final determination on the submitted well application. The resolution to conditionally approve the well, with conditions, is included should the City Council agree with the applicants position and the argument raised throughout this process . ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt the Resolution denying the installation of one (1) new domestic supply well; 2. one (1) new domestic supply well, and adopt the Alternative Resolution with findings to approve or conditionally approve the domestic supply well application; 3. Do not adopt either resolution and provide direction to staff regarding the preparation of an acceptable resolution for action on the application; or 4. Provide other direction to staff. ADVANTAGES: Denial of the application would result in the required connection of the property to the should the applicant apply to establish a residential use on the project site as suggested in the information submitted to staff to date. The applicant would be free to re-submit a new well application should they consider a different development use. Con consistent with the AGMC to ensure that properties within the city connect to the system when it is practical and feasible to do so. DISADVANTAGES: The original staff report stated that no disadvantages were identified. The applicant argued at the February 27, 2024, hearing that there were disadvantages to him in the form of additional environmental and financial costs. Staff respectfully disagrees that the outweigh that the well application should be approved. As described above, additional potential negative outcomes or impacts to the City, community, neighborhood, and environment would be speculative due to the lack of additional information about site development that would allow for the evaluation of those impacts. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: In compliance with CEQA, it has been determined that if the application is denied, the CEQA does not apply to the disapproval or rejection of projects. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21080, subd. (b)(5); State CEQA Guidelines, § 15270, subd. (a).). There will be no construction or development as Item 10.a. City Council Continued Public Hearing to Consider a Resolution Denying the Installation of One (1) Domestic Well on Property Zoned Planned Development (PD); Applicant Michael Harris; Representative Richard Burde, SLO Civil Design May 28, 2024 Page 6 a result of the denial of this application for a domestic water well, and therefore the denial has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (c)(2)-(3); 15378.). A conditional approval resolution to approve the installation of a domestic water well is also included, and this project would be categorically exempt from CEQA under the Class 3 exemption, which applies to the construction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures; installation of small new equipment and facilities in small structures; and the conversion of existing small structures from one use to another where only minor modifications are made in the exterior of the structure. (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15303.) PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS: Government Code Section 54954.2. Following the February 27, 2024 Public Hearing, a Notice of Continuance to a date certain of March 26, 2024 was published on February 29, 2024. A Public Hearing Notice for the May 28, 2024 Public Hearing was published on May 17, 2024. Written public comments received following the February 27, 2024 Public Hearing are included in Attachment 10. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Proposed Resolution for Denial 2. Alternative Resolution for Approval 3. Application Materials (link to February 27, 2024 meeting) 4. (link to February 27, 2024 meeting) 5. Previous Well Approvals Resolutions (link to February 27, 2024 meeting) 6. Previous Well Approvals Staff Reports (link to February 27, 2024 meeting) 7. Supplemental Information provided by applicant on February 27, 2024 8. PowerPoint Presentation provided by applicant on February 27, 2024 9. Oakley Arborist Report 10. Public Correspondence Received after February 27, 2024 Public Hearing Item 10.a. ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DENYING THE INSTALLATION OF ONE (1) NEW DOMESTIC SUPPLY WELL ON PROPERTY ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT; LOCATED NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF NOYES ROAD AND EQUESTRIAN WAY (APN: 007-781-055); APPLIED FOR BY MICHAEL HARRIS, AND FINDING THE ACTION EXEMPT FROM CEQA WHEREAS, Michael Harris has submitted an application to drill and install one (1) new domestic supply well at a property on an unaddressed parcel on Noyes Road in Arroyo Grande ; and WHEREAS, the Well Application would be on unaddressed property on Noyes Road (APN: 007-781-055), northeast of the intersection of Noyes Road and Equestrian Way WHEREAS, Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Chapter 13.08 requires City Council to discretionarily review and approve or deny all new or replacement wells in the City; and WHEREAS, specifically, AGMC section 13.08.040 requires the City Council to consider, in its discretion, approval for new or replacement wells or abandonment of existing wells. Approval to drill a well within the City boundaries may be granted if the City Council determines: 1) the well will neither deplete nor contaminate the City feasible; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a noticed, continued public hearing on February 27, 2024; and WHEREAS, the City Council opened the public hearing, heard presentations, asked questions of staff and the applicant, closed the public hearing, began deliberations, and continued the public hearing to March 26, 2024; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a noticed, continued public hearing on and May 28, 2024, to consider the Well Application; and WHEREAS, as described in additional detail below and as incorporated by the accompanying Staff Report, system is both practical and feasible to Subject Property. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande hereby: (1) Recitals. Finds that the recitals above are true and correct and are incorporated herein in full; and (2) Well Application. Denies the application to drill and install one (1) new domestic supply well at the property located northeast of the intersection of Noyes Road and Equestrian Way (APN: 007-781-055). (3) Findings. The City Council finds that pursuant to Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Chapter 13.08, the following required finding cannot be made to approve tem is neither The City Council finds that it is both feasible and roperty, as: a. The Subject Property No. 5, which is a 1.2 million gallon above-ground storage tank; and b. A residential water service connection can be made directly to the City property line with a standard water meter on the property; and c. or improvements to existing City infrastructure; and d. CEQA. The City Council determines that if the application is denied, the item does disapproval or rejection of projects. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21080, subd. (b)(5); State CEQA Guidelines, § 15270, subd. (a).). There will be no construction or development as a result of the denial of this application for a domestic water well, and therefore the denial has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (c)(2)-(3); 15378.) The City Council directs staff to file a Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk and State Clearinghouse within five days of this Resolution. On motion of Council Member , seconded by Council Member , and on the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this 28th day of May 2024. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 3 _________________________________________ CAREN RAY RUSSOM, MAYOR ATTEST: ________________________________________ JESSICA MATSON, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: ________________________________________ MATTHEW DOWNING, CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: ________________________________________ ISAAC ROSEN, CITY ATTORNEY ATTACHMENT 2 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING THE INSTALLATION OF ONE (1) NEW DOMESTIC SUPPLY WELL ON PROPERTY ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT; LOCATED NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF NOYES ROAD AND EQUESTRIAN WAY (APN: 007-781-055); APPLIED FOR BY MICHAEL HARRIS, AND FINDING THAT THIS ACTION IS EXEMPT FROM CEQA WHEREAS, Michael Harris has submitted an application to drill and install one (1) new domestic supply well at a property on an unaddressed parcel on Noyes Road in ; and WHEREAS, the Well Application would be on unaddressed property on Noyes Road (APN: 007-781-055), northeast of the intersection of Noyes Road and Equestrian Way WHEREAS, Council to discretionarily review and approve or deny all new or replacement wells in the City; and WHEREAS, specifically, AGMC section 13.08.040 requires the City Council to consider, in its discretion, approval for new or replacement wells or abandonment of existing wells. Approval to drill a well within the City boundaries may be granted if the City Council determines: 1) the well will neither deplete nor contaminate the City feasible; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a noticed, continued public hearing on May 28, 2024, to consider the Well Application. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande, as follows: 1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein. 2. Well Application. Approves the application to drill and install one (1) new domestic supply well at the property located northeast of the intersection of Noyes Road and Equestrian Way (APN: 007-781-055), subject to the conditions as set forth in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. 65501.00001\\42283120.1 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 2 3. Findings. The approval of the well application is based on the findings required by AGMC Section 13.08.040 and made below: a. The drilling and operation of the well will neither deplete nor contaminate the City water supply because: i. The proposed well does not access the same aquifer utilized icipated. ii. The proposed well will not impact adjacent properties because the owner will be required to obtain County Environmental Health approval, be located at least 100 feet from septic system areas, and be metered to determine annual water usage. b. Service from the city water system is neither practical nor feasible because: i. The proposed well is on property that is predominantly covered by native oak woodland, includes steeper slopes and includes significant existing rock outcroppings, which when taken together require significant construction challenges in avoiding impacts from a City water system infrastructure extension for a single family residence. ii. Although the Subject Property is immediately adjacent to the City's Reservoir No. 5 would not require any easements or improvements to existing City infrastructure, a direct water service connection for a single-family residence would necessitate construction of a service line that would have potential impacts to sensitive resources such as native oak woodland and existing rock outcroppings. iii. The proposed well would require minor infrastructure that would not impact sensitive resources on the property. 4. CEQA. The City Council determines that the installation of a domestic water well is categorically exempt from CEQA under the Class 3 exemption, which applies to the construction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures; installation of small new equipment and facilities in small structures; and the conversion of existing small structures from one use to another where only minor modifications are made in the exterior of the structure. (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15303.). This project falls within the Class 3 exemption because approval of the project would result in the installation of one small well structure. Furthermore, none of the exceptions outlined in State CEQA Guidelines section 15300.2 apply here. The well will be located to avoid sensitive habitats. There will be no cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time, because RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 3 only one domestic well is necessary to serve any future proposed residential uses on the project site. There are no unusual circumstances such that the project will have a significant environmental impact. The well will avoid all scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, and is not within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. The project is not located on a site included on any list compiled pursuant to Government Code section 65962.5. In addition, the project will not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. Therefore, the project is categorically exempt from CEQA and no further environmental review is required. City Council directs staff to file a Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk and State Clearinghouse within five days of this Resolution. On motion of Council Member , seconded by Council Member , and on the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: th The foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this 28 day of May 2024. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 4 _________________________________________ CAREN RAY RUSSOM, MAYOR ATTEST: ________________________________________ JESSICA MATSON, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: ________________________________________ MATTHEW DOWNING, CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: ________________________________________ ISAAC ROSEN, CITY ATTORNEY RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 5 EXHIBIT "A" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ONE (1) NEW DOMESTIC SUPPLY WELL NORTHEAST CORNER OF NOYES ROAD AND EQUESTRIAN WAY APN: 007-781-955 GENERAL CONDITIONS: 1. The applicant shall ascertain and comply with all State, County and City requirements as are applicable to this project. 2. The project shall occur in substantial conformance with the application and plans on file in the Community Development Department office. 3. The applicant shall comply with all the conditions of the City Council Resolution adopted on May 28, 2024, as well as the terms, conditions, and standards specified in the written permit issued by the County of San Luis Obispo Public Health Department. 4. To the extent permitted by law, Applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Arroyo Grande, its City Council, its officers, employees proceeding brought by a third party against the indemnified parties and the applicant to attack, set aside, or void any permit or approval for this project authorized by the City, including (without limitation) reimbursing the City its f the litigation. The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such action with attorneys of its choice. The Applicant shall reimburse the City for any court and attorney's fees which the City may be required to pay as a result of any claim or action brought against the City related to this permit or approval. Although the Applicant is the real party in interest in an action, the City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of the action, but such participation shall not relieve the Applicant of any obligation under this condition. 5. This approval shall expire on May 28, 2026 unless a drilling permit is obtained from the County of San Luis Obispo Public Health Department. Time extensions may be requested in conformation with the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code. 6. This approval shall only be valid for the residential construction of up to one (1) single family home, one (1) accessory dwelling unit, and one (1) junior accessory dwelling unit. Any additional development of the property will be water infrastructure at the sole cost of the property owner at the time of proposed development. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 6 7. This approval shall only be valid for the existing legal parcel and shall not extend to any future parcels created through subdivision of the property. Prior to recordation of any subdivision of the property, the owner shall abandon the well in accordance with County Environmental Health Standards. 8. The applicant shall install a meter on the well head that monitors all water st drawn from the well and report annual pumping amounts as of December 31 st to the City Public Works Department by January 31of the following year. 9. An approved backflow device shall be installed per City standard on the water meter service. 10. A copy of the well/driller report required by the provisions of Section 13751 of the Water Code of the State shall be submitted to the Public Works Department upon completion of the construction of the well. 11. The applicant shall obtain permits for all electrical connections required for the new well pumps. 12. The applicant shall produce survey verification that the distance of the well to any septic system (leach field) is greater than 100 feet to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 13. This well approval is conditioned on the stated planned development of a single family home, Accessory Dwelling Unit and Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit on the subject parcel. If the residential use on the site is intensified, such as a subdivision or additional housing units are created, applicant must return to the City Council for a new hearing and approval to use the well pursuant to existing at the time of such intensification of use. 14. The well must comply with all general legal requirements imposed by the California Department of Water Resources, State Water Resources Control Board, and any other applicable state or federal law. 15. During any period of noncompliance with these conditions, the well will constitute an unapproved use of land subject to the penalties and remedies of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code. Links to Attachments 3 through 7 3. Application Materials (link to February 27, 2024 meeting) 4. Letter from Marsha Burch dated October 24, 2023, and attached (link to February 27, 2024 meeting) 5. Previous Well Approvals Resolutions (link to February 27, 2024 meeting) 6. Previous Well Approvals Staff Reports (link to February 27, 2024 meeting) 7. Supplemental Information provided by applicant on February 27, 2024 emember that this is discretionary for a reason. Each well within the city limits is unique, R without a on each parcel for a total of two units " family residence - one singlediscretionary permit I am not a developer, so I wanted written confirmation from the city that I recommendation ce from ? Clearest path to best build site would be 2,000 feetDirect path is impossibleSlopeRocksEnvironmental IssuesDriplineHand trenchingPerformance bond Distance to potential build sitesTopography of the propertyChapter 12.16 of the AGMC Why would it be prohibitively expensive to receive servithe city water system this is a narrow rewrite of the city code by unelected staff {ƷğŅŅ ƩĻğķƭ ƷŷĻ ƦƩğĭƷźĭğƌźƷǤ ğƓķ ŅĻğƭźĬźƌźƷǤ ƷĻƭƷ ğƭ ƚƓĻ ĬğƭĻķ ƚƓ ǞŷĻƷŷĻƩ ƷŷĻ /źƷǤ źƭ ƩĻğƭƚƓğĬƌǤ ğĬƌĻ Ʒƚ ƦƩƚǝźķĻ ğ ķƚƒĻƭƷźĭ ǞğƷĻƩ ƭĻƩǝźĭĻ ĭƚƓƓĻĭƷźƚƓ ŅƩƚƒ ƷŷĻ /źƷǤ Ʒŷźƭ ĭğƓ ĬĻ ķƚƓĻ͵This is not the city code without any public comment or reviewI can find no city council discussion or public comment or writing on the need to narrow the city code on water wells to become a ministerial decision ƚƓ ƷŷĻ ƷƚƦƚŭƩğƦŷǤ ƚŅ ƷŷĻ ƭźƷĻ͵ city code does not require the city council or city staff to ƭƚƌĻƌǤ {ƷğŅŅ ķƚĻƭ ƓƚƷ ĬĻƌźĻǝĻ ƦƩğĭƷźĭğƌźƷǤ ğƓķ ŅĻğƭźĬźƌźƷǤ ĭƩźƷĻƩźğ ƭŷƚǒƌķ ĬĻ ĬğƭĻķ ǒƦƚƓ ƷŷĻ ƓƚƩ ƭŷƚǒƌķ źƷ ĬĻ ĬğƭĻķ This is not the city code hardship? Should the city staff and city council consider the topography of the site which there are certain environmental impacts? Granting. Applications Approval Private systems - 13.12.070 . practical nor feasible RESOLUTION NO. 4830 , which is why they are and let me know if you have any the feasibility letter hydro study and numbers for construction costs associated with connecting a water line to the I don't think that is going to be likely once you present the numbers will be providing those to you Discuss feasibility of connecting to City services at Reservoir 5 and - reviewing the feasibility letter Can you take a look at the manager for a reviewwater tower and that any water services would need to be put in at ~20% slopesMEETING water tank with our City Manager. is there anything else . Preliminary estimates are coming in around $115,000 but I will be I wanted to check on your progress with the feasibility calculation I think that should be sufficientI was able to get the quote from the contractor, please see attached problem getting that to you by early next week. Please remind me, but the cost estimate that we need to provide the City at this time?numbers tomorrow. providing the final estimate asap last week. related to the for approval we would expect the "rock clause" identified - for next Tuesday I sent the staff report for a final round of review the estimate that was provided does not include costs if you could provide more information on the cost to see I was asked associated with trenching through, or removing rocks that would be found in the water the water tanks and the likely build site so on the estimate to come into effect We should be on the consent agenda installation of the well. If you can provide that information, I think that should be sufficient for the Council to make a wellthe attached . Staff will report any to the issues being considered and to the appropriate board, commission provide a copy to the complainant . the City Manager determines the issues are substantive The City Manager will submit a written determination 1. Any complaint regarding staff performance shall be referred to the City Manager.3. The appropriate department director shall be requested to investigate the performance issue.1. If members of the public identify information or conclusions within a staff report that they believe to be inaccurate or inconsistent with City policies and/or regulations, they may submit their concerns to the City Manager either in person or on the City Standard Request Form.and make a determination if a change is necessary.3. or City Council prior to the meeting and changes to the Board, Commission or City Council at the meeting.5. If sufficient time is not available to properly investigate and respond to the concerns, postponement D. Complaints Regarding Staff PerformanceG. Informal Administrative Review Process Involving Staff Reports assistance me to of a written determination was provided copy No Email if all information has not been presented? correct call What staff position?How can it be the What policies have been set forth by the city council?Council members should reserve judgment until all evidence is presented, staff reports are thoroughly examined, and the public has been given an adequate opportunity to participate Gjhvsf!2;!uif!qspqptfe!mpdbujpo!gps!uif!tjohmf.gbnjmz!sftjefodf!jt!tipxo!jo!zfmmpx)Cvjmejoh!Tjuf!2*/!!Uif!qspqptfe!epnftujd! xfmm!xpvme!cf!jo!uif!wjdjojuz!pg!uijt!mpdbujpo/!!Uif!qspqptfe!mpdbujpo!gps!uif!epnftujd!xbufs!tfswjdf!dpoofdujpo!qspqptfe!cz! uif!Djuz!jt!tipxo!xjui!b!sfe!bsspx/!!Uif!zfmmpx!mpdbujpo!jt!bqqspyjnbufmz!911.gffu!gspn!uif!qspqptfe!mpdbujpo!gps!uif!Djuz! tfswjdf!dpoofdujpoboe!uif!nptu!fowjsponfoubmmz!jnqbdugvmxbufs!mjof!xpvme!gpmmpx!uijt!qbui)Pqujpo!2*-!xifsfbt!uif!hsffo! qbui!gps!uif!xbufs!mjof)Pqujpo!3*!bqqfbst!up!cf!uif!mfbtu!fowjsponfoubmmzjnqbdugvm!cvu!jt!bqqspyjnbufmz!3111.gffu!gspn!uif! qspqptfe!tfswjdf!dpoofdujpo!mpdbujpoboe!dvut!uispvhi!tfotjujwf!pbl!xppemboe!ibcjubu!up!b!hsfbufs!efhsff/!Uif!bsfb! cfuxffo!cpui!cvjmejoh!mpdbujpot!boe!uif!qspqptfe!tfswjdf!dpoofdujpo!mpdbujpo!jttfotjujwf!pbl!xppemboe!ibcjubuuibu!jt! qspufdufe!cz!Djuz!psejobodf/ From: Gaea Powell Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2024 5:59 PM To: public comment <publiccomment@arroyogrande.org>; Mike Harris < Subject: Fwd: Public comment from Mike Harris Hello, Mike Harris is unavoidably on a plane and would like for his below statement to be read during public comment. Thank you. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Michael Harris < Date: Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 2:56PM Subject: Public comment from Mike Harris To: Powell Gaea < My experience surrounding the city's handling of my water well application has shed light on significant deviations from the principles of fairness, impartiality, and comprehensive evaluation during the public hearing process. There is a critical need for immediate rectification. The recent public hearing concerning my water well application was marred by several unsettling occurrences that raise grave concerns about the process's integrity. Notably, the mayor's interactions with city staff during the hearing demonstrated a lack of rigorous inquiry and an unsettling dismissal of crucial issues relevant to my application. The substantial financial and environmental repercussions of denying my application were astonishingly overlooked. The mayor's repeated question, “Does it matter?” in response to these significant concerns, unveiled a disconcerting bias and a blatant disregard for factors critically pertinent to both my position as the applicant and to the wider community's welfare. Compounding these concerns was the mayor’s approach to the city staff's recommendations. Her inquiry as to why no disadvantages had been identified in their recommendation against my application went unanswered. More troubling was the mayor's lack of persistence for an answer, a failure that significantly undermines her role in ensuring a balanced and informed decision-making process. The mayor was unwilling and unable to critically assess and question the city staff's position, thereby tarnishing the integrity of the hearing and the legitimacy of any subsequent decision. These procedural deficiencies are far from minor; they fundamentally undermine the essence of a fair public hearing. The mayor's reluctance to address significant questions and to seek a balanced perspective resulted in a skewed presentation that unjustly favored the city staff's recommendations. Action of this nature suggest that decisions are made based on preconceived biases rather than an objective assessment of the facts and community feedback. In response to these glaring failures, I request that the public hearing on my water well application be reopened under impartial guidance, devoid of the previous bias and negligence. Furthermore, the mayor must recuse herself from any further proceedings related to this matter, especially given her premature expression of support for the city staff's position in her October 6th email in which she stated "she strongly supports staff position, it is the correct call based on policies put forth by the city council", which blatantly predetermines the hearing's outcome. This demand for recusal is grounded in the need to uphold the integrity of the hearing process and ensure all relevant factors are considered impartially and thoroughly.